their Testimony of Tradition must more then put to silence all contradiction of particular Persons or Churches it must also subdue their minds to an assent and this under the Penalty of an Anathema or cutting off from the Body of Christ which answers to a Civil death in the Law 9. If then an Obedience so indispensable was required to Legal Iudges who might possibly give a wrong sentence How securâ—ly may we submit our judgements to the Supream Tribunal of the Church And how justly will an Anathema be inflicted on all gainsayers of an Authority that we are assured shall never mislead us And the grounds of this assurance which the Preacher is not yet perswaded of are now to be discoverd 10. The true grounds of the Churcheâ— Infallibility are the words of Truth the Infallibility of the promises of Christ the Eternal wisdom of the Father These Promises are the true Palladium not of the Conclave but of the Vniversal Church Nor do we think Doctor Pierce such an Vlisses as to apprehend he can steal it away 11. We do not deny however that Infallibility and Omniscience are as he saies incommunicable Attributes of God It is God alone to whose Nature either lying or being deceived are essentially contrary because he is essentially immutable as in his Being so in his Vnderstanding and Will Yet the immutable God can preserve mutable Creatures from actual mutation God who is absolutely Omniscient can teach a rational Creature 〈◊〉 Truths necessary or expedient to be known So that though a man have much ignorance yet he may be in a sort omniscient within a determinate Sphere he may be exempted from ignorance or error in teaching such special verities as God will have him know and has promised he shall faithfully teach others Our Saviour as man was certainly infallible and as far as was requisite omniscient too So were the Apostles likewise whose writings Protestants acknowledge both to be infallible and to contain all Truth necessary to Salvation Good Doctor do you think it a contradiction that God should bestow an infallibility as to some things on a Creature What did our Saviour give St. Peter when he said I have prayed for thee that thy Faith fail not Thus the Doctor may see what a trifling Discourse he has made against Gods Church 12. Now the infallible promises of our Lord to his Church by vertue of which she has alwaies been believed to be in our sense infallible follow At least as many of them as may suffice for the present purpose 1. Our Saviour has promised his Apostles That he would be present with them alwaies to the end of the World Therefore since not any of them out-liv'd that age this infallible promise must be made good to their Successors 2. He has promised that When two or three of them meet together in his Name he will be in the midst of them Surely to direct them Therefore much more when the whole Church is representatively assembled about his businesse onely 3. He has promised that he will lead his Church into all Truth at least all that is necessary or but expedient for them to know 4. He has promised that Against his Church built upon St. Peter the Gates of Hell that is Heresie say the Fathers shall not prevail Therefore it shall be infallibly free from Heresie 5. He has commanded that Whoever shall not obey his Church shall be cut off from his Body as a Heathen and a Publican Therefore Anathema's pronounced by his Church are valid Our Lord indeed speaks of Decisions made by a particular Church in quarrels among Brethren Therefore if Disobedience to such Decisions be so grievously punished what punishment may we suppose attends such as are disobedient to Decisions of the Universal Church call'd by the Apostle The Pillar and ground of Truth made for the composing of publick Debates about the common Faith 6. To conclude the belief of the Churches Vnity is an unchangable Article of our â—reed Therefore certainly the onely effectual mean to preserve Unity which is an un-appealable and infallible Authority shall never be wanting in the Church 13. All these Texts and Prmises we by the example of the Holy Fathers and Authority of Tradition produce as firm Grounds of an Infallibility in the Universal Church representative which has an influence over the Souls of menâ— requiring much more than an external submission which yet is all that Protestants will allow to the most authentic general Councils We hope now Doctor Pierce will not fly to Mr. Chillingworths miserable shift and say that all these Promises are only conditional and depending on the piety of Church-governors For this is contrary to the assertion of all Antiquity which from these Promises argues invincibly against all Heretics and Schismatics who might otherwise on Mr. Chillingworths ground alledge as the Donatists did that the Church by the sins of some had lost all her Authority and that Gods spirit was transplanted from her into themselves Nor yet that he will use the plea of several other Protestant Writers somwhat more discreet who are willing to allovv those Promises absolute and to belong also to the Guides of the Church som or other that they shall in all ages continue orthodox but not alvvayes to the more superior or to the greater bodies of these assembled in Councils because thus they see their cause will suffer by it But this plea also is utterly unsatisfying For whenever the superior and subordinate Church-Officers or Ecclesiastical Courts shall contradict or oppose one another here the superior questionlesse is to be our Guide otherwise we have no certain rule to know who is so and therefore to these not the other in such cases must belâ—ng these promises where they cannot possibly agree to both 14. These promises now being Yea and Amen the Doctor must not seem to make our Lord passe for a Deceiver but apply them to his English Protestant Church since he will not allow them to the Catholic for to some Church they must be applyed But let him consider withal he must condemn St. Gregory who professed that he venerated the four first General Councils of the Catholic Church as the four Gospels He must condemn Constantine who in the first Council of Nice professed that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c whatever is decreed in the holy Councils of Bishops that ought to be attributed to thâ— Divine will In a word he must by condemning all the General Councils of Gods Church condemn likewise which is more dangerous the Act of Parliament 1 Eliz. For manifest it is that all the Fathers in those Councils did pronounce many Anathema's against all those that would not submit to a belief of such and such Decisions of theirs in some of which were new expressions not extant in Scripture but devised by the Fathers then present as the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Now I ask Doctor Pierce were
Novelties we readily grant they are not obliged to subscribe them And it being supposed by the Archbishop c. that without such a certainty it would have been unlawfull for Protestants to question or censure such former Doctrins of the Church The Doctor is bound and â—here adjure him to declare expresly as in the presence of Him who is Supreme Head of the Church and will revenge severely all calumnious persecutions of it that he is demonstratively certain that in all these Points charged by him on the Church of later times as Novelties and Errors introduced since the four first Councils she is manifestly guilty and that nothing appears in this or any other Catholic book of his Acquaintance which deserves to be esteem'd so much as a probable proof to the contrary For my part I here protest on the other side that I find not any one concluding allegation in his Sermon nor believe there can any be produced which can warrant him to make such a Declaration 10. The second Condition is That in like manner he professe he can or hath demonstratively proved by Scripture or Primitive Antiquity the main grounds upon which they pretend to justifie their separation to be no Schism to wit these 1. That the universal Church â—epresented in a Lawful General Council may in points of doctrin not fundamental so mislead the Church by errors that a particular Church c. discovering such errors may be obliged to separate externally 2. That a particular Chrâ—stian or a Congregation Diocesan may lawfully reverse Decisions formerly made by a Nationaâ— Synod and assented to by it and that a Nationaâ— Council may do the like in regard of a Patriarchical or any of them in regard of an Oecumenical formerly accepted and admitted If these Assâ—riâ—ous he Innovations as in our perswasion they are it is clear they destroy all possible unity If they be not let some demonstrative Proofs and Examples be produced out of Antriquity that a reversing of such order and subordination has been practised and approved in the Catholic Church 3. That a particular Church c. in opposition to the Vniversal can judg what Doctrines are fundamental or necessary to all Persons 〈◊〉 Communities c. and what not And that a Catalogue of such Doctrines be given by the Respondent or demonstrative reasons alledged why such an one is not necessary 11. Thirdly if he will deny the Church of England has separated externally from the present Vniversal Church but only from the Roman then to make this good he is obliged to name what other visible Member of the Vniversal Church they continue in Communion with in whose public Service they will joyn or can be admitted and to whose Synods they ever have or can repair And since at the time of their first Separation they were only in Communion with the Roman-Catholic Church and the Members of it be must shew how when and where they entered into any other new Communion Lastly Since the English Church by renouncing not only several Doctrines but several Councils acknowledged for General and actually submitted to both by the Eastern and Western Churches hath thereby separated from both these he must find out some other pretended Members of the Catholic Church divided from both these that is some that are not manifestly heretical with whom the English Church communicates 12. A fourth Condition is that he must either declare other Calvinistical Reformed Churches which manifestly have no succession of lawflly Ordained Ministers enabled validly to celebrate and administer Sacraments to consecrate confirm preach God's Word c. to be no heretical or Schismatical Congregations Or if they be he must demonstrate how the English Church can acquit her self from Schism since her Bishops and Divines have authoritatively repaired to their Synods and a general permission is given to any Protestant Writers to acknowledg them true reformed and sufficiently Orthodox Congregations 13. The last shall be that he abstain from imputing to the Catholic Church the opinions or sayings of particular Writers The Church her self having sufficiently declared her Doctrines in her Councils especially that of Trent If he will combate against her there he has a fair and open field and charity requires that he affix to her Decisions the most moderate and best qualified sense Otherwise he will declare himself as one who is sorry his Mother should not be ill reputed Now in exchange I for my part am extreamly willing to proceed in the same manner with the English Church I would sain charge her with nothing but her own declared Doctrines and Decisions But truly I know not where to find them except only in the little Primmer and Catechism for Children For the 39. Articles being almost all Negatives may as well be reputed the Doctrines of Iewish or Turkish Congregations since these also deny the Sacrifice of the Masse Purgatory Infallibility of Councils c. other Reformed Churches have published reasonably large Professions of their Faith they have declared their own positive sense in almost all Points of Christian Belief as the Huguenots in France c. the Lutherans in Germany c only the English Church seems to have made a secret of her Faith upon what motive I am unwilling to guess 14. These Conditions in themselves so reasonable and even according to Protestants grounds also so necessary if the Replyer shall refuse to perform he will in the judgment of all discerning Readers be himself the Answerer and Conâ—uter of his own Reply and withall will shew it is not Truth or Peace he aims at but the satisfying his own or others interests passions and revenge against those who least deserve it All subterfuges all involved intricacies in answering all discourses which are not open candid and sincere will be confessions of guilt He may perhaps hide the weaknesse of his cause from credulous Women Trades-men or possibly the more unlearned part of our Gentry but to all considering Readers his Art of hiding will be his most manifest discovery Aristotle saies the Sepiâ— is the wisest of all Fishes because she conceals her self by casting forth round about her a black humour which hinders the sight of her But on the contrary Iulius Caesar Scaliger affirms she is of all Fishes the most imprudent Quia cum se putat latere prodit seipso latibâ—lo for the Fishermen are sure to find her under her inky humour 15. And now having finished our Answer to the substance wherein we differ let us conclude with the Name that distinguishes us He puts us in mind of the reason why the Lutherans and from them other Reformerd took the name Protestants for protesting against the bloody Edict of Worms Spires c. we find little ground why the Reformers in England should borrow that title Against what Armes or Armies did they ever protest What Edicts were made against them We Catholics might rather assume such a title if it were of any special honor having
and examining Antiquity and were as willing to make it speak on their sides as the Preacher was But as ill Consciences as they had they were convinced and forced publickly to confess that the Fathers were against them and focus And in particular Opposition to his Claim of Antiquity like Bishop Iewels for the first six Centuries Doctor Fulk is so far from concurring with him or Bishop Iewel that he is so choleric at the suspition of such a charge that he addresses himself to his Adversary in this civil language I Answer saies he if he charge me with confessing the continuing of the Church in incorruption for six hundred years next after Christ he lyeth in his heart 3. One passage there is of that famous Andreas Duditius which truly I cannot read without extream compassion and astonishment at the dreadful judgment of God and it may do Doctor Pierce much good if he sadly reflect on it Many years he had lived in great esteem for learning and prudence a Catholick Bishop of Petscben in Hungary called Quinque Ecclesiae present he was at the frameing the Decrees of the Council of Trent But at last falling in love with a Maid of honour in the Queen of Hungaries Court to marry her he quitted both his Bishoprick and Religion This poor man in his declining Age could not abstain from confessing in a Letter to Beza his unsatisfaction in his new Religion vainly hoping some either Cordial or Opiate for his distressed Conscience from one as deeply plunged and by the very same motives engaged in the same change I pray observe his words Si veritas est saies he quam veteres Patres c. If that be truth which the antient Fathers by mutual consent have professed it will entirely stand on the Papists side For if heretofore any Controversies out of a beat of Disputation arosâ— between the learned among them an end was presently imposed thereto by Decrees of Councils or even of the Pope alone But what strange people have we among us They are alwaies wandring toss'd with every wind of Doctrine and being hurried into the main Deep they are carried sometimes this way sometimes another If you would inform your self what their Iudgment to day is touching Religion you may perhaps come to know it But what it will be to morrow on the same Argument neither themselves nor you can certainly affirm Thus Duditius And what Cordial against this scrupulous Melancholly does Beza his good friend afford him Take it from himself Scio speciosum esse venerandae velustatis nomen c. I know the name of venerable Antiquity is very specious But whence shall we fetch the beginning of that Title but from the Prophets and Apostles For as for Writers that come after them if we will take their own advice we will believe them on no other terms but as far as they shall evidently make good what they deliver out of the Holy Scriptures That is in effect have but the Christian modesty and humility to prefer your own sense of Scriptures before all the Fathers and Councils of Gods Church and then nothing they say need to trouble you Antiquity venerable Antiquity will be on your side You may confidently say of all your Adversaries Doctrins From the Beginning it was not so 4. Many other Confessions of the like nature might be added but for brevity-sake I will content my self with onely one more and that is as it seems to me a secret acknowledgement of the Church of England in her publick Liturgy directly contrary to the Preachers pretension and applications of his Text by which she after a sort imputes Novelty to her self and confesses the Roman to be that Church which was from the beginning In the Order for Morning-prayer there are these Versicles and Responds V. O. Lord save the King R. And mercifully hear us when we call upon thee V. Endue thy Ministers with righteousness R. And make thy chosen people joyfull V. O Lord save thy People R. And bless thine Inheritance Then follows a Versicle for Peace Now these as almost all the other Prayers are mafestly translated out of the Roman Office But that which ought to be observed is That in the Roman Office there is a Versicle and Respond immediately following these and going before the Versicle for Peace which the English Church has studiously left out and that is this V. Be mindfull of thy Congregation O Lord. R. Which thou didst possess from the beginning Now the ground why this special Versicle or Prayer for the Church was left out is not so mysterious but it may be very probably guess'd at The first Reformers did not love to put God in mind of that Church which was from the beginning Or rather they were desirous the People should forget the Church which was from the beginning They had rather no Prayers at all should be made for the Church than for one that was from the beginning because apparently that could not be the Reformed Church of England whose beginning themselves saw 5. Notwithstanding such plain Confessions of these Pillars of Reformation yet the Doctor confidently stands with a little contraction and abatement to Bishop Iewel 's Challenge He indeed mentions 27. Points of which 22. are about circumstantial matters touching the Eucharist and two more of them viz. 1. That Ignorance is the Mother and Cause of true Devotion and Obedience 2. And that the Lay-people if he speaks of them in general are forbidden to read the Word of God in their own tongue are Calumnies The other are three indeed of the Preacher's points viz. 1. Supremacy of the Pope 2. Worship of Images 3. Common-prayers in a strange tongue though the only fault he can find in this last is That the later Church hath adhered too close to Antiquity that the hath not varied in the language of her Devotions from her Predecessors and after A. D. 600. continued to say her Prayers in the same Language she did before But then this Bishop as being somewhat better experienc'd in Antiquity than Doctor Pierce had not the confidence in this his Catalogue to reckon as Novelties either the Infallability of the Church Invocation of Saints Purgatory or Prayer for the Dead Celibacy of the Clergy or Sacrifice of the Mass. So much more courage had the Preacher than even Bishop Iewel himself Well between both all antiquity is for them and nothing but novelty on our side No doubt but his admiring and believing Hearers assured themselves that some never-before-examined Witnesses some hitherto unknown or un-observed Records had been found out by their learned and confident Preacher to justifie their deserted claim of Antiquity I mean by way of aggression and not simple defence But when the Sermon is publish'd nothing appears in the Text or Margins but Assertions and Quotations an hundred times before produced and as often silenced many of which too as he explains them have no regard
arguments he knows St. Gregory makes use of in several Epistles both to the Emperor to Iohn himself and others which being already produc'd by him need not be repeated Yet for all this neither Pelagius nor St. Gregory notwithstanding their detesting this Title did therefore quit their right to the Vniversal Pastorship of the Church and their Iurisdiction over all both Bishops and Patriarks too nay they assert it in these very Epistles wherein they are most sharp against that Title as shall be shew'd 6. The reason of this 't is manifest the Preacher does not understand therefore let him not disdain to be inform'd The like Order that is observ'd in the Church of England he may conceive is observed in the Catholic Church that is that the same person may be both a Bishop an Archbishop and a Primat I will add also the Supreme head of the Church as the Archbishop of Canterbury is among Eccâ—esiasticks For as for his Majestys Supremacy in Ecclesiastical affairs it is not in this place to be treated of Now my Lord of Canterbury is just like other Bishops merely a Bishop in his Diocese of Canterbury He is likewise a Metropolitan in his Province to visit all Bishops in it but he is not a Bishop in the other Dioceses subject to him for in them none have Episcopal right but only the respective Bishops themselves which are not removeable by him unlesse they incur crimes that by the Canons deserve it Lastly he is a Primat over both Provinces that is the whole Nation yet without prejudice to the other Metropolitan in whose office of Visitation and Ordinations he cannot interpose though he have a power to summon him to a National Council c. And in this regard he may be stiled the Vniversal Pastor of England and by being so makes the Church of England to be one National Church which otherwise would have two Episcopal heads Yet if any one should stile him the Vniversal Bishop of England it would not be endured because he can exercise Functions properly Episcopal in no other Province or Diocese but his own By considering this well the Doctor may more clearly apprehend how matters stand in the Catholic Church 7. For though this Title of Vniversal Bishop taken in some sense might draw after it such ill consequences yet being apply'd to the Supreme Pastor of God's Church it might innocently signifie no more but such a general Superintendency as the Scriptures allow to St. Peter and the Canons of the Church also have acknowledged due to his Successors and with such an innocent meaning as this Title was used long before in the 3d. Act of the Council of Chalcedon without any contradiction of the same Council to Pope Leo Boniface the Third did accept it from Phocas yet having done so it seems to me apparent that he neither exercised nor challenged the least access of Iurisdiction by it more than himself and his Predecessors had enjoy'd And of this the Doctor himself shall be Judge If he can find any proof to the contrary let him produce it and I will immediately recall what I have said 'T is true as appears in the History of the Council of Trent written by the Illustrious and learned Cardinal Palavicino that there was in that Council an earnest and constant opposition made by the French Prelates against naming the Pope Bishop of the Vniversal Church who in conclusion absolutely gained the silencing of that Title But this happened not because these denied to the Pope an Universal Superintendency over the whole Church or over all Churches taken disjunctively for this they willingly acknowledged but they opposed this Title only as the Universal Church might be taken in a collective sense that is to say as united in a General Council whereby a right of Superiority over a General Council may seem to be determin'd to the prejudice of the Decisions of the Councils of Constance and Basil which in this matter they allowed CHAP. IV. The absolute necessity of a Supreme Pastor in the Church Supremacy of Iurisdiction exercised by Pope Boniface the Third his Predecessors viz. St. Gregory P. Pelagius P. Felix P. Gelasius P. Leo. The 28th Canon of Chalcedon illegal Of the 2d Canon of the first Council of Constantinople 1. BEing now to demonstrate more than a Primacy of Order a primacy of Iurisdiction in the Predecessors of Boniface the Third extending it self to all Christians all particular Prelates and Churches yet a Supremacy not unlimited for then General Councils would be useless but sufficient to preserve unity in the Church I will first to make it appear reasonable declare the ground of the necessity of it which in brief is as the Preacher will find by the succeeding Testimonies of the Fathers because since General Councils the only absolute Supreme Authority Ecclesiastical either for want of agreement among Princes or by the inconvenience of the long absence of Prelates or great expences c. can very seldom be summon'd it would be impossible without an Ordinary constant standing Supreme Authority in the Church to prevent Schisms that is it is impossible the Church should subsist 2. For what effect against Schism can be expected from a meer Primacy of Order a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a sitting at the upper end of the Table a priviledge to speak first or to collect Votes Therefore for a Protestant to deny a Primacy of Iurisdiction to be necessary to conserve unity as in a National Church so in the Vniversal is to give up his own cause to the Presbyterians For all the subtilty of human wit without such a Concession can never answer the arguing thus If according to the Doctrin of the Fathers there be a necâ—ssity of setting up one Bishop â—ver many Fresbyters for preventing Schism there is say they as great a necessity of setting up one Archbishop â—ver many Bishops and one Patriark over many Arch-Bishops and one Pope over all unlesse men will imagin that there is a danger of Schism only among Presbyters and not among Bishops Arch-bishops c. which is contrary to reason truth history and experience But what expedient now without such a primacy of Iurisdiction can the Presbyterians find out against the mischief of Schism Truly no other but by rejecting that Article of the Creed in which we professe the certainly visible unity of the Catholic Church that is by believing that Schism iâ— no such ill thing as that much care needs be used to prevent it But surely English Protestants not having blotted out of their Creed that Article since they acknowledge the constituting one Bishop necessary to the unity of a Diocesse c. will find great difficulty to shew a reason why one Governor is not as necessary to the â—nity of the whole Church to which only both unity and Indefectibility is promised and without which the unity of Provinces or Dioceses are but factions 3. Certain it is that the antient Fathers thought so
infamous Canon surreptitiously made saith Liberatus after the departure of the Iudges the Senate and of the Legats of the See Apostolic and entirely nullyfied by the protestation of the said Legats and the Sentence of Pope Leo without whose consent according to the antient traditionary Law nothing made in any Council could oblige the Church A Canon this was so despised during that whole Age and more that the memory of it only remained in the Acts of that Council but it was not inserted among the other Canons for as it appears by the most antient Greek and Latin Copies of that Council by the collection of Dionisius Exiguus and by the Testimony of Theodoret Anagnostes a Grecian the Council of Chalcedoâ— publisht only twenty seven Canons whereas now this is reckoned the 28th Lastly A Canon this was that Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople by whose brigâ—ing with some Bishops and violence to others it was compiled was himself both ashamed and sorrow for it as appears by St. Leo's answer to him And of which Pope Gelasius forty years after affirms That the See Apostolic never consented to it the Emperor never imposed it Anatolius never made use of it and the whole matter was put in the power of the See Apostolic And therefore what the same See confirm'd remained in force and that which it receiv'd not could not have any firmnesse 9. Now because this enormous Canon was pretended to be only a renewing of a former Canon made in the second General Council of Constantinople observe the false dealing of that Bishop and his Clergy in citing that Canon For whereas it was thus conceived Let the Bishop of Constantinople enjoy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 prerogatives of honor after the Bishop of Rome These renewers of this Canon at Chalcedon fraudulently thrust in the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 equal priviledges As if excepting only the sitting in the second Chair he was to enjoy in the Church all the prerogatives of the See Apostolick A fancy which never entred into the minds of those former Bishops And indeed de facto after the fourth Council of Chalcedon the new Patriark by vertue of the exotic power given him presumed to summon all the other Patriarks and Bishops in the East to a Council An attempt repressed by Pope Leo. And no doubt when afterward the usurped the Title of Oecumenical Bishop they would not fear to give the same Title of Oecumenical to their Councils too 10. And as for the second Canon of that Council of Constantinople quoted in the Margin of the Sermon whereby the Eastern Patriarks are forbidden to meddle in Ecclesiastical affairs beyond the limits of their Provinces what is this to the Bishop of Rome He is not so much as named nor thought of in that Canon Neither was there ever any received Council in Gods Church that excluded him from an universal Iurisdiction which the Doctor sees was â—rcised by so many Popes at and after the Council of Chalcedon and he will see more before it CHAP. VII The Pope's Supremacy confirmed by a Law of the Emperor Valentinian Decrees of Pope's had antiently the force of Lawes Yet with restriction The Pope's Supream Iurisdiction confirmd by Examples in the Eastern Church Appeals to the See Apostolic decreed at Sardica where were present British Bishops Of the first Council at Arles where British Bishops likewise were present The sixth Canon of the Council of Nice explain'd 1. THere was an Imperial Law made by Valentinian the third who began his Reign A. D. 424. directed to the Bishops of France importing that Whatever had been and should be establish'd by the See Apostolick should have the force of a Law to them and all others And this the Emperor saies is Secundum veterem consuetudinem Moreover to shew the grounds of that Law he further saieâ— That the Supremacy of the See Apostolic has been established both by the merit of St. Peter who is the Prince of Episcopal Society and by the dignity of the City and by the sacred Authority of a Synod 2. Now if we shall consider the weight of such a publick Testimony and how Christian Catholick Emperors never made Lawes touching Ecclesiastical matters but by the advice of Bishops and for the corroborating of former Church Canons both touching Faith and Discipline and by no means for introducing of new ones we shall find a greater proof can scarce be produced against the Preachers pretention That between the times of the four first General Councils the Popes enjoyed only a primacy of Order and not Iurisdiction 3. Though this Law seems too excessively large commanding That whatever had been or should be c. Pope Leo who lived in the same Age limits the true sense of it when he commands That all the Decretals and Constitutions both of Pope Innocent and all other his Predecessors should be observed namely such as are publish't touching Ecclesiastical Orders and Canons Or as Pope Hilarius expresses it What ever Constitutions have been made by Popes for the quiet of all Gods Priests the observance of Discipline and taking away confusions 4. Examples of such publick Decrees of unquestion'd Authority even in the judgement of the most learned Protestants we finde made by Pope Zosimus Pope Innocent the First and Pope Siricius who governed the Church between the yeares 385. and 418. For as for the Decretals pretended to be made by antecedent Popes they do except against them and perhaps not without ground He will not expect I should transcribe those authentick Decrees to weary both him and my self unnecessarily He knows very well where to find them I will only adde that such Decrees were actually received as Laws by the Churches of Spain France c. Hence it is that in the fourth Council of Toledo the Bishops say For what is to be observed by us in such Cases Let us be informed by the Precepts of the Apostolick See and not follow our own but our common Fathers Instruction And the Council of Tours says What Bishop shall presume to act contrary to such Decrees as have proceeded from the See Apostolick Notwithstanding it was not forbidden to Bishops to consider and examin such Decrees for if they were made upon misinformation even Popes themselves have declared that the force of them should be suspended And much more if against the ancient Canons for saith Pope Zosimus ap Gratian. 25. q. 1. Even this Seat hath not Authority to constitute or change any thing contrary to the Statute of the Fathers 5. As for the more Primitive times preceding these I will content my self with a few examples but such and of so great weight that if the Preacher will be ingenuous they will even content him In the recounting of them it will not be necessary I should observe exactly the Order of times in each of them And the first shall be a passage of
enjoying a special priviledge in the exercise of every one of these Acts and Functions or exempts them from Subordination to him as their Superior yea Supream Pastor Supream not in Order only but Iurisdiction Certainly the Doctor can easily apply this to St. Peter and the rest of the Apostles or to St. Peter's Successors and all other Bishops 8. Now if the Fathers may be believed is was a priviledge and a great one that St Peter for the merit of his Confession had Christs own Title as Christ was Governor of the Church given him of being called a Rock For in the Syrian language in which our Lord spake the words have no different termination as in the Greek or Latin Petrus Petra but the words were Thou art Gepha a Rock and upon this Gepha Rock I will build my Church It was a priviledge that Peter neither the eldest nor first chosen Apostle is alwaies in the Gospel first reckoned and expresly called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the First It was a priviledge importing a greater latitude of Iurisdiction when after our Lord's Resurrection St. Peter alone had in the midst of the rest a Commission given him of indefinitly â—eeding Christ's Flock And after the Descent of the Holy Ghost was peculiarly appointed the Apostle of the Circumcision as St. Paul was of the Gentiles Yea that the Dedication of St. Paul's Office was performed by St. Peter who by immediate revelation was appointed to gather the first fruits of the Gentiles in the conversion of Cornelius and his house-hold c. 9. But why among such Governors as the Apostles was any Supereminency of Iurisdiction given to one man Certain it is there never was lesse necessity to provide against disobedience and dis-unions then among the Apostles every one of whom was guided by a Divine unerring light by which they knew all Truth and replenish'd with the Spirit of Charity and Vnâ—ty which exempted them from all ambitious envious or malicious designâ— Yet a Subordination not absolutely necessary to them was established among them for the succeeding Churches sake which without such order would in a very short time become a meer Babel Hence St. Hierom saies The Church was built upon Peter though true it is the same thing is done upon others and that the strength of the Church equally rests upon all But among the twelve one is chosen that a Head being constituted the occasion of Schism may be taken away 10. To the same purpose St. Cyprian notwithstanding the Sentence produced by the Preacher out of him That all the Apostles were pari consortio praediti honoris potestatis Yet in the very same Book saies Super unum aedificat Ecclesiam c. Our Lord builds his Church upon one Person And though after his Resurrection he gave an equal power to all the Apostles saying As my Father sent me so send I you Receive the Holy Ghost Whose sins you remit c. Yet that he might manifest unity he by his Authority disposed the Original of the same Vnity beginning from one And presently after Whosoever holds not the unity of the Church does he believe that he holds the Faith He that opposes are resists the Church he that forsakes the Chair of S. Peter upon which the Church is founded does he trust that he is in the Church In like manner St. Optatus at Rome saies he a Chair was placed for St. Peter to the end that unity might be preserved of all and for fear the other Apostles should challenge to themselves each one a particular Chair So St. Chrysostome Observe now how the same John that a little before ambitiously beg'd a preferment after yields entirely the Supremacy to St. Peter And again Christ did constitute Peter the Master not of that See of Rome alone but of the whole world 11. Now whereas the Doctor objects that St. Paul's contesting with St. Peter and resisting him to his face argues that he did not acknowledge any Superiority in him Let St. Augustin from St. Cyprian resolve us You see saies he to the Donatists what St. Cyprian hath said that the holy Apostle St. Peter in whom did shine forth so great a grace of Primacy being reprehended by St. Paul did not answer that the Supremacy belong'd to him and therefore he would not be reprehended by one that was posterior to him And he adds The Apostle St. Peter hath left to posterity a more rare example of humility by teaching men not to disdain a reproof from inferiors then St. Paul by teaching inferiors not to fear resisting even the highest yet without prejudice to Charity when Truth is to be defended 12. From all that has been said on this Subject it will necessarily follow that whatever Superiority St. Peter enjoyed and the Holy Fathers acknowledged was the gift of our Saviour only a gift far more beneficial to us then to St. Peter He was as St. Chrysostome saies Master of the World not because his Throne was establish'd at Rome but receiving from our Lord so supereminent an Authority he therefore made choice of Rome for his See because that being the Imperial City of the World he might from thence have a more commodious influence on the whole Church 13. Upon which grounds whensoever the Fathers make use of the Authority of his Successors Bishops of Rome against Hereticks or Schismaticks they consider that authority as a priviledge annexed to the Chair of St. Peter and only for St. Peters regard to the Sea of Rome This is so common in the Fathers writings that I will not trouble him with one Quotation Indeed Iohn of Constantinople when he would invade an equality 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in some sort with the Pope did wisely to mention only the priviledge of the Imperial City because he could allege no other pretention for his Plea But St. Leo St. Gregory St. Gelasius c. produce their evidences for their Supremacy from Tues Petrus super hanc Petram c. from Pasce oves meas c. Nay St. Augustin and other Bishops of the Milevitan Council writing to Pope Innocent to joyn with them in condemning the Pelagians tell him their hope was those Hereticks would more easily be induced to submit to his Authority Why because of the splendor of the Imperial City No but because the Popes Authority was de Sanctarum Scripturarum authoritate deprompta deduced from the Authority of the Holy Scriptures 14. I might with reason enough yet I will not omit to take notice of Doctor Pierce's trivial reasonings against the Popes as he calls it pretended Headship because such being sitted to vulgar capacities and confidently pronounc'd do more mischief then those that have more shew of profundity and weight Thus then he argues If the Pope be head of the Church then the Church must be the Body of the Pope And if so then when there is no Pope the Church has no Head
Supremacy began with St. Peter his words are Among the Apostles themselves there was one chief that had chief authority over the rest to the end Schisms might be compounded And this he quotes from Calvin who said The twelve Apostles had one among them to govern the rest 26. I will now produce two who will give this whole Cause to the Pope The first is the so fam'd Melancthoâ— who writes thus As certain Bishops preside â—ver particular Churches so the Bishop of Rome is President over all Bishops And this Canonical policy no wise man as I think does or ought to disallow c. For the Monarchy of the Bishop of Rome is in my judgement profitable to this end that consent of Doctrine may be retain'd Wherfore an agreement may easily be established in this Article of the Popes Supremacy if other Articles could be agreed upon The other witnesse is learned Doctor Covel the Defender of Mr. Hooker he having shew'd the Necessity of setting up one above the rest in God's Church to suppresse the Seeds of Dissention c. thus applies it against the Puritans If this were the principal means to prevent Schisms and Dissentions in the Pâ—imitive Church when the graces of God were more abundant and eminent then now they are Nâ—y if twelve Apostles were not like to agree except there had been one chief among them For saith Hierom Among the twelve one was therefore chosen that a chief being appointed occasion of Schism might be prevenâ—ed how can they think that equality would keep all the Pastors in the World in peace and unity For in all Societies Authority which cannot be where all are equal must procure unity and obedience He adds further The Church without such an Authority should be in a far worse case then the meanest Common-wealth nay almost then a Den of Theives if it were left dâ—stitute of means either to convince Heresies or to suppresse them yea though there were neither help nor assistance of the Christian Magistrate Thus Dr. Pierce may see how these his own Primitive Reformers either joyn with us in this Point of Primacy or however they oppose him in calling it a Novelty begun by Pope Boniface the third CHAP. IX Of the Churches Infallibility The necessity thereof that she may be a certain Guide to Salvation And the grounds whereupon She claims it 1. THe Second pretended Novelty of Catholick Doctrine is the Infallibility of the Church called by the Preacher The Paâ—â—adium of the Conclave and derived from the Schollars of Marcus in Irenaeus or from the Gnosticks in Epiphanius Against which Infallibility his unanswerable Arguments are 1. Infallibility is one of Gods incommunicable Attributes 2. The Church not being omniscient must therefore be ignorant in part and consequently may fall into Error 3. It is confess'd by the great Champions of the Papacy that the Heresie of the Novatians was hatch'd in Rome and continued there almost two hundred years 4. Besides Arianism that over-spread the Church she was infected with the Heresie of the Chyliasts being deceived by Papias which Heresie found no contradiâ—â—â—â— for some Ages 5. Yea the whole Church in the opinion of St. Augustin and Pope Innocent during the space of six hundred years according to Maldonaâ— thought the Sacrament of the Eucharist necessary to Infants yet the Council of Trent is of a contrary mind 2. In order to the answering of this Discoâ—rse he will sure acknowledge that all Sect of Christianity agree in this that each of them has both a Rule of their Faith and a 〈◊〉 also But in both these there is difference among them To the Presbyterians Independents Anabaptists Quakers Socinians c. the only Rule is the Holy Scripture But both Catholicks and English Protestants though they acknowledge Divine Revelations to be their only Rule yet they admit certain universally received Traditions besides expresse Scripture 3. But as for the Guide from which we are to learn the true sense of this Rule the difference among the said Sects is far greater and more irreconcilable The Socinians will have Scripture interpreted onely by private reason a Guide evidently fallible and therefore not to be imposed on others The Independents Anabaptists Quakers and Presbyterians too pretend to an Infallible Guide Gods Holy Spirit but with this difference that the Independents Anabaptists and Quakers rationally acknowledge that this Guide is only to direct those that have it and perceive they have it but cannot oblige other men that have it not nor can be sure they have it Whereas the Presbyterians by an unexampled Tyranny at least in France do oblige themselves and their Posterity to a Profession that by a Divine Illumination they are taught to distinguish Canonicâ—l Books of Scripture from Apocriphal and by the same Guide to justifie all the Doctrines by which they dissent from all others And moreover by a most senslesse inhumanity will impose a necessity on all others to belie their own Consciences and acknowledge the same Guide though they have never wrought any Miracles which certainly are necessary to oblige others to believe and follow the internal Guidance of that Spirit to which they pretend 4. As for Dr. Pierce and the generality of English Protestants I speak of them now as hitherto they have bin for what they must be hereafter neither they nor I know a special Guide of theirs beyond Reason and Spirit for the finding out the sense of Scripture and judging of Traditions received by them is the Primitive Church or foure first General Councils But since those ancient Fathers are now past speaking and their Writings are as obnoxious to disputes as the Scriptures themselves a speaking Judge of the sense of all these I suppose is their Ecclesiastical Synods or Bishops when Synods are dissolved but principally those that are to make and determine the sense of Acts of Parliament And upon these grounds they finde themselves obliged to behave themselves differently to several adversaries For against Sects that went out from them they use the help of Catholick weapons the Authority of the Chuâ—ch Councils c. But against Catholics they renouncing the Authority of the present Church in her Supremest Councils of convening which the times are capable and in the interval of Councils in the major part of the Governours thereof united with him whom themselves acknowledge the prime Patriark will make use of a kind of private spirit or reason or the judgment of a most inconsiderable number of Church-Governâ—rs going against the whole Body of the Catholick Church and their chief Pastor but this as to assent only where it likes them and so will be their own selves Judges of what is the sense of Councils Fathers Scriptures and all And great difficultie they often find how to avoid being accounted Papists when they speak to Sectaries and being even Fanaticks when they Dispute with Roman Catholicks And truly the Doctors whole Sermon is in effect meerly Fanatick
Prayers and Oblation for the Dead In opposition whereto he saies Prayers made for the dead profit them though they do not blot out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 entirely all mortal sins And again Who shall now have the â—oldnesse to dissolve the Statute of his Mother the Church or the Law of his Father which Father he there interprets to be the Holy Trinity Moreover St. Chrysostome It is not in vain that the Apostles have instituted this Law That during the celebration of the dreadful mysteries commemoration should be made of the dead for they knew that great benefit and profit would thereby accrew unto them And yet more expresly in another place We must saith he give our help and assistance to sinners departed by our Prayers Supplications Alms and Oblations For these things were not rashly and groundlesly devised Neither is it in vain that in the Divine Mysteries we make mention of these who are dead and approaching to the Altar addresse our prayers for them to the Lamb placed there who took away the sins of the World But we do this to the end that some comfort and refreshment may come to them thereby Neither is it in vain that he who assists at the Altar at the time when the dreadful Mysteries are communicated cries out Pray for all that are dead in Christ and for those who celebrate their memorials For were it not that such commemorations were profitable to them such things would not be spoken For the matters of our Religion are no sport No God forbid These things are perform'd by the Order and Direction of Gods Spirit 10. True it is that antiently in the publick Liturgies a commemoration was made even of the greatest Saints yes and prayers were made for them But yet not such prayers as were made for the imperfect But since all future things may be the subject of our prayers it may become our charity to pray for accession of glory to Saints already glorified but which at the Resurrection shall be in a yet better State And therefore when St. Austin saies It is an injury to pray for a Martyr since we ought rather to commend our selves to his prayers he means such prayers as we make for imperfect Christians that is for remission of their sins refreshment c. 11. Now tho' some such prayers extant in the Holy Fathers did regard the day of Judgment and the glory ensuing yet withal that they thought to some Souls a present refreshment did accrew in the intermediat condition is evident both by the foresaid Testimonies and many more that may be added As where St. Aâ—brose saies he would never cease his Intercessions for the Soul of the dead Emperor till he found a deliverance by them This is so apparent both out of the Fathers and ancient Liturgies that Bishop Forbes Spalato and other Protestant Writers do acknowledge it and refuse not to assent to the ground of such a practise The words of Spalato are these There would be no absurdity if we should confesse that some lighter sins which have not in this life been remitted quoad culpam as to the guilt or fault may be forgiven after death and this somtimes a little after the departure of the Soul c. by vertue of the Churches intercession 12 It cannot be denied but that there are among the Holy Fathers great varieties of Opinions touching some particular circumstances regarding the state of Souls after death and at the present some differences there are between the Roman and Greek Church In which notwithstanding it will appear to any who will compare them that the Roman Doctrin is far more moderate receiveable and approaching to the grounds of Protestants than that of the Eastern Church But however it is without all controversy that all Churches who professed Christianity before the Reformation do agree unanimously in the practice of praying for the Dead so as to beg forgiveness of sins a bettering of their state an asswagement of their sufferings c. Which practise they esteem not a voluntary offering but a duty to a necessary performance of which charity obligeth all Christians And therefore English Protestants cannot be excused for their neglect of this duty especially consisidering that the Doctrin upon which this Practice is grounded is not mentioned at all among those Points which they account Novelties in the Roman Church On the contrary the more learned among them have and do though not in expression yet in sense agree with Bishop Andrews conceding in his Reply to Cardinal Perron That for offering doth he not mean here for offering the Christian sacrifice of the Holy Eucharist for them for what is more manifest in Antiquity than this and prayer for the Dead little is to be said against it No man can deny but it is very antient Since then the Church cannot be thought from the most antient times thereof to have offered up to God all her prayers in all ages pro defunctis in vain methinks I cannot here but in this respect also commiserate the condition of those poor Souls who depart hence un-owned by that Church and without any share in her prayers which only like a true Mother is so sollicitous and carefull a Supplicant not only for her living but also deceased children and who after a life here not so well spent seeing themselves going hence only with an inchoated repentance an unperfect reformation and very unprepared to be immediatly entertained in that place of bliss and glorious society into which no impure thing shall enter yet are content rather to lose the benefit of the daily prayers and oblations for them of this careful Mother than to render themselves capable thereof by returning into her Communion And surely much more uncomfortable must such a death be that is void of the hopes of any such assistance than theirs is who departing hence in the bosom of the Church and in this blessed communion of Saints with the request of St. Austins dying Mother in their mouth Illud vos rogo ut ad Domine altare memineritis mei This I beg of you that at the Altar of our Lord ye make remembrance of me are sure to enjoy the last aid of this pious charity and also the yet more efficacious sacrifice of the Altar to be frequently offered to God in their behalf 10. Lastly to omit particular Quotations out of the antient public Liturgies of the Church that of St. Iames acknowledged by the second General Council that of St. Basil St. Chrysostom c. in every one of which are expresse prayers and oblations for the Dead demanding pardon of their sins refreshment of their sufferings c. I will conclude with a full convincing Testimony of St. Augustin whose words are these That by the Prayers of the Holy Church and saving Sacrifice as likewise by Alms expended for their Souls our departed Brethren are helped that God may deal with them more
the Body and Wine into the Blood of Christ he would think to escape by allowing a change to be made but only in the Act of worthy receiving Therefore I will onely make use of such Authorities as demonstrate this change to be made before communicating that it remains when the Sacrament is reserved and that immediately after consecration before any participation of the Symbols both the Priest and People did perform an act of Adoration to Christ beleived to be really and substantially though mystically present 10. In all ancient Liturgies as Blondel himself though a Huguenot confesses the prayer in the consecration of the Elements was That God would by his holy Spirit sanctifie the Elements whereby the Bread may be made the Body and the Wine the Blood of our Lord. And that before communicating whilst it was on the Altar it was esteem'd and worshiped as the true Body of our Lord St. Chrysostome will witnesse Let us saith he who are Citizens of Heaven imitate but even the barbarous Magi who worshipped our Lord an Infant c. Thou seest him not in the Manger but on the Altar Thou dost not see a woman holding him but the Priest standing by him and the Spirit with great vertue hovering over these Mysteries proposed Thou not only seest the Body it self as the Magi did but thou knowest also the vertue of it c. The same Body which is the most precious and most honour'd thing in Heaven I will shew thee placed upon Earth c. Neither dost thou only see it but touchest and eatest it and having received it thou returnest home with it c. Hence Optatus saith What other thing is the Altar but the Seat of the Body and Blood of Christ. A yet more irrefragable witnesse hereof is the General Council of Nice wherein Act. l. 3. c. de Divinâ mensâ are these words In this Divine Table let us not abase our intentions so as to consider the Bread and Wine set before us but raising up our mind by Faith let us understand that upon that holy Table is placed the Lamb of God which takes away the sins of the World which is unbloodily immolated by the Priest and receiving his precious Body and Blood let us truly believe that these are the Symbols of our Redemption And that the Elements once consecrated and after reserved yet remain the Body of Christ though not participated St. Cyril of Alexandria expresly â—ectifies I hear saith he there are others who affirm that the Mystical Eulogy if any thing of it remain till another day doth profit nothing to sanctification Bur they are mad who say these things For Christ is not alter'd neither is his holy Body changed but the vertue of Benediction and quickning grace perpetually remains in it And as touching Adâ—ration of our Lord as acknowledged substantially present on the Altar St. Ambrose expresly asserts it Adore the foot-stool of his feet Therefore by the footstool is understood the Earth and the Earth the flesh of Christ which at this day also we adore in the Mysteries and which the Apostles adored in our Lord Iesus And from St. Ambrose the same is taught as expresly by St. Augustin discoursing on the same Text Adorate Scabellum pedum ejus Who moreover adds Christ hath given his flesh to be eaten by us for our Salvation Now no man eats this except he first adore it Yea moreover he saies We do not only not sin by adoring it but we should sin if we did not adore it And in an Epistle to Honoratus he affirms That the rich of the Earth and proud are somtimes brought to the Table of our Lord and there receive of his Body and Blood but they onely adore it they are not satiated with it because they do not imitate him by humility For of the humble it is said Edent pauperes saturabuntur 11. The same may be inferr'd by the wonderfull niceness and scrupolosity observed in the Primitive Church in the handling communicating and reserving these Mysteries what a crime was it esteem'd in the Primitive times if but a crum or drop of the consecrated Elements should fall to the ground For fear of that till about the year six hundred they were received by the Communicants not in their Fingers as among the Reformed but in the inside plain of their hands and in a silver Pipe c. But I will conclude this point with a brief Answer to the Doctors Allegations 12. Whereas therefore he says It is evident that Transubstantiation waâ— never taught by our Saviour since in the same breath wherewith he pronounced these words This is my Blood he explain'd himself by calling it expresly the Fruit of the Vine On the contrary I do confidently pronounce it to be evident that those words were neither spoken by our Lord in the same breath after the Consecration of the Chalice nor had they any regard to the Sacrament 'T is true they are mentioned by St. Matthew after the Consecration but he knows that in St. Luke who promised to write 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those words are mentioned before any Consecration began and the occasion of them is evidently the eating of the Paschal Supper c. For this is his Narration When the hour was come he sate down and the twelve Apostles with him And he said unto them with desire I have desired to eat this Passeover with you before I suffer For I say unto you I will not any more eat thereof until it be fulfill'd in the kingdom of God And he took the Cup and gave thanks and said Take this and divide it among your selves For I say unto you I will not drink of the fruit of the Vine until the kingdom of God shall come Now after all this follows his own last Supper the Mystical consecration and communion of his blessed Body and Blood For the Text thus continues And he took Bread saying This is my Body c. likewise also the Cup after Supper saying This Cup c. This being the order of the words no Text can possibly with more evidence conâ—ute the Doctor than this which himself cites for what can be clearer if before Consecration our Saviour said He would drink no â—ore of the fruit of the Vine then that what he drank after was not of the fruit of the Vine But besides this though our Lord should have called it after Consecration the fruit of the Vine as Saint Paul calls the other Symbol Bread this does not argue against a Change in their nature For Moses his Rod after it was changed into a Serpent is call'd a Rod still because it had been one Exod. 7. 12. and Io. 2. 9. it is said That the Master of the Feast tasted the Water that was made Wine 13. Is not now the Doctor 's Insincerity evident his insincerity even in the Pulpit has he not palpably mis-inform'd his Majesty and so illustrious
the Church had warrant and authority to do as she did he must prove that such an Authority could be extended only to private Persons or Fanilies and by no means to publick Congregations That the same was a whole Communion in a Chamber and but a half Communion in a Church That a sick man or one at Sea c. broke not the institution of Christ whilst he communicated under one kind but did break it when he was in health or upon firm ground 6. Till these things be proved by him which will be ad Graecas Calindas he must of necessity grant that here is no Noveâ—ty at all no change in the present Catholic â—hurch as to Doctrin And that the change which is made in external Disciplin is of so great importance that Protestants who would not have separated from her Communion if she had given them leave to break our Saviours Institution only privatly will renounce her because she thinks and knows that a privat House and a Church cannot make the same action both lawful and unlawful and therfore since she had authority within doors she cannot be deprived of it abroad 7. Nay further Doctor Pierce's task does not end here for though he should be able to prove all this yet if this be one of the provocations and causes of their separation he cannot justifie that separation till they have made a tryal whether the Church will not dispence with them as to this point of Discipline and after tryal been refused For surely he will not esteem Schism a matter so inconsiderable as to expose themselves to the guilt of it because others besides them are obliged and content to receive under one species whilst themselves are left at liberty They will not unnecessarily make tumults and divisions in the Church by disputing against others when they themselves are not concern'd Now that such a dispensation may possibly be had does appear in that the Church by a General Council hath either given to or acknowledged in her Supreme Pastor a sufficient authority to proceed in this matter according to his own prudence and as he shall see it to be prâ—fitable to the Church and for the spiritual good of those that shall demand the use of the Chalice 8. As for us Catholics we are bread up to the Orders established by Gods Church And being assured that our Lord will not forget his Promises and consequently his Church shall never mislead us to our danger we do not think it our duty to question the Churches prudence or set up a private Tribunal to censure her Lawes We are not sure we know all the Reasons that induced the Council of Constance to confirm a practise almost generally introduced by custome before Yet some Reasons we see which truly are of very great moment for that purpose to wit the wonderful encrease of the numbers of Communicants and wonderful decay of their Devotion From whence could not be prevented very great dangers of irreverences and effusion oft-times of the precious blood of our Lord considering the defect of providence and caution to be expected in multitudes little sensible of Religion It is probable likewise that the Heresie of Berengarius who acknowledged no more in the Sacrament than the meer signs of the body and blood of our Lord might induce the Catholics publickly to practise what the Primitive Church did privatly to the end they might thereby demonstrate that though they received not both the Signs yet they were not defrauded of being partakers of all that was entirely contained under both the Species which was whole Christ not his body only but also his blood c. CHAP. XIII Of the Sacrifice of the Masse Asserted Universally by Antiquity The true Doctrine concerning it explained 1. HIS sixth supposed Novelty which is the third that regards the blessed Sacrament is the Sacrafice of the Masse But how is this prov'd to be a Novelty Ipse dixit Not one Text not one Quotation appears in the Margin and why Alas where should he find any Since there 's not a Father in Gods Church from the very Apostles but acknowledged a Christian Sacrifice nor any old Heretick ever denyed it Nay who besides himself calls it a Noveltie I am sure Dr. Fulk expresly confesseth that Teâ—tullian Cyprian Austin Hierom and a great many more do witnesse that Sacrifice yea Sacrifice for the Dead is the Tradition of the Apostles And Mr. Ascham acknowledges that the Sacrifice of the Masse is so antient that no first beginning of it can be shewed Yet Dr. Pierce would fain have proved it to be a Novelty Gladly would he have applyed to this his From the beginning it was not so But could not find one Word in Antiquitie for his purpose However for all that it must not be omitted His Auditors would have wonderd to hear the Church accused and the clause touching the Sacrifice left out of the Indictment 2. To please therefore popular ears he named it as an ill thing But coming to print his Sermon he leaves that Margin empty For what could be in the Fathers to fill it It was not for his purpose to quote St. Ignatius's saying It is not lawful either to offer or to immolate the Sacrifice or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without the Bishop Which say the Centurists are dangerous words and seeds of Errors Or St. Ireneus who tells us that our Lord consecrating the Mystical Elements Taught us a New Oblation of the New Testament which the Church having received from the Apostles offers to God through the whole World Or St. Cyprian whose words are Who was more a Priest of the most High God then our Lord Iesus Christ Who offred a Sacrifice to God the Father and offred the very same that Melchisedech had offred that is Bread and Wine to wit his own Body and Blood c. and commanded the same to be afterward done in memory of him That Priest therefore doth truly supply the place and function of Christ and imitates that which Christ did who undertakes to offer according as he sees Christ himself offerd In which one Epistle he calls the Eucharist a Sacrifice seven times and above twenty times he affirms that the Symbols are offred in it 3. The truth is in the writings of Antiquity the celebration of these Mysteries is scarce ever call'd by other name but Oblation Sacrifice Immolation c. And because the Fathers may be said to speak figuratively and rhetorically the Canons also of the Church which ought to speak properly scarce ever use any other expression See the third among the Apostolic Canons The 58 th Canon of the Council of Laodicea The 20 th Canon of the first Council of Aâ—les The 40 th Canon of the Council of Cartâ—age And the 18 th Canon of the first General Coâ—ucil of Nice in which are these words The Holy Synod is inform'd that in some places Deacons administer the Euâ—harist to Priests
put his trust in it as expecting any good from it as if he knew not what Divinitie Vertue or Sanctitie was in that carved piece of wood Notwithstanding because he had heard that such a scandalous imputation was by some misperswaded persons laid on the Church he would then and there undeceive them Thereupon he spit upon the Crucifix threw it scornfully to the ground and trampled it under his feet 14. You see Mr. Bagshaw what kind of Idolaters the Papists are Against this Idolatry let us see what expresse Scripture you can produce This is the great crime for which there can be no expiation but oppressions Imprisonments and Gallowses Now if what hath been here said give you no satisfaction in case you have a mind to reply do not practise your old way of snatching a phrase or expression out of a single Author a School-man or Controvertist making the whole Church answerable for one mans indiscretion But search what the Church her self has declared in the Council of Trent Imagines Christi c. in Templis praesertim retinendae c. Images of Christ c. ought to be reteined in Churches especially and due honor and veneration exhibited to them not that there is believed any Divinity or Vertue in them for which they ought to be worshipped or that they are to be petitioned for any thing or any confidence to be repos'd in them but because the honor exhibited to them is referred to the Prototypes they represent Dispute against this as well as you can and be assured you shall either be answered or told you are unconquerable CHAP. XV. The Roman Churches Prudence in restraining the too free use of Scripture from the Unlearned The miseries of this Kingdom justly ascribed to a defect in such Prudence Of Prayers not in a Vulgar Tongue The Causes and Grounds thereof That practise not contrary to St. Paul I. DOctor Pierce his next which is a double Novelty regards not any Doctrines but only a Point of Discipline in the Church which is The with-holding Scripture from the Vulgar and practising public Devotions in an unknown Tongue Concerning the former he saies The Scriptures were written in Hebrew the mother-tongue of the Iew and in Greek a Tongue most known to Eastern Nations And afterwards were translated into the Dalmatick by St. Hierom into the Gothick by Vulphilas into the Arminian by Chrysostom c. and the Vulgar Latin was anciently the Vulgar Language of the Italians c. 2. Truly the Doctor has if it be well consider'd made choice of a very proper season to renew a quarrel against the Roman Church upon this Point and to endeavour the engaging his Majesty in it as if the calamities already hapned both to the Royal Family and the whole Nation were either too little or not to be imputed chiefly to that Error He and all Christendom has seen the blessed effects that this prostituting Scripture to the passions and lusts of the rude and common people of all Conditions Ages and Sexes has wrought the last twenty years in this Kingdom What was it but Scripture as it was used and of which ill use themselves were the first causes and hereafter will never be able to prevent that justified Discontents against the Government both Civil and Ecclesiastical that put Swords and Guns into the hands of Subjects against their Kings and all that were faithful to them that dissolved the entire frame of the Kingdom that encourag'd men to Plunder and all manner of Rapines that Arraign'd and Murther'd our last most Excellent KING that endanger'd his now living Son our most gracious Kings life and forced him into a long necessitous banishment that has revived and given strength to old and new Monsters of Heresies to the astonishment of Man-kind some of which are no where else to be seen and the rest in no where place so venomous as in England Let but the Doctor remember how much mischief the perverse interpretation of this one Text which none but the ignorant could mistake produc't in this Nation Having a form of godlinesse but denying the power thereof How did this ring in their ears and stir them up to reject and hate all set-forms of Prayer How with this Text alone often repeated and industriously enlarged and zealously apply'd by the holy Lecturers were their very hearts set on fire to burn the grand Idol of the Common Prayer Book And yet after all this the Doctor makes or renews quarrels with the Roman Catholic Church because she is unwilling by imitating them to give a birth from her bowels to such mischiefs as these 3. Yet cannot be deny'd that Doctor Pierce was subtile for having a design in recompence of the service Roman Catholicks have done them to expose them to the common rage of all these Monsters he could not make choice of a subject more proper for his purpose than this in which alone they were all interessed not for the good they reap by Scripture but because without it they would not have the advantage to do half so much mischief 4. Yet must he not think he can so blind mens eyes but they know well enough that English Protestants are in their very Souls grieved That 't is now too late for them to eâ—deavor how they may imitate both the Prudence and Charity of Catholic Churches in the dispensing of Scripture Our Pastors do not as he wrongfully seems to charge them forbid the Translation of Scripture into Vulgar Tongues since there is scarce any Nation but hath it There are Catholic Translations of the Scripture into English French Dutch Italian Spanish c. for the use of those of the Laity who are by their Spiritual Guides judged such as that they may reap benefit and no harm by the reading thereof And what more doth the Preacher shew in the practise of the ancient times in saying that the Holy Scriptures were then translated into the Dalmatick Tongue by St. Hierom then I shew in justification also of the later times which he would here condemn in saying as truly that the Holy Scriptures are also found translated long ago in Wicliffs the Reformers time by the allowance and Authority of the Catholic Church of which thus Dr. Fâ—lk That the Scriptures were extant in English both before and after Wicliffs time and not of his Translation beside your conjecture out of Liâ—dâ—ood it is manifestly proved by so many ancient â—riters Copies of the English Bible differing in â—â—anslation yet to be shewed of which Wicleffs Translation could be but one Or in saying That the same Holy Scriptures have been Translated also of late since Luthers a second Reformer's time with the allowance of the same Church Catholic by the industry of the Rhemish Divines But Catholic Governors knowing how impossible it is for ignorant Persons to understand it and for passionate minds to make good use of it esteem it more conduceing to their edification and the common peace that such
Hierons Fulgentius the fourth Council of Carthage at which St. Augustin was present c. And it is not contradicted by any one Antient Doctor nor any except antient Hereties Iovian Vigilantius c. And this surely will suffice to demonstrate it no Novelty in God's Church much lesse that it was esteem'd a Doctrin of Devils to forbid Marriage to Persons consecrated to God's service Forbid it I say not the Gnosticks Manichees c. forbad it as an unlawful thing in it's self but only as an impediment and distraction in a spiritual Vocation Now whether Widows are esteem'd by the Preacher to be more nearly and perfectly consecrated to the Divine service by the Office of Deaconesses then men by Priesthood 't is expected he should declare 3. But for better clearing of this Point touching the prohibition of Mariage to persons in holy Orders c. in charity I must suppose the Doctor will not professe the Heresie of Iovinian who taught that Virginity does not excel Matrimony An Heresie so contrary to reason that as St. Augustin tell us it was presently extinguished and never could attain to the deceiving so much as one Priest This Heresie formally contradicts St. Paul teaching thus There is difference between a wife and a Virgin The Virgin unmarried woman careth for the things of our Lord that shew ay be holy both in body and spirit But she that is maried careth for the things of the world how she may please her husband Which saying of the Apostle certainly at least declares a state of Virginity and continency much more advantagious to promote the service of God and keep the mind fixed on spiritual and heavenly imployments than a Married state encombred with worldly cares and carnal appetites Thus much I doubt not will by the Preacher be granted 4. But now the Question must be whether Eunuchism for the Kingdom of Heaven that is a perpetual abstinence from Marriage and all carnal lusts may lawfully be by Priests c. made the matter of a Vow That it is a Council of Perfection is evident from our Saviours speech Qui potest capere capiat But upon supposition that Continency is a special gift of God not bestow'd on all and that it is infinitely difficult for any one certainly to know he has this Gift for these and such like reasons the Roformed Churches in opposition to the Roman Catholic have generally condemned the practice of such Vows at least consider'd as extending it self generally to any whole Order or state of men and especially an Obligation imposed on them to this practice 5. On the other side the Roman Catholic Church though she acknowledges Continence to be a special Gift of God and that there may be some difficulty to attain and preserve it yet esteems not these to be grounds sufficient to relinquish the obligation of Câ—libacy in Priests c. which she submitted to from the Preachchers Beginning that is in the primitive times of the Church at least within the four first General Councils 6. It is granted then that Continency that is an ability to abstain not from all motions of Concupiscence but from putting in execution all motions either by a voluntary morose delectation in them or much more by outward unclean practises of them is a Gift of God a fruit of his Holy Spirit and cannot by natural means be obtained so as to be practised in obedience to him But so are all Christian vertues So is Faith so is Repentance so is Charity all which notwithstanding we vow in our Baptism And why do we vow a practise of those vertues which are pure Gifts of God Because we are assured the same God who commands that Vow will not be wanting to supply strength to perform it in all those that sincerely beg those Gifts of him by earnest Prayers made in Faith and by avoiding all known and possible-to-beavoided impediments to the practise of those vertues 7. But it will be said that great difference is to be made between that Continence which is a Christian vertue necessary to all viz. a Continence from all unlawful Lusts and such a Continence as is now treated of which is an Abstinence from Marriage that is from the lawful Remedies of unlawful Lusts which Abstinence is so far from being necessary to all that it is no more than a Council to those that aspire to perfection which are but few even in the opinion of the Roman-Church This Abstinence certainly is a far more special Gift of God say they and not too easily and commonly to be presumed on 8. All this likewise understood cum grano Salis is acknowledged by us Yet withall Protestants know that even this Abstinence from Marriage or from exercising the lawful Acts in Marriage is a Gift bestowed on very many and in some cases necessary to almost every one For otherwise it would be utterly unlawful for Parents to keep their children unmarried after the time they are capable and thereby to expose them to unlawful lusts since it seems they are not sure they have such a Gift it would be unlawful for Merchants and Travellers to make long voyages abroad and leave their Wives at home deprived of the necessary lawful Remedies against Lust and Temptations to which they are exposed All Statutes of Colledges ought to be repealed which forbid Marriage still to all Fellows and heretofore to all Presidents upon penalty of forfeiting their whole subsistence A long Sickness inflicted by God on either of the married Couples would be far more dangerous to their Souls than their Bodies so as if such an Abstinence as is now spoken of were such an extraordinary Gift of Perfection England would have more Saints or more Adulterers c. than she is aware of And here good Doctor I desire you tell me a thing that perhaps you have not thought on yet will easily perceive its meaning assoon as you think on 't What is the reason that the Ministers of England generally marry not till they are above thirty years of age Can they abstain all that while when their passions are stronger and their reason weaker and then after so long a Continency begin to plead 't is impossible for them to hold any longer unlesse they had the gift of Chastity which God bestows not on every one shall I give you my Conjecture I doubt they force themselves to live single till they have a Benefice and then assoon as they can maintain a wife they get one is not this meer hypocrisie to talk of Marrying out of tenderness of Conscience to allay their Concupiscence when the danger is almost all past and make no provision to prevent the sins of the unrulyest part of their age Methinks they should either marry earlyer when they may justly suspect their Chastity before they have tryed themselves or live longer Batchellors when they may prudently hope by the grace of God to persevere after so much experience of their
continency 9. Catholicks therfore though they confesse this continence to be a special Gift of God not bestow'd on all because all do not use the means yet resolve it is such a special gift as is denyed to none who rightly seek it and conceive it also may be made the matter of a vow by those who have a steddy purpose to use the necessary means to attain and conserve it and by those who by humble and due examining themselves are perswaded that God calls them to a state of greater Perfection and being in that state depend on his grace for performing their Vow seeking his assistance by constant Prayers watchfulnesse and necessary penitential austerities Now those may be confident they are called to such a state either in a Monastical or Ecclesiastical Profession who betake themselves thereto not out of any worldly respects for gaining a subsistence or preferment or other temporal invitations but purely to avoid the tentations solicitudes and distractions of the world and flesh and to devote themselves more to the service of God and advancing their Souls in vertue and piety In this state of Perfection and in complying with this Council of Perfection those who duly undertake that state may as undoubtedly promise to themseves Gods assistance whilst they use the means to obtain it as generally all Christians may after the vow of Baptism St. Augustin writes thus David vow'd as having the matter in his own power And yet he beggs withall â—f God that he may perform what â—e vow'd Here is the devotion of one that vows here is the humity of one that prays Let no man presume on his own strength as if he were able of himself to perform what he shall vow He that exhorts thee to vow saying Vovete reddite the same God helps thee to perform what thou hast vow'd 10. If then it be lawfull for private persons to vow Celibacy surely it is lawful for the Church to enjoyn it her Doctrin being That Goddenies not the gift of Chastity to them who ask it aright nor suffers us to be tempted above what we are able Which Doctrin is the ground why the Church enjoyns Celibacy to Priests So that Chastity is called a special Gift not in this sence as it all men though using what means â—oever are not capable of it But it is such a Gift as many men never actually receive from God because they do not use the means and such a Gift as few also will endeavour to use the means to attain because these means are harder than those by which other Gifts may be attained That the undertaking by Vow such a life of Chastity and abstinence from Marriage yea in Marriage it self has been approv'd commended and practised in Gods Church from the very beginning if the Preacher will not believe us let him not suspect at least partiality in his own best Friends We are not ignorant says Chemnitius that the Fathers did approve the vows of perpetual Celibacy and acknowledge them to be obligatory Profession and Vows of Chastity says Peter Martyr were extant among Christians in the time of Clement of Alexandria that is about the year 170. Again I know says he that Epiphanius with many of the Fathers erred in this that they said it was a sin to violate such a Vow when it was requisite and that he did ill in referring it to Apostolic Tradition Danaeus says confidently That St. Augustin and all the Bishops in the Council of Carthage abused manifestly the word of God saying upon the Apostles words If any widows how young soever have vowed themselves to God c. and afterwards shall go to secular Marriage they shall according to the Apostle have damnation because they dared to make void the vow of Chastity made to God The Centurists affirm it to be manifest by the Epistles of Ignatius that in those times men began to have too much liking of the Profession of Virginity for he says Let Virgins consider to whom they have consecrated themselves 11. And as for the Doctrin of Devils mentioned by the Preacher he may do well to sit him down and consider the words of the Apostle and the comments of the Fathers on them a little better First he will find the Apostle in his opposing those who in the latter times should forbid to marry and command to abstain from meats to argue against them thus That every Creature and Ordinance of God is good according to Gen. 1. 31. 2. 23 24. and therefore being sanctified first by the word of God and Prayer may lawfully be used See 1 Tim. 4. 3 4 5. which plainly shews that St. Paul means such Apostates as abstain from or prohibit Marriage and Meats as in themselves unlawful and unclean and contaminating Which thing can neither be objected to the antient nor modern Church-practise using abstinence from some meats for the chastisement of the body not for any uncleanesse in the food and not forbidding Marriage to any single person absolutely but only upon his voluntary undertaking such an employment with which they imagin a married condition not so well to sute In which case if necessary abstinence from Marriage be a fault the Apostle himself may seem to comply with it in those expressions of his forementioned concerning the Widows 1 Tiâ— 5. 11 12. 2ly He will find it manifest by experience that this prophecy of the Apostle was most eminently fulfilled in other persons of these latter times whom these Fathers even in these points most vehemently resisted they affirming downright all Marriage especially with reference to procreation of children therefore the married were advised by them in such manner to use their Wives as to avoid this See S. Aug. De Morib Manich. c. 18. to be unlawful and the work or dedesign of the Devil as likewise flesh-diet to be unclean and defiling They forbid living Creatures as detesting them saith Epiphanius not in respect of preserving continency or a vertuous life but out of fear and fancy that they might be defiled by eating such living Creatures Wine they use not at all saying 't is Diabolical And S. Austin Contra Faust. l. 30. c. 5. Ye call the Creature unclean because the Devil ye say frames flesh out of the more feculent part of natural matter Such were some of the Gâ—osticks Eucratites Mâ—ntanists Marcionites and in the last place the Manichees who not holding all things to have been created by the same good God but this lower world by an evil Principle or by the Prince of Darkness as they call him affirmed in the begetting of a man that the Soul which they account to be a part of the substance of God himself becomes fertered and imprisoned in the walls or handy-work of the Devil i. e. the body and therefore was marriage as occasioning such imprisonment forborn by all their Elect and though this was permitted to their Auditors yet saith S. Austin it
our selves obliged to the assent unto which is far more then not to contradict And this obligation is founded on the Infallible Authority which we acknowledge in the Catholick Church derived from the promises of Christ whose Spirit shall lead her into all Truth The denial of which assent we affirm to be formal Heresie and an open contradiction to which Authority is formal Schism 12. This we are taught concerning our Duty and Submission to General Councils And hereto we must add that considering the present distracted state of the Christian world and especially the Schism pertinaciously persisted in by the Eastern Patriarks who live under the Tyranny of the Turk and therefore will never probably be permitted to convene for the general Union of Christendom it is almost become impossible that such General Councils should now be assembled with all formalities as the four first were wherein all the five Patriarks were present at least by their Deputies Yet notwithstanding all this we cannot without infidelity doubt that God will be wanting to his Church to preserve it in Truth and Vnity Since therefore such an Oecumenical Council cannot be expected as was during the times of the Roman Empire the Supremest that can now be had ought to have the force and vertue of obliging which the former ones had the Anathemas of it must be as valid the Decisions of it as much to be submitted to and a renunciation of its Doctrine and Laws as heynously Schismatical as of any Council that ever went before Therefore Doctor Bramhal Lord Primate of Armagh in the Preface of his Reply to the Bishop of Chalcedon declaring that he submits himself to the Representative Church that is to a free General Council most rationally adds this clause or to so General as can be procured 13. Thus of General Councils As for inferior subordinate Councils though their Decrees touching Doctrines and Laws for Discipline are not unappealable yet an obligation in both these respects they impose on Christians living respectively within their Precincts The Decisions of a Provincial Synod are to be internally assented to except they be evidently erroneous or contradictory to those of a Superior Synod so that without Schism they cannot be openly contradicted Yet the same Decisions may be annulled by a Patriarchical Synod And all by an Oecumenical of which alone all the Decisions and Laws are irreversible because there is no Authority upon earth superior to it and in all Governments an inferior Authority can never reverse what hath once been established by a Superior especially if that establishment hath been actually submitted to For if a Provincial Synod could annul the formerly received Acts of a National or a National of a Patriarchical there must of necessity follow a Dissolution of all Government and Vnity as to the whole Catholick Church yet we profess in our Creed Vnam Catholicam Add to this that in all Synods the Major part alwayes must decide so that the fewer however they may be esteem'd the better or more learned must submit to them These likewise all use of meetings and consultations will be evacuated 14. This fundamental Rule of all Government and Vnity is the only true unering Touch-stone by which a judgement is to be made concerning Schism If Doctor Pierce can furnish us with a better let it be produced but that being impossible he must give us leave to make use of this to examin the cause between the Roman Catholick Church and all other Congregations that call themselves Reformed But indeed it is lost labour to apply such a Rule as this to any Calvinistical Independent or Fanatick Congregations because they renounce both all such Laws and the whole Authority and Offices of those that made them Therefore leaving them to the severe judgement of him who said Where are those my enemies that will not have me to rule over them I will consider the Controversie as the Preacher stated it between the Roman Catholick and English Protestant Churches I say as he hath stated it because being to treat of Schism he hath given the right notion of it and not mispent time and paper as some others have done with vain discourses of an Internal and External separation c. as if there were no danger in external Schism or dividing of Communion unless men also have with the Presbyterians c. lost all even appearance of charity to all Christian Churches before them damning all who believe that Artiticle of our Creed concerning the Unity and Authority of the Church CHAP. XXI The Fundamental RULE of Church-Government Limitations of the Authority of Gen Councils Their Grounds made by Arch Bishop Lawd Dr. Feild c. Of Points Fundamental and Non-fundamental Protestants allow not so much Authority to Gen. Councils as God commanded to be given the Iewish Sanedrim Of the pretended Independence of the English Church from the Example of Cyprus The foresaid fundamental Rule of all Government That no Laws can validly be repealed by an Authority Inferior to that by which they were Enacted is a Rule not now invented to serve our present purpose but written in the hearts of all mankind that consider what Government is and it is as to Church-matters particularly taken notice of by St. Augustine when he declares the Order that is in the Church and which alone can keep it in unity Particular Writings of Bishops saies he if any Error be in them may be corrected by others more learned or by Synods and Synods themselves assembled either in Provinces or Regions ought without any tergiversation to yield and submit to the Authority of Plenary Councils and oftimes former Plenary Councils may be corrected by other following Plenary Councils 2. This most Irrefragable Rule is that by which Schism may most certainly and undeniably be discovered And therefore though in gross it be admitted by Protestants I mean the wisest and most learned among them yet out of a necessity of maintaining the grounds of the English Reformation they put such restrictions exceptions to it as utterly take away all use of it For whereas S. Augustine makes the Supream Authority of the Church to reside in plenary or general Councils because he withal implies that such Councils may be corrected they therefore take the liberty to reject them at least in decisions in their esteem of less importance and by that means altogether inervate their Authority Not considering that in case the Decisions which he saies may be mended should regard matters of belief which perhaps upon better consideration may be expressed more commodiously and so as that they may be less liable to misconstruction yet it belongs not to any particular men or Churches to correct them but onely to succeeding Councils of equal Authority To demonstrate this I will here set down what Authority learned Protestants such as Doctor Field the late Arch-Bishop Lawd c. acknowledg in general Councils and withal how they circumscribe the same Authority 3.
These agree that the Universal Church is infallible in fundamentals Hence says the Archbishop The visible Church hath in all ages taught that unchanged faith of Christ in all Points fundamental Doctor White had reason to say this c. Again The whole Church cannot universally erre in absolutely fundamental Doctrines therefore it is true also that there can be no just cause of making a Schism from the whole Church Again quoting Kickerman he saith That she cannot erre neither in the Faith nor in any weighty point of Faith And from Doctor Field he asserts That she cannot fall into Heresie c. That she may erre indeed in superstructions and deductions and other unnecessary Truths from her curiosity or other weakness But if she can erre either by falling away from the Foundation totally or by heretical error in it she can no longer be holy for no Assemblies of Hereticks can be holy And so that Article of the Creed I believe the holy Catholick Church is gone Now this holiness saith he Errors of a meaner allay take not away from the Church The same Archbishop likewise acknowledges that a General Council de post facto is unerrable that is when the Decisions of it are received and admitted generally by Catholicks 4. Thus far goes the Arch-Bishop attended by Doctor Field Doctor White c. But being necessarily obliged to maintain the separation of his own Church from the Roman c. he treating of that point extends most enormously the Errors of the Church in non-Fundamentals for then forgeting his former phrases of unprofitable curiosities unnecessary subtilties unnecessary Doctrines to which her curiosity or weakness may carry her beyond her Rule he saith The Roman Church held the Fundamentals literally yet she erred grosly dangerously nay damnably in the exposition of some of them That she had Errors though not Fundamental yet grating upon the Foundation c. Now what he speaks of the Roman is manifest must as well be applied to the Eastern Church too and so to the whole Church Catholick at Luthers discession for most of the Doctrines found fault with by Protestants in the Roman Church themselves see to have been and still to be taught by the Eastern c. with an accession on of other Errors from which the Roman is free 5. Hitherto these Writers speak of the Authority of the Church onely in generals The Church say they cannot Erre in Fundamentals She may Erre in non-Fundamentals But who is to discern between Fundamentals and non-Fundamentals And who is to judg of the Churches Error in non-Fundamentals Doctor Field will tell us to this purpose That no particular man or Church may so much as profess publickly that they think otherwise then has been determined in a general Council except with these three limitations 1. Vnless he know most certainly the contrary to what the Church has determined 2. If there be no gainsaying of men of worth place and esteem 3. If there appear nothing that may argue an unlawful proceeding And the Arch-Bishop briefly to this effect states the Point That General Councils lawfully called and ordered and lawfully proceeding are a great and awful representation and cannot erre in matters of Faith upon condition 1. That they keep themselves to God's Rule and not attempt to make a new one of their own 2. And they are with all submission to be observed by every Christian where Scripture or evident demonstration come not against them 6. These are their limitations and sure it was a very great necessity that forced such wise and learned men to grant so licentious a liberty for annulling what ever hath been or shall be determined by the Supream Tribunal in Gods Church A liberty never heard or thought of from Doctor Pierces beginning I am certain A liberty manifestly destructive to all their own Articles Canons and Acts of Parliament For sure they will not say that these are of more sacred and inviolable Authority then those of the whole Church Do none pretend to know most certainly the contrary to those determinations or do none of worth place and esteem gainsay them when all the Christian world Reform'd and non-Reform'd except a little portion of England absolutely reject them Lastly does nothing appear that may argue an unlawful proceeding in Hen. the Eighths first Reformation or K. Edwards or Q. Elizabeths But there was no possible avoiding the concession of this liberty apparently ruinous to themselves because they have usurped it against the whole Church could not refuse it to any that would make use of it to destroy their own 7. Let us here briefly examine these Grounds laid by the Arch-Bishop c. viz. 1. The Church is unerrable in Fundamentals but subject to error in non-Fundamentals 2. The Decisions of General Councils are to be observed where Scripture or evident Demonstration come not against them 8. In these Assertions is included a Supposition not denied by Catholicks That even among Doctrines determin'd by the Church there are some which are in themselves fundamental others not so but yet withal those Doctrines which in themselves are not fundamental being once determin'd by the Church are necessary to be assented to by all Catholicks to whom they are so represented for in those circumstances Obedience is a fundemental duty But though Catholicks allow this distinction in general they withal profess it is impossible for any particular persons of themselves to determin among all the Churches Decisions and say this or this Point is necessary and fundamental the others not And the reason is because the terms Necessary Fundamental c. are relative terms when applied for that is necessary to be believed and known by one which is not so by another Many Doctrines are necessary to Churches for their well ordering which are not so to any single persons Parishes c. c. For this reason all Decisions of the Church are sacred to them no permission to question any of them is allow'd and by this means the Church is continued in unity and by assenting to all Decisions they are sure never to dissent from those that are necessary Whereas Protestants taking a liberty of discerning between fundamentals and non-fundamentals and of dissenting in non-fundamentals at least wherein they think the Church Catholick may be fallible though they have no Rule by which to judg so are besides a certainty of dis-union exposed to errours even in fundamentals 9. The ground upon which those learned Protestants conclude a fallibility even in the universal Church as to Doctrines not fundamental besides the manifest interest of their own Church is because the end why Christ made such promises of leading his Church into all Truth was lest the Gates of Hell should prevail against her which can be done only by Heresies against fundamental Doctrines and therefore God's assistance for other Points not fundamental is not to be presumed on 10. But though this Position in
visible Church saith he we have without scruple formerly granted that Protestants did forsake it that is renounce the practise of same observances in which the whole visible Church before them did communicate And sect 56. What do you conclude saith he from â—ence but that seeing there was no visible Church but corrupted where note that he must affirm not only corruptions in manners but also in Doctrines and Lawes for from several of these he will not deny Luther to have made a discession Luther forsaking the external Communion of the corrupted Church could not but forsake the external communion of the Catholick Church Well let this be granted what will come of it That Luther must be a Scismatick By no means I say it is evident as these confess that the pretended Reformed Churches really separated themselves from the whole world that is from that holy Catholick Church which we believe is to continue so in every Age Since not one Church upon earth antecedent to their separation can be found out with which they are joyned in external Communion not one which has Laws or Governors in common with them not one that will joyn with them or with which they will joyn in publick Offices Lyturgies Sacrifices and Synods The English Church doth not pretend a Communion with Churches manifestly Heretical as the Armenian Coptite Abissine Nestorian Iacobite Georgian Churches c. And for the Grecian the Reformers at their first separation were actually divided from her and sure they will not say that by separation from the Roman they became ipso facto in communion with the Grecian or if they would say so the Grecian would protest against them as we see their Patriark Hieremias did c. 17. And that is but a very ineffectual Salve which a late learned Protestant Writer in his discourse of Schism insists upon when seeing clearly the English Church could not pretend a Communion with any other Ancient Churches in the world he therefore claims priviledges of the English Church equal to those ancient ones of Cyprus which was a Church independent of all other and exempted from the Jurisdiction of the Eastern Patriark of Antioch For though this pretention could be made good which is impossible yet this would not serve their turn considering the English Church ever since her Conversion acknowledged her self a Member of the Western Patriarchate But though she had indeed such a priviledge and never renounced it who will say the Cyprian Church because exempted from certain Acts of Patriarckical Iurisdiction as Ordinations Visitations c. could therefore independently of all the world frame or change Articles of Faith or be excused from subscribing to the Decisions of Councils though onely Patriarckical CHAP. XXII The limitations of the Churches Authority made by Arch-Bishop Lawd c. examined Objections against the Proceedings in the Council of Trent answered Manifest Illegality in Q. Eliz. Reformation Secular and Carnal ends in it 1. HAving shew'd the indispensible obligation of even an internal assent that Roman Catholicks acknowledge due to the Decisions of General Councils as being infallible and which Protestants ought also to perform though they acknowledge such an infallibility to extend only to Doctrines Fundamental since the Church her self hath not declar'd which of her Decisions are Fundamental and which not for she hath affixed Anathemas to many which in themselves are not Fundamental and hath said only si quis dixerit not si quis non crediderit concerning Doctrines which are unquestionably Fundamental and necessary We will now examine the foremention'd Limitations or cases in which it is said particular persons or Churches may and ought to be dispensed with for yielding an assent to Decisions of General Councils touching matters not Fundamental or even for not contradicting them which limitations have been fixed by Archbishop Lawd Doctor Field c. 2. In the first place An assent even internal say they is to be given indispensably to all Decisions of General Councils touching such Doctrines only as are Fundamental or Points of necessary Faith because so far and no farther their Infallibility extends But who shall or can judge what Points are or are not of necessary Faith with respect to all particular states of men or Churches when the Church her self hath not made any distinction between them and perhaps cannot Surely Prudence and a most necessary care of our own Salvation by continuing in the Unity of the Church would dictate to us that since the Church is as to Fundamentals infallible and therefore cannot mislead us to our danger there can be no safety but in assenting to all her Decisions as if they were of necessary Faith for only by doing so we can be sure not to err in necessary Points and we shall be certainly free from all danger of Schism 3. Secondly As to Decisions made by General Councils of Doctrines not necessary if we could find them out the same internal assent say they is due except in two cases i. Vnless Scripture or evident demonstration come against them whereby we know most certainly the contrary to what they have determined in which case it is unlawful to assent yea it is permitted rather to contradict and separate But let any Christian mans conscience judge whether this be to be admitted as a fitting respectful or even possible supposition that the whole Church should conspire to frame Decisions in matters of Christian Doctrine against which express Scripture or evident demonstration can be produced This licence being admitted who shall be judge whether that which is pretended to be a Demonstration be really one or no Or whether a person do know most certainly the contrary to what the whole Church hath decided None can judge of the thoughts of another So that upon these grounds whoever shall say he is certain the Church hath erred must be believed or however cannot be found fault withall for his renouncing obedience to the Universal Church What Presbyterian writing or disputing against Episcopacy or other Doctrines of this Church will doubt to say that he does most certainly believe and know such Doctrines to be Errors And if he say so who can demostrate that he does not think so And if he think so he may question contradict and make parties to reverse all the Laws Decisions c. both of the English and God's Church too by the Archbishop's warrant for he taking notice page 245. that such an Objection will be made resolves it thus That a General Council he means another General Council must decide whether it be a demonstration or not Hence it will follow 1. That when any one cries a Demonstration he cannot be reduced to obedience till another General Council be called 2. But if another General Council must decide it why hath not the last General Council which he disobeys decided it Or if this may not oblige him why should the next But this is not yet judged to be dispensation enough For
truly Catholick was to extirpate all Innovations in Doctrine all transgressions of Discipline that swerved from the Decrees and Ordinations of the Church and no other 2. Surely the Doctor doth not think Christian Princes as such cease to be sons of the Church they must be saved as well as their Subjects and therefore are not dispensed from that speech of our Lord Qui vos audit me audit They are not Pastors but Sheep Yet Catholick Religion obliges us to acknowledge that their Civil power extends it self to all manner of causes though purely Ecclesiastical so as to make use of the Civil Sword in constraining even their Ecclesiastical Subjects to perform that duty which either the Moral and Divine Law according to the Churches exposition thereof or the Laws of the Church require Such a power yea a Supremacy in such a Power we acknowledge to be in Princes But withal we cannot find either in reason or Antiquity any ground to apply to Princes that Commission which our Saviour only gave to the Apostles and their Successors Sicut misit me Pater c. As my Father sent me so send I you Receive the holy Ghost c. Teach all Nations c. No promise hath been made to Princes that God's Spirit shall lead them into all Truth any other way then whilst they follow the direction of their Ecclestical Pastors to whom only that Promise was made 3. Nay that very Argument by which he would assert his cause is a Demonstration against him He sayes and that very truly Our Kings are as much as any in the world 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they hold their Regal Authority immediately from God without any dependence on any other authority on earth The like must be said of other absolute Princes too Now this independency of Princes demonstrates that the regulation of their power in Ecclesiastical matters must of necessity be made according to an Authority and Iurisdiction purely spiritual common to them all which is in the Church For otherwise being independent and absolute they may perhaps be able to preserve a kind of Unity in their respective Kingdoms by forcing from their Subjects an Obedience to a Religion and Church-policy framed by themselves contrary to the Law of the Catholick Church But how shall the whole Church be preserved in Unity by this means Other Princes are independent as well as they and therefore may frame a Religion which they may call Reformation as well as they So that if there be not a spiritual Director and Ecclesiastical Laws common to them all and submitted to by all what will become of Vnity Which of these Independents will make himself a Dependent on another Shall there be Patriarchicall or General Councils of Kings meet together Who shall summon them In such Royal Synods there must be order which of them shall challenge a Primacy even of Order Doctor Pierce may see what consequences naturally and unavoidably flow from his Positions 4. Touching the Code and Novels of Iustinian and the practice of Charlemain for the Emperor Zenos 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we leave to himself he may please to cast a serious eye on their Laws and will find they were all regulated by the Law of the present Church in their Times The Churches Faith and her Canons for Discipline they reduced into Imperial Laws to the end their Subjects might be more obedient to the Church more averse from innovations in Doctrine and irregularity in manners And doth all this suit with the case of English Protestants Can he justifie King Henry the Eighths Oath of Supremacy and Head-ship of the Church or King Edward the Sixths Reformatio◠legum Ecclesiasticarum or Q. Eliz. new Articles and Canons by these Laws of the Code or Capitulare Let the Emperor Iustinian pronounce his Sentence in this matter Sancimus vicem Legum obtinere c We ordain and command that the holy Ecclesiastical Rules declared and established by holy Councils shall obtain the force of Laws For their Doctrines we receive as the Holy Scriptures themselves and their Rules we observe as Lawes Add again to shew that the Laws enacted by him touching Ecclesiastical matters were intended not as Acts of an absolute Ecclesiastical Supremacy but as consequences of the Churches Authority he saies Our Lawes disdain not to follow the holy and Divine Rules of the Church These were indeed Lawes of Reformation fit for glorious Princes devout Sons of the Church to make but surely very incommodious patterns for the Preachers purpose 5. What the late Emperours Fardinand the first and Maximilian the second did neither his Sermon nor Margin tell us but onely that something was done which he it seems thought for his advantage I 'le tell him what it was Their Reformers in Germany were grown very powerful yet not so but that they made a shew of hearkening to some composition Those worthy Emperors for peace sake made several consultations with learned and moderate Catholicks some indeed too moderate as Cassander c. how the Church Doctrines and Ordinances might be qualified Hereupon divers expedients were proposed Treatises written c. by which the Emperors were in hope debates might be ended But how By betraying the present Churches Faith By renouncing the Popes Iurisdiction or consent to a composition Far otherwise For when they saw no agreement would please the Lutheran Electors and their Divines but such as was derogating from the Authority of the Supream Pastor and prejudicial to the Lawes of the Church they surceased all motions of reconciliation rather chusing to expose themselves to all the dangers that might come from their arms and Rebellion 6. Touching the many Kings of England as he sayes in Popish times whose actions in his opinion shewed that the work of Reformation belonged especially to them in their Kingdom His Margin indeed quotes the Names of fourteen of our Kings since the conquest as if he would have the world believe the pure Reformed Religion were almost six hundred years old But what Reformations were made by any of them either in Religion or Church-Discipline neither I nor himself can shew except by the last King Henry the Eighth who was indeed a Reformer of the new fashion 'T is true the former Kings had frequent quarrels with the Court of Rome touching Investitures procuring of Bulls for determining causes belonging to the Kings Courts usurping a disposal of Bishopricks and other Benefices c. But what is all this to Religion Such debates as these he may see at this day between the Roman Court and the Kings of France Spain c. in all which commonly the Pope is but little a gainer yet notwithstanding all these he will not sure deny but that the Kings of France and Spain and 't is as certain that all those former Kings of England except one were perfect Roman Catholicks not any of them ever did believe that their Supremacy could allow them to alter the
custome is most dangerous and altogether to be eschewed What sayes the witty Whitacre The Popish Religion is a patcht coverlet of the Fathers Errors sewn together And again to believe by the Testimony of the Church not excepting any Age is the plain Heresie of the Papists To conclude for I might quote all day long upon this Subject what sayes the Patriark of Protestancy Luther There never was any one pure Council but either added something to the faith or substracted And now what shall we say our selves in this confused variety Against some of our Adversaries we must cite antiquity or else we do nothing against others if we cite all the antiquity that ever was baptized we do nothing God deliver them from their cross and incertain wandrings and me from the weariness of following them in their wild chase 5. But if the Doctor means by shewing that Iota as to which c. that we have not so shewed it as to stop their mouths or to force them to confess and repent of their fault then there can be no shewing any thing by any one party to another as long as the dissention lasts between them In this sence they have never shewed one Iota to the Presbyterians Anabaptists Quakers c who after all their Books Canons Acts of Vniformity c. which those Sects call Antichristian tyrannical Popery as the Protestants did ours still persist in separation from them Then neither the Apostles antient Fathers or Councils ever shewed one Iota to antient Pagans or Heretics because for all their shewing others remained Pagans and Heretics afterward And yet even in this particular though a very unreasonable one we Cathâ—lics can confidently affirm that we have defeated this bravado of the Preacher For evident Truth on our side has extorted from the mouths and pens of a world of the most learned among the Reformed Writers a Confession both in general and in every particular Controversie that Antiquity declares it self for the Roman Church against them Thousands of such proofs may be read in the Protestants Apology the Triple Cord c. Books writen on purpose to reckon up such Confessions This is truly if well considered an advantage strange and extraordinary for I believe never did any of the Antieâ—t Hâ—retiâ—s so far justifie the Catholic Church No such confessions of theirs are recorded by the Antieâ—t Fathers which shews that above all former examples the Heretics and Schismatics of this last Age are most properly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 condemned by their own Consciences 6. But withall the Doctor must take notice of this one thing That it does not belong to us Catholics to be obliged to shew that Iota in which they who have set up a new and separated Church from us but the other day have left the word of God or Primitive antiquity or the four first General Councils aâ— it belongs to them who have thus divided themselves not only to shew but to demonstrate first most clearly that there is such a discession from those Scriptures Fathers and Councils by that former Church which they deserted not in an Iota but in some grand principle of our Faith which admitted no longer safety to them in her Communion because the Roman Catholic Church is in possession and by our Adversaries own Confession has been unquestionably so for above a Thousand years of all or most of her present Doctrins for which they have relinquished her Particularly the Pope has enjoy'd an Authority and Supremacy of Jurisdiction a longer time than any succession of Princes in the world can pretend to A Jurisdiction acknowledged as of Divine Right and as such submitted to by all our Ancestors not only as Englishmen but as Members of the whole Western Patriarchaâ— yea of the Vniversal Church and this as far as any Records can be produced He is now after so many Ages question'd and violently deposed from this Authority by one National Church nay by one single Woman and her Counsel the universality of her Clergy protesting against her proceedings and much more against her destroying a Religion from the Beginning establish'd among us and which had never been question'd here in former times but by a Wiclef or a Sir Iohn Oldcastle c. manifest Heretics and Traytors Now it is against all Rules of Law Iustice and Reason that such as are Possessores bonae fidei should be obliged to produce their evidences This belongs only to the Plaintiffs and no Evidences produced by them against such a Possession can be of any force except such as are manifest demonstrations of an Vsurpation yea such an Vsurpation as cannot either be exercised or submitted to without sin 7. The Doctor is likewise to consider thaâ— if ex super abundanti we should yield so far as out of Antient Records of Councils or Fathers to alledge any Proofs to enervate their claim to them and justifie our Possession Such Proofs of ours though considered in themselves were only probable yet in effect would have the force of demonstrations against English Protestants But on th' other side unlesse they can produce from Scripture or Antiquity evident demonstrations against us they are not so much as probabilities all this by their own confession For as has been shew'd they lay it for a ground and acknowledge the Catholic Church of which according to their own Doctrin the Roman is at least a Member to be in all fundamental Points infallible and that in all other Points now in debate which are not fundamental it would be unlawful for particular Churches to professe any dissent from her without an evident demonstration that she has actually and certainly erred in them yea moreover that she will admit none of the Dissenters into her Communion except such as though against their Consciences and Knowledge will subscribe to her Errors Errors so heynous as to deserve and justifie a separation 8. These things premis'd my last care must be to provide that in case a Reply be intended to this Treatise it may not be such an one as may abuse the world The Preacher must consider it is not such another blundering Sermon that will now serve his turn to give satisfaction so much as to any Protestant who has a Conscience guided by the light of Reason or thinks Schism not to be a sleight Pâ—ecadillo Therefore that he may know what Conditions are necessary to render an Answer not altogether impertinent and insupportable I here declare that in case he shall undertake a confutation of what is here alledged by me to disprove the charge of Noveltiâ—â— by him laid on the Roman Catholic Church and the excusing of Schism in his own he will be a betrayer of his own Soul and the Souls of 〈◊〉 those that rely on him unless he observe the Conditions following 9. The first is since if Protestants have in truth an evident demonstration that the Roman Doctrins for which they separate are indeed such pernicious errors and
seen and felt too Edicts of another and far more bloody nature made against us Nay thanks to such Sermons we see at this day Edicts severe enough published and worse preparing not against Subjects in Arms and actual Rebellion as the Lutherans were against the Empire but against such as the Law-givers and Law-perswaders know mean no harm against such as would be both most watchful assisting to establish the peace of the Kingdom Edicts to draw all the remainder of blood out of our veinâ— which have been almost emptied in our Kings and Countries Cause though our hope is still in the mercy of our gracious Sovereign and the prudent moderation of those about him 16. Yet sanguinary Sermons are greater Persecutions than sanguinary Laws for Laws may and somtimes are qualifi'd by the equity of Judges and in particular those against Roman Catholics have often been allay'd by the gracious clemency of our Kings But the uncharitable Sermons that call for blood inspire fury into mens hearts make compassion esteem'd unlawful and the most savage cruelty the best Sacrifices of Religion The truth is Pulpits have been the Sources whence so much blood has flow'd in this Kingdom which Sources if they had been open'd by such as Smectymnâ—us whose vocation is Rebellion against the Princes and barbarous inhumanity to all that are not of their fiction Sustinuissemus utique and so we shall do still with the help of Grace by whose hands soever Almighty God presents us this Cup. Quod voluit factum est quod fecit bonum est Sit nomen Domini benedictum AMEN PSAL. 108. 3. 73. 2. Pro co â—t me dâ—ligerent detrahebant mihi Ego autem or aham Memento Congregationis tue quam possâ—disti AB INITIO FINIS The CONTENTS CHAP. I. OF Doctor Pierce's Sermon in general Sect. 1 2. What was probably the design of it 3 4. Catholicks persecuted though their best friends 6 7. CHAP. II. Page 8. Eleven Novelties charged on Catholics 2. Schism imputed is them 3. Why necesssary the Sermon should be refuted 4 5. The Answerers Protestation of sincerity 6 7. CHAP. III. Page 13. B. Jewels Challenge imitated by the Doctor 1 5. Primitive Reformers Acknowledgment 2 3 4. The Doctors Notion of Beginning 6. Questions proposed touching that Notion 8. 9 10 11. CHAP. IV. Page 29. The sum of the Doctors Discourse against the Popes Supremacy enervated by himself 1. 2 3. The Churches Doctrine therein 4. The Text Mark 10. 42. cleared 5 6. CHAP. V. Page 36. The Doctor obliged to acknowledge submission due to the Popes Authority as exercised during the Four General Councils 1 2. Of the Title of Universal Bishop 3 4 5. Not generally admitted at this day 6 7. CHAP. VI. Page 44. The absolute necessity of a Supreme Pastor in the Church 1 2 3. Supremacy of Iurisdiction exercised by Boniface III. his Predecessors 4 5 6 7. The 28. Canon of Chalcedon Illegal 8. Of the second Canon of the Council of Constantinople Sect. 9 10. CHAP. VII Page 54. The Popes Supremacy confirmed by a Law of the Emperor Valentinian 1 2. Decrees of Popes their Ancient force 3 4. The Popes Supreme Iurisdiction confirmed by the Eastern Church 5 6 7 8 9. Appeals to the See Apostolick decreed at Sardiea British Bishops present 11 12. Of the first Council at Arles 13 14. Sixth Canon of the Nicene Council explained 15. 16 17. CHAP. VIII Page 67. Proofs of the Popes Supreme Jurisdiction before first Council of Nâ—ce 2 3 5. How all Apostles and all Bishops equâ—l and how subordinate 6 7. St. Peter had more then a Primacy of Order 8. 9 10. Of St. Pauls resisting St. Peter 11 12. Objections Answered 13 15. The Popes Supremacy not dangerous to States On the contrary c. 18 20 22. Protestants writing in favour of it 25 26. CHAP. IX Page 89. The Churches Infallibility 2 3 4. The Necessity thereof 8 9. The Grounds whereon she claims it 10 12 14 15. Objections Answered 16 18. CHAP. X. Page 109. Prayer for the dead 3 4 5. It s Apostolick Antiquity 6 7 9. Purgatory necessarily supposed in it 11 12. Objections Answered CHAP. XI Page 121. Transubstantiâ—â—ion 2 3 4 6 8. Iustified by Authority of the Fathers 10. Objections Answered Sect. 12 14 1â— CHAP XII Page 137. Communion under one Species 2. â—onfirmâ—d by the practice of the Primitive Church in private Communions 3 4 5 6. No cause of Separation 7 8. CHAP. XIII Page 143. The Sacrifice of the Masâ— 1. Asserted universally by Antiquity 2 3 4. The true Doctrine concerning it explain'd 5 6 7. CHAP. XIV Page 151. Veneration of Images 1. The Churches Approved practice of it most suitable to reason 2 13. CHAP. XV. Page 163. The Churches prudence in restraining the too free use of Scripture from the unlearned 2. 4 5. Our late miseries justly ascribed to a defect in such Prudence 6. Of Prayer not in a vulgar Tongue 7 8. The Causes and Grounds thereof 9. 10. That Pracâ—ise not contrary to St. Paul 11 12 13. CHAP. XVI Page 178. Invocation of Saintâ— 2 3 4 5 6. Proved out of Antiquity 7 8 9 10. Concessions Deductions and Objections Answered â—1 adult CHAP. XVII page 201. Celibacy of Priests 2 3 4. Vows of Chastity 5 6. The Doctrine and Practice of the Church in both 9 10. Objections Answered 10 13 14 15 CHAP. XVIII page 219. Dovorce and the several kindes of it 2. 3 7. The Practice of the Roman Church manifestly mistaken by the Prâ—â—cher 8 to 17. CHAP. XIX page 225. Of Schism Sect. 1. The unpardonableness of that oâ—ime acknowledgâ—d by Antiquity 2 4 6. No cause or pretence can excuse it 7 8. CHAP. XX. page 233. The Preacher vainly endeavâ—rs to excuse his Church from Schism 3 4 5. and chapter 21. Sect. 15 16. Of the Subordination of Church-Governours and Synods 13 The unappealable Authority of General Councils acknowledged by Antiquity 8. Of the decisions of later Councils 9 10 11 12. CHAP. XXI page 249. The Fundamental Rule of Church Government 1 2 Limitations of the Authority of General Councils 5 6. Their Grounds made by A. B. Lawd Dr. Field c. 3 4. Of Points Fundamental and non 7 8 12 Protestants allow not so much Authority to General Councils as God commanded to be given the Saâ—hedrim 13 14. Of the pretended Independence of the English Church from the Example of Cyprus 17. CHAP. XXII page 265. Limitations of the Churches Authority by A. B. Lawd c. examin'd 1 2 3 4. Objections against the proceedings in the Council of Trent answered 5 6. Manifest Illegality in Q. Eliz. Reformation 7. 8 9 10 11â— Secular and carnal ends in it 12 13. CHAP. XXIII page 28â— The Doctâ—rs Proofs alledged 〈◊〉 justifie the English Separation answered 1 2. 1. From the independent Authority of our Kings 3. 2. From the Example of Justinian and other Emperâ—rs 4 5. 3. From the practice of fourteen of our Kings 6.