blessed Saviour Whatsoever entereth into the mouth goeth into the belly and is cast forth into the draught meaning that all food that is taken by the mouth hath for his share the fortune of the belly and indeed manducation and ejection are equally deminutions of any perfect thing and because it cannot without blasphemy be spoken that the natural body of Christ ought or can suffer ejection neither can it suffer manducation To this Bellarmine weakly answers that these words of Christ are only true of that which is taken to nourish the body which saying of his is not true for if it be taken to purge the body or to make the body sick or to make it lean or to minister to lust or to chastise the body as those who in pennances have masticated aloes and other bitter gums yet still it is cast into the draught 2. But suppose his meaning true yet this argument will not so be put off because although the end of receiving the blessed Sacrament is not to nourish the body yet that it does nourish the body is affirmed by Irenaeus Justin Martyr and others of which I have already given an account To which I here add the plain words of Rabanus Illud corpus Christi in nos convertitur dum id manducamus bibimus That body is chang'd into us when we eat it and drink it and therefore although it hath a higher purpose yet this also cannot be avoided 3. Either we may manducate the accidents only or else the substance of bread or the substance of Christs body If we manducate only the accidents then how do we eat Christs body If we manducate bread then 't is capable of all the natural alterations and it cannot be denied But if we manducate Christs body after a natural manner what worse thing is it that it descends into the guts than that it goes into the stomach to be cast forth than to be torn in pieces with the teeth as I have proved that it is by the Roman Doctrine Now I argue thus if we eat Christs natural body we eat it either Naturally or Spiritually if it be eaten only Spiritually then it is Spiritually digested and is Spiritual nourishment and puts on accidents and affections Spiritual But if the natural body be eaten naturally then what hinders it from affections and transmutations natural 4. Although Algerus and out of him Bellarmine would have Christians stop their ears against this argument and so would I against that doctrine of which these fearful conclusions are unavoidable consequents yet it is disputed in the Summa Angelica and an instance or case put which to my sence seems no inconsiderable argument to reprove the folly of this doctrine For saith he what if the Species pass indigested into the belly from the stomach He answers that they were not meat if they did not nourish and therefore it is probable as Boetius says that the body of our Lord does not go into the draught though the Species do And yet it is determined by the Gloss on the Canon Law that as long as the species remain uncorrupted the holy body is there under those Species and therefore may be vomited and consequently ejected all ways by which the Species can pass unalter'd Eousque progreditur corpus quousque species said Harpsfield in his disputation at Oxford If these things be put together viz. the body is there so long as the Species are uncorrupted and the Species may remain uncorrupted till they be cast upwards or downwards as in case of sickness it follows that in this case which is a case easily contingent by their doctrine the holy body must pass in latrinam And what then it is to be ador'd as a true Sacrament though it come from impure places though it be vomited So said Vasquez and it is the prevailing opinion in their Church Add to this that if this nourishment does not descend and cleave to the guts of the Priest it is certain that God does not hear his prayers for he is enjoyned by the Roman Missal published by authority of the Council of Trent and the command of Pope Pius the Fourth to pray Corpus tuum domine quod sumpsi sanguis quem potavi adhaereat visceribus meis Let thy body O Lord which I have taken and the blood which I have drunk cleave to my bowels It seems indeed they would have it go no further to prevent the inconveniences of the present argument but certain it is that if they intended it for a figurative speech it was a bold one and not so fitted for edification as for an objection But to return This also was the argument of Origen Quod si quicquid ingreditur in os in ventrem abit in secessum ejicitur ille cibus qui sanctificatur per verbum Dei perque obsecrationem juxta id quod habet materiale in ventrem abit in secessum ejicitur haec quidem de typico symbolicóque corpore He plainly distinguishes the material part from the spiritual in the Sacrament and affirms that according to the material part that meat that is sanctified by the word of God and prayer enters into the mouths descends into the belly and goes forth in the natural ejection And this is only true of the typical and symbolical body Now besides that it affirms the words of our blessed Saviour to have effect in the Sacrament he affirms that the material part the type and symbols are the body of Christ that is his body is present in a typical and symbolical manner This is the plain and natural sence of the words of Origen But he must not mean what he means if he says any thing in an other place that may make for the Roman opinion And this is their way of answering objections brought from the Fathers they use to oppose words to words and conclude they must mean their meaning or else they contradict themselves And this trick Bellarmine uses frequently and especially Cardinal Perron and from them the lesser Writers And so it happens in this present argument for other words of Origen are brought to prove he inclined to the Roman opinion But I demand are the words more contradictory if they be both drawn to a spiritual sence than if they be both drawn to a natural 2. Though we have no need to make use of it yet it is no impossible thing that the Fathers should contradict one another and themselves too as you may see pretended violently by Cardinal Perron in his answer to K. James 3. But why must all sheaves bow to their sheaf and all words be wrested to their fancy when there are no words any where pretended from them but with less wresting than these must suffer for them they will be brought to speak against them or at least nothing for them But let us see what other words Origen hath by which we must expound
Innocentius Nec invenitur ubi Ecclesia istam veritatem determinet solenniter Neither is it found where the Church hath solemnly determin'd it And for his own particular though he was carried into captivity by the symbol of Pope Innocent 3. for which by that time was pretended the Lateran Council yet he himself said that before that Council it was no article of faith and for this thing Bellarmine reproves him and imputes ignorance to him saying that it was because he had not read the Roman Council under Greg. 7. nor the consent of the Fathers And to this purpose I quoted Henriquez saying that Scotus saith the doctrine of Transubstantiation is not ancient the Author of the Letter denies that he saith any such thing of Scotus But I desire him to look once more and my Margent will better direct him What the opinion of Durandus was in this Question if these Gentlemen will not believe me let them believe their own friends But first let it be consider'd what I said viz. that he maintain'd viz. in disputation that even after consecration the very matter of bread remain'd 2. That by reason of the Authority of the Church it is not to be held 3. That nevertheless it is possible it should be so 4. That it is no contradiction that the matter of bread should remain and yet it be Christs body too 5. That this were the easier way of solving the difficulties That all this is true I have no better argument than his own words which are in his first question of the eleventh distinction in quartum num 11. n. 15. For indeed the case was very hard with these learned men who being pressed by authority did bite the file and submitted their doctrine but kept their reason to themselves and what some in the Council of Trent observed of Scotus was true also of Durandus and divers other Schoolmen with whom it was usual to deny things with a kind of courtesie And therefore Durandus in the places cited though he disputes well for his opinion yet he says the contrary is modus tenendus de facto But besides that his words are as I understand them plain and clear to manifest his own hearty perswasion yet I shall not desire to be believed upon my own account for fear I be mistaken but that I had reason to say it Henriquez shall be my warrant Durandus dist qu. 3. ait esse probabile sed absque assertione c. He saith it is probable but without assertion that in the Eucharist the same matter of bread remains without quantity And a little after he adds out of Cajetan Paludanus and Soto that this opinion of Durandus is erroneous but after the Council of Trent it seems to be heretical And yet he says it was held by Aegidius and Euthymius who had the good luck it seems to live and die before the Council of Trent otherwise they had been in danger of the inquisition for heretical pravity But I shall not trouble my self further in this particular I am fully vindicated by Bellarmine himself who spends a whole Chapter in the confutation of this error of Durandus viz. that the matter of bread remains he endeavours to answer his arguments and gives this censure of him Itaque sententia Durandi hâ—retica est Therefore the sentence of Durandus is heretical although he be not to be called a heretick because he was ready to acquiesce in the judgment of the Church So Bellarmine who if he say true that Durandus was ready to submit to the judgment of the Church then he does not say true when he says the Church before his time had determined against him but however that I said true of him when I imputed this opinion to him Bellarmine is my witness Thus you see I had reason for what I said and by these instances it appears how hardly and how long the doctrine of Transubstantiation was before it could be swallowed But I remember that Salmeron tells of divers who distrusting of Scripture and reason had rather in this point rely upon the tradition of the Fathers and therefore I descended to take from them this armour in which they trusted And first to ease a more curious inquiry which in a short dissuasive was not convenient I us'd the abbreviature of an adversaries confession For Alphonsus à Castro confess'd that in Ancient writers there is seldome any mention made of Transubstantiation one of my adversaries says this is not spoken of the thing but of the name of Transubstantiation but if à Castro meant this only of the word he spake weakly when he said that the name or word was seldom mention'd by the Ancients 1. Because it is false that it was seldom mention'd by the Ancients for the word was by the Ancient Fathers never mention'd 2. Because there was not any question of the word where the thing was agreed and therefore as this saying so understood had been false so also if it had been true it would have been impertinent 3. It is but a trifling artifice to confess the name to be unknown and by that means to insinuate that the thing was then under other names It is a secret cosenage of an unwary Reader to bribe him into peace and contentedness for the main part of the Question by pleasing him in that part which it may be makes the biggest noise though it be less material 4. If the thing had been mentioned by the Ancients they need not would not ought not to have troubled themselves and others by a new word to have still retained the old proposition under the old words would have been less suspicious more prudent and ingenious but to bring in a new name is but the cover for a new doctrine and therefore S. Paul left an excellent precept to the Church to avoid prophanas vocum novitates the prophane newness of words that is it is fit that the mysteries revealed in Scripture should be preached and taught in the words of the Scripture and with that simplicity openness easiness and candor and not with new and unhallowed words such as is that of Transubstantiation 5. A Castro did not speak of the name alone but of the thing also de transubstantiatione panis in Corpus Christi of the Transubstantiation of bread into Christs body of this manner of conversion that is of this doctrine now doctrines consist not in words but things however his last words are faint and weak and guilty for being convinc'd of the weakness of his defence of the thing he left to himself a subterfuge of words But let it be how it will with à Castro whom I can very well spare if he will not be allowed to speak sober sence and as a wise man should we have better and fuller testimonies in this affair That the Fathers did not so much as touch the matter or thing of Transubstantiation said the Jesuits in prison as is
the Pope in the Arian Controversie why was the Bishop of Rome made a party and a concurrent as other good Bishops were and not a Judge and an Arbitrator in the Question why did the Fathers prescribe so many Rules and cautions and provisoes for the discovery of Heresy why were the Emperours at so much charge and the Church at so much trouble as to call and convene Councils respectively to dispute so frequently to write so sedulously to observe all advantages against their Adversaries and for the truth and never offered to call for the Pope to determine the Question in his Chair Certainly no way could have been so expedite none so concluding and peremptory none could have convinc'd so certainly none could have triumphed so openly over all Discrepants as this if they had known of any such thing as his being infallible or that he had been appointed by Christ to be the Judge of Controversies And therefore I will not trouble this Discourse to excuse any more words either pretended or really said to this purpose of the Pope for they would but make books swell and the Question endless I shall onely to this purpose observe that the old Writers were so far from believing the Infallibility of the Roman Church or Bishop that many Bishops and many Churches did actually live and continue out of the Roman Communion particularly Saint Austin who with 217 Bishops and their Successors for 100 years together stood separate from that Church if we may believe their own Records So did Ignatius of Constantinople S. Chrysostome S. Cyprian Firmilian those Bishops of Asia that separated in the Question of Easter and those of Africa in the Question of Rebaptization But besides this most of them had Opinions which the Church of Rome disavows now and therefore did so then or else she hath innovated in her Doctrine which though it be most true and notorious I am sure she will never confess But no excuse can be made for S. Austin's disagreeing and contesting in the Question of Appeals to Rome the necessity of Communicating Infants the absolute damnation of Infants to the pains of Hell if they die before Baptism and divers other particulars It was a famous act of the Bishops of Liguria and Istria who seeing the Pope of Rome consenting to the fifth Synod in disparagement of the famous Council of Chalcedon which for their own interests they did not like of renounced subjection to his Patriarchate and erected a Patriarch at Aquileia who was afterwards translated to Venice where his name remains to this day It is also notorious that most of the Fathers were of opinion that the Souls of the faithfull did not enjoy the Beatifick Vision before Doomsday Whether Rome was then of that opinion or no I know not I am sure now they are not witness the Councils of Florence and Trent but of this I shall give a more full account afterwards But if to all this which is already noted we adde that great variety of opinions amongst the Fathers and Councils in assignation of the Canon they not consulting with the Bishop of Rome nor any of them thinking themselves bound to follow his Rule in enumeration of the Books of Scripture I think no more need to be said as to this particular 15. Eighthly But now if after all this there be some Popes which were notorious Hereticks and Preachers of false Doctrine some that made impious Decrees both in Faith and manners some that have determined Questions with egregious ignorance and stupidity some with apparent sophistry and many to serve their own ends most openly I suppose then the Infallibility will disband and we may doe to him as to other good Bishops believe him when there is cause but if there be none then to use our Consciences Non enim salvat Christianum quòd Pontifex constanter affirmat praeceptum suum esse justum sed oportet illud examinari se juxta regulam superiùs datum dirigere I would not instance and repeat the errours of dead Bishops if the extreme boldness of the pretence did not make it necessary But if we may believe Tertullian Pope Zepherinus approved the Prophecies of Montanus and upon that approbation granted peace to the Churches of Asia and Phrygia till Praxeas perswaded him to revoke his act But let this rest upon the credit of Tertullian whether Zepherinus were a Montanist or no some such thing there was for certain Pope Vigilius denied two Natures in Christ and in his Epistle to Theodora the Empress anathematiz'd all them that said he had two natures in one person S. Gregory himself permitted Priests to give Confirmation which is all one as if he should permit Deacons to consecrate they being by Divine Ordinance annext to the higher Orders and upon this very ground Adrianus affirms that the Pope may erre in definiendis dogmatibus fidei And that we may not fear we shall want instances we may to secure it take their own confession Nam multae sunt decretales haereticae says Occham as he is cited by Almain firmiter hoc credo says he for his own particular sed non licet dogmatizare oppositum quoniam sunt determinatae So that we may as well see that it is certain that Popes may be Hereticks as that it is dangerous to say so and therefore there are so few that teach it All the Patriarchs and the Bishop of Rome himself subscribed to Arianism as Baronius confesses and Gratian affirms that Pope Anastasius II. was strucken of God for communicating with the Heretick Photinus I know it will be made light of that Gregory the seventh saith the very Exorcists of the Roman Church are superiour to Princes But what shall we think of that Decretall of Gregory the third who wrote to Boniface his Legate in Germany quòd illi quorum uxores infirmitate aliquâ morbidâ debitum reddere noluerunt aliis poterant nubere Was this a doctrine fit for the Head of the Church an infallible Doctor It was plainly if any thing ever was doctrina Daemoniorum and is noted for such by Gratian Caus. 32.4.7 can quod proposuisti Where the Gloss also intimates that the same privilege was granted to the English-men by Gregory quia novi erant in fide And sometimes we had little reason to expect much better for not to instance in that learned discourse in the Canon-Law de majoritate obedientia where the Pope's Supremacy over Kings is proved from the first chapter of Genesis and the Pope is the Sun and the Emperour is the Moon for that was the fancy of one Pope perhaps though made authentick and doctrinall by him it was if it be possible more ridiculous that Pope Innocent the third urges that the Mosaicall Law was still to be observed and that upon this Argument Sanè saith he cùm Deuteronontium Secunda lex interpretetur ex vi vocabuli comprobatur ut quod
determined we are never the nearer but may hug ourselves in an imaginary truth the certainty of finding truth out depending upon so many fallible and contingent circumstances And therefore the thing if it were true being so to no purpose it is to be presumed that God never gave a power so impertinently and from whence no benefit can accrue to the Christian Church for whose use and benefit if at all it must needs have been appointed 18. But I am too long in this impertinency If I were bound to call any man Master upon earth and to believe him upon his own affirmative and authority I would of all men least follow him that pretends he is infallible and cannot prove it For he that cannot prove it makes me as uncertain as ever and that he pretends to Infallibility makes him careless of using such means which will morally secure those wise persons who knowing their own aptness to be deceived use what endeavours they can to secure themselves from errour and so become the better and more probable guides 19. Well thus far we are come Although we are secured in Fundamental points from involuntary errour by the plain express and dogmaticall places of Scripture yet in other things we are not but may be invincibly mistaken because of the obscurity and difficulty in the controverted parts of Scripture by reason of the incertainty of the means of its Interpretation since Tradition is of an uncertain reputation and sometimes evidently false Councils are contradictory to each other and therefore certainly are equally deceived many of them and therefore all may and then the Popes of Rome are very likely to mislead us but cannot ascertain us of truth in matter of Question and in this world we believe in part and prophesy in part and this imperfection shall never be done away till we be translated to a more glorious state either then we must throw our chances and get truth by accident or predestination or else we must lie safe in a mutuall Toleration and private liberty of perswasion unless some other Anchor can be thought upon where we may fasten our floating Vessels and ride safely SECT VIII Of the disability of Fathers or Writers Ecclesiastical to determine our Questions with certainty and truth 1. THere are some that think they can determine all Questions in the world by two or three sayings of the Fathers or by the consent of so many as they will please to call a concurrent Testimony But this consideration will soon be at an end For if the Fathers when they are witnesses of Tradition do not always speak truth as it happened in the case of Papias and his numerous Followers for almost three Ages together then is their Testimony more improbable when they dispute or write Commentaries 2. The Fathers of the first Ages spake unitedly concerning divers Questions of secret Theology and yet were afterwards contradicted by one personage of great reputation whose credit had so much influence upon the world as to make the contrary opinion become popular why then may not we have the same liberty when so plain an uncertainty is in their perswasions and so great contrariety in their Doctrines But this is evident in the case of absolute Predestination which till Saint Austin's time no man preached but all taught the contrary and yet the reputation of this one excellent man altered the scene But if he might dissent from so general a Doctrine why may not we doe so too it being pretended that he is so excellent a precedent to be followed if we have the same reason He had no more Authority nor dispensation to dissent then any Bishop hath now And therefore Saint Austin hath dealt ingenuously and as he took this liberty to himself so he denies it not to others but indeed forces them to preserve their own liberty And therefore when Saint Hierom had a great minde to follow the Fathers in a point that he fansied and the best security he had was Patiaris me cum talibus errare Saint Austin would not endure it but answered his reason and neglected the Authority And therefore it had been most unreasonable that we should doe that now though in his behalf which he towards greater personages for so they were then at that time judged to be unreasonable It is a plain recession from Antiquity which was determined by the Council of Florence piorum animas purgatas c. mox in Coelum recipi intueri clarè ipsum Deum trinum unum sicuti est as who please to â—ry may see it dogmatically resolved to the contrary by Justin Martyr by Irenaeus by Origen by Saint Chrysostome Theodoret Arethas Caesariensis Euthymius who may answer for the Greek Church And it is plain that it was the opinion of the Greek Church by that great difficulty the Romans had of bringing the Greeks to subscribe to the Florentine Council where the Latines acted their master-piece of wit and strategem the greatest that hath been till the famous and superpolitick design of Trent And for the Latine Church Tertullian Saint Ambrose Saint Austin Saint Hilary Prudentius Lactantius Victorinus Martyr and Saint Bernard are known to be of opinion that the souls of the Saints are in abditis receptaculis exterioribus atriis where they expect the resurrection of their bodies and the glorification of their souls and though they all believe them to be happy yet they injoy not the beatifick Vision before the resurrection Now there being so full a consent of Fathers for many more may be added and the Decree of Pope John XXII besides who was so confident for his Decree that he commanded the University of Paris to swear that they would preach it and no other and that none should be promoted to degrees in Theology that did not swear the like as Occham Gerson Marsilius and Adrianus report since it is esteemed lawfull to dissent from all these I hope no man will be so unjust to press other men to consent to an Authority which he himself judges to be incompetent These two great instances are enough but if more were necessary I could instance in the opinion of the Chiliasts maintained by the second and third Centuries and disavowed ever since in the Doctrine of communicating Infants taught and practised as necessary by the fourth and fifth Centuries and detested by the Latine Church in all the following Ages in the variety of opinions concerning the very form of Baptism some keeping close to the institution and the words of its first sanction others affirming it to be sufficient if it be administred in nomine Christi particularly Saint Ambrose Pope Nicolas the First Ven. Bede and Saint Bernard besides some Writers of after-Ages as Hugo de Sancto Victore and the Doctors generally his contemporaries And it would not be inconsiderable to observe that if
at Trent then we also have a question to ask and that is Where was your Religion before Trent The Council of Trent determined That the Souls departed before the day of Judgment enjoy the Beatifical Vision It is certain this Article could not be shewn in the Confession of any of the ancient Churches for most of the Fathers were of another opinion But that which is the greatest offence of Christendom is not only that these doctrines which we say are false were yet affirmed but that those things which the Church of God did always reject or held as Uncertain should be made Articles of Faith and so become parts of your Religion and of these it is that I again ask the question which none of your side shall ever be able to answer for you Where was your Religion before Trent I could instance in many particulars but I shall name one to you which because the thing of it self is of no great consequence it will appear the more unreasonable and intolerable that your Church should adopt it into the things of necessary belief especially since it was only a matter of fact and they took the false part too For in the 21. Sess. Chap. 4. it is affirmed That although the holy Fathers did give the Sacrament of the Eucharist to Infants yet they did it without any necessity of salvation that is they did not believe it necessary to their salvation Which is notoriously false and the contrary is marked out with the black-lead of every man almost that reads their Works and yet your Council says this is sine controversiâ credendum to be believed without all controversie and all Christians forbidden to believe or teach otherwise So that here it is made an Article of Faith amongst you that a man shall neither believe his reason nor his eyes and who can shew any Confession of Faith in which all the Trent-doctrine was professed and enjoyned under pain of damnation And before the Council of Constance the doctrine touching the Popes power was so new so decried that as Gerson says he hardly should have escaped the note of Heresie that would have said so much as was there defined So that in that Article which now makes a great part of your belief where was your Religion before the Council of Constance And it is notorious that your Council of Constance determined the doctrine of the Half-communion with a Non obstante to Christ's institution that is with a defiance to it or a noted observed neglect of it and with a profession it was otherwise in the Primitive Church Where then was your Religion before John Hus and Hierom of Prague's time against whom that Council was convened But by this instance it appears most certainly that your Church cannot shew her Confessions immediately after Christ and therefore if we could not shew ours immediately before Luther it were not half so much For since you receded from Christ's Doctrine we might well recede from yours and it matters not who or how many or how long they professed your doctrine if neither Christ nor his Apostles did teach it So that if these Articles constitute your Church your Church was invisible at the first and if ours was invisible afterwards it matters not For yours was invisible in the days of light and ours was invisible in the days of darkness For our Church was always visible in the reflections of Scripture and he that had his eyes of Faith and Reason might easily have seen these Truths all the way which constitute our Church But I add yet farther that our Church before Luther was there where your Church was in the same place and in the same persons For divers of the Errors which have been amongst us reformed were not the constituent Articles of your Church before Luther's time for before the last Councils of your Church a man might have been of your Communion upon easier terms and Indulgences were indeed a practice but no Article of Faith before your men made it so and that very lately and so were many other things besides So that although your men cozen the credulous and the simple by calling yours The old Religion yet the difference is vast between Truth and their affirmative even as much as between old Errors and new Articles For although Ignorance and Superstition had prepared the Oar yet the Councils of Constance and Basil and Trent especially were the Forges and the Mint Lastly If your men had not by all the vile and violent arts of the world stopped the mouths of dissenters the question would quickly have been answered or our Articles would have been so confessed so owned and so publick that the question could never have been asked But in despite of all opposition there were great numbers of professors who did protest and profess and practise our doctrines contrary to your Articles as it is demonstrated by the Divines of Germany in Illyricus his Catalogus testium veritatis and in Bishop Morton's Appeal But with your next objection you are better pleased and your men make most noise with it For you pretend that by our confession Salvation may be had in your Church but your men deny it to us and therefore by the confession of both sides you may be safe and there is no question concerning you but of us there is great question for none but our selves say that we can be saved I answer 1. That Salvation may be had in your Church is it ever the truer because we say it If it be not it can add no confidence to you for the Proposition gets no strength by our affirmative But if it be then our authority is good or else our reason and if either be then we have more reason to be believed speaking of our selves because we are concerned to see that our selves may be in a state of hope and therefore we would not venture on this side if we had not greater reason to believe well of our selves than of you And therefore believe us when it is more likely that we have greater reason because we have greater concernments and therefore greater considerations 2. As much charity as your men pretend us to speak of you yet it is a clear case our hope of your Salvation is so little that we dare not venture our selves on your side The Burger of Oldwater being to pass a River in his journey to Daventry bad his man try the ford telling him he hoped he should not be drowned for though he was afraid the River was too deep yet he thought his Horse would carry him out or at least the Boats would fetch him off Such a confidence we may have of you but you will find that but little warranty if you remember how great an interest it is that you venture 3. It would be remembred that though the best ground of your hope is not the goodness of your own faith but the greatness of our charity yet we that charitably
but yet of no objection in case of Confirmation * And indeed Consignari is us'd in Antiquity for any signing with the Cross and anealing Thus it is used in the first Arausican Council for extreme Vnction which is there in case of extreme necessity permitted to Presbyters Haereticos in mortis discrimine positos Si Catholici esse desiderent si desit Episcopus à Presbyteris cum Chrismate benedictione Consignari placet Consign'd is the word and it was clearly in extreme Unction for that rite was not then ceased and it was in anealing a dying body and a part of reconciliation and so limited by the sequent Canon and not to be fancied of any other consignation But I return *** The first Council of Toledo prohibites any from making Chrisme but Bishops only and takes order Vt de singulis Ecclesiis ad Episcopum ante diem Paschae Diaconi destinentur ut confectum Chrisma ab Episcopo destinatum ad diem Paschae possit occurrere that the Chrisme be fetcht by the Deacons from the Bishop to be used in all Churches But for what use why it was destinatum ad diem Paschae says the Canon against the Holy time of Easter and then at Easter was the solemnity of publick baptisms so that it was to be used in baptism And this sence being premised the Canon permits to Presbyters to sign with Chrisme the same thing that S. Gregory did to the Priests of Sardinia Statutum verò est Diaconum non Chrismare sed Presbyterum absente Episcopo praesente verò si ab ipso fuerit praeceptum Now although this be evident enough yet it is something clearer in the first Arausican Council Nullus ministrorum qui Baptizandi recipit officium sine Chrismate usquam debet progredi quia inter nos placuit semel in baptismate Chrismari The case is evident that Chrismation or Consigning with ointment was used in baptism and it is as evident that this Chrismation was it which S. Gregory permitted to the Presbyters not the other for he expresly forbad the other and the exigence of the Canons and practice of the Church expound it so and it is the same which S. Innocent the first decreed in more express and distinctive terms Presbyteris Chrismate baptizatos ungere licet sed quod ab Episcopo fuerit Consecratum there is a clear permission of consigning with Chrisme in baptism but he subjoyns a prohibition to Priests for doing it in Confirmation Non tamen frontem eodem oleo signare quod solis debetur Episcopis cùm tradunt Spiritum Sanctum Paracletum By the way some that they might the more clearly determine S. Gregorie's dispensation to be only in baptismal Chrisme read it Vt baptizandos ungant not baptizatos so Gratian so S. Thomas but it is needless to be troubled with that for Innocentius in the decretal now quoted useth the word Baptizatos and yet clearly distinguishes this power from the giving the Chrisme in Confirmation I know no other objection and these we see hinder not but that having such evidence of fact in Scripture of Confirmations done only by Apostles and this evidence urged by the Fathers for the practice of the Church and the power of Confirmation by many Councils and Fathers appropriated to Bishops and denied to Presbyters and in this they are not only Doctors teaching their own opinion but witnesses of a Catholick practice and do actually attest it as done by a Catholick consent and no one example in all antiquity ever produced of any Priest that did no law that a Priest might impose hands for Confirmation we may conclude it to be a power Apostolical in the Original Episcopal in the Succession and that in this power the order of a Bishop is higher than that of a Presbyter and so declared by this instance of Catholick practice SECT XXXIV And Jurisdiction Which they expressed in Attributes of Authority and great Power THUS far I hope we are right But I call to mind that in the Nosotrophium of the old Philosopher that undertook to cure all Calentures by Bathing his Patients in water some were up to the Chin some to the Middle some to the Knees So it is amongst the enemies of the Sacred Order of Episcopacy some endure not the Name and they indeed deserve to be over head and ears some will have them all one in office with Presbyters as at first they were in Name and they had need bath up to the Chin but some stand shallower and grant a little distinction a precedency perhaps for order-sake but no preheminence in reiglement no superiority of Jurisdiction Others by all means would be thought to be quite through in behalf of Bishops order and power such as it is but call for a reduction to the Primitive state and would have all Bishops like the Primitive but because by this means they think to impair their power they may well endure to be up to the ankles their error indeed is less and their pretence fairer but the use they make of it of very ill consequence But curing the mistake will quickly cure this distemper That then shall be the present issue that in the Primitive Church Bishops had more power and greater exercise of absolute jurisdiction than now Men will endure to be granted or than themselves are very forward to challenge 1. Then The Primitive Church expressing the calling and offices of a Bishop did it in terms of presidency and authority Episcopus typum Dei Patris omnium gerit saith S. Ignatius The Bishop carries the representment of God the Father that is in power and authority to be sure for how else so as to be the supreme in suo ordine in offices Ecclesiastical And again Quid enim aliud est Episcopus quà m is qui omni Principatu potestate superior est Here his superiority and advantage is expressed to be in his power A Bishop is greater and higher than all other in power viz. in materiâ or gradu religionis And in his Epistle to the Magnesians Hortor ut hoc sit omnibus studium in Dei concordiâ omnia agere Episcopo praesidente loco Dei Do all things in Vnity the Bishop being President in the place of God President in all things And with a fuller tide yet in his Epistle to the Church of Smyrna Honora Episcopum ut Principem Sacerdotum imaginem Dei referentem Dei quidem propter Principatum Christi verò propter Sacerdotium It is full of fine expression both for Eminency of order and Jurisdiction The Bishop is the Prince of the Priests bearing the Image of God for his Principality that 's his jurisdiction and power but of Christ himself for his Priesthood that 's his Order S. Ignatius hath spoken fairly and if we consider that he was so primitive a man that himself saw Christ in the flesh and liv'd a man of exemplary sanctity and died a Martyr and hath
but the confession and acknowledgment of the greatest Doctors of the Church of Rome Scotus sayes that before the Lateran Council Transubstantiation was not an Article of Faith as Bellarmine confesses and and Henriquez affirms that Scotus sayes it was not ancient insomuch that Bellarmine accuses him of ignorance saying he talk'd at that rate because he had not read the Roman Council under Pope Gregory the Seventh nor that consent of Fathers which to so little purpose he had heap'd together Rem transubstantiationis Patres ne attigisse quidem said some of the English Jesuits in Prison The Fathers have not so much as touch'd or medled with the matter of Transubstantiation and in Peter Lombard's time it was so far from being an Article of Faith or a Catholick Doctrine that they did not know whether it were true or no And after he had collected the Sentences of the Fathers in that Article he confess'd He could not tell whether there was any substantial change or no. His words are these If it be inquir'd what kind of conversion it is whether it be formal or substantial or of another kind I am not able to define it Only I know that it is not formal because the same accidents remain the same colour and taste To some it seems to be substantial saying that so the substance is chang'd into the substance that it is done essentially To which the former Authorities seem to consent But to this sentence others oppose these things If the substance of Bread and Wine be substantially converted into the Body and Blood of Christ then every day some substance is made the Body or Blood of Christ which before was not the body and to day something is Christ's Body which yesterday was not and every day Christ's Body is increased and is made of such matter of which it was not made in the Conception These are his words which we have remark'd not only for the Arguments sake though it be unanswerable but to give a plain demonstration that in his time this Doctrine was new not the Doctrine of the Church And this was written but about fifty years before it was said to be decreed in the Lateran Council and therefore it made haste in so short time to pass from a disputable Opinion to an Article of Faith But even after the Council Durandus as good a Catholick and as famous a Doctor as any was in the Church of Rome publickly maintain'd that even after consecration the very matter of bread remain'd And although he sayes that by reason of the Authority of the Church it is not to be held yet it is not only possible it should be so but it implies no contradiction that it should be Christ's Body and yet the matter of bread remain and if this might be admitted it would salve many difficulties which arise from saying that the substance of bread does not remain But here his reason was overcome by authority and he durst not affirm that of which alone he was able to give as he thought a reasonable account But by this it appears that the Opinion was but then in the forge and by all their understanding they could never accord it but still the Questions were uncertain according to that old Distich Corpore de Christi lis est de sanguine lis est Déque modo lis est non habitura modum And the Opinion was not determin'd in the Lateran as it is now held at Rome but it is also plain that it is a stranger to Antiquity De Transubstantiatione panis in corpus Christi rara est in Antiquis scriptoribus mentio said Alphonsus à Castro There is seldom mention made in the ancient Writers of transubstantiating the bread into Christ's Body We know the modesty and interest of the man he would not have said it had been seldom if he could have found it in any reasonable degree warranted he might have said and justified it There was no mention at all of this Article in the Primitive Church And that it was a meer stranger to Antiquity will not be deny'd by any sober person who considers That it was with so much uneasiness entertained even in the corruptest and most degenerous times and argued and unsetled almost 1300. years after Christ. And that it was so will but too evidently appear by that stating and resolution of this Question which we find in the Canon Law For Berengarius was by Pope Nicolaus commanded to recant his error in these words and to affirm Verum corpus sanguinem Domini nostri Jesu Christi sensualiter non solùm in sacramento sed in veritate manibus sacerdotum tractari frangi fidelium dentibus atteri That the true Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ sensually not only in Sacrament but in truth is handled by the Priests hands and broken and grinded by the teeth of the faithful Now although this was publickly read at Rome before an hundred and fourteen Bishops and by the Pope sent up and down the Churches of Italy France and Germany yet at this day it is renounc'd by the Church of Rome and unless it be well expounded sayes the Gloss will lead into a heresie greater than what Berengarius was commanded to renounce and no interpretation can make it tolerable but such an one as is in another place of the Canon Law Statuimus i. e. abrogamus nothing but a plain denying it in the sence of Pope Nicolas But however this may be it is plain they understood it not as it is now decreed But as it happened to the Pelagians in the beginning of their Heresie they spake rudely ignorantly and easily to be reprov'd but being asham'd and disputed into a more sober understanding of their hypothesis spake more warily but yet differently from what they said at first so it was and is in this Question at first they understood it not it was too unreasonable in any tolerable sence to make any thing of it but experience and necessity hath brought it to what it is But that this Doctrine was not the Doctrine of the first and best Ages of the Church these following testimonies do make evident The words of Tertullian are these The bread being taken and distributed to his Disciples Christ made it his Body saying This is my Body that is the figure of my Body SECT II. Of PVRGATORY THAT the doctrine of Purgatory as it is taught in the Roman Church is a Novelty and a part of their New Religion is sufficiently attested by the words of the Cardinal of Rochester and Alphonsus à Castro whose words I now add that he who pleases may see how these new men would fain impose their new fancies upon the Church under pretence and title of Ancient and Catholick verities The words of Roffensis in his eighteenth article against Luther are these Legat qui velit Graecorum veterum commentarios nullum quantum
nor charitable to extend the Gravamen and punishment beyond the instances the Apostles make or their exact parallels But then also it would be remembred that the Apostles speak as fiercely against communion with Fornicatours and all disorders practical as against communion with Hereticks If any man that is called a brother be a Fornicatour or Covetous or an Idolater or a Railer or a Drunkard or an Extortioner with such a one no not to eat I am certain that a drunkard is as contrary to God and lives as contrary to the Laws of Christianity as an Heretick and I am also sure that I know what drunkenness is but I am not sure that such an Opinion is Heresie neither would other men be so sure as they think for if they did consider it aright and observe the infinite deceptions and causes of deceptions in wise men and in most things and in all doubtful Questions and that they did not mistake confidence for certainty But indeed I could not but smile at those jolly Friers two Franciscans offered themselves to the fire to prove Savonarola to be a Heretick but a certain Jacobine offered himself to the fire to prove that Savonarola had true Revelations and was no Heretick in the mean time Savonarola preacht but made no such confident offer nor durst he venture at that new kind of fire Ordeal And put case all four had past through the fire and died in the flames what would that have proved Had he been a Heretick or no Heretick the more or less for the confidence of these zealous Ideots If we mark it a great many Arguments whereon many Sects rely are no better probation then this comes to Confidence is the first and the second and the third part of a very great many of their propositions But now if men would a little turn the Tables and be as zealous for a good life and all the strictest precepts of Christianity which is a Religion the most holy the most reasonable and the most consummate that ever was taught to man as they are for such Propositions in which neither the life nor the ornament of Christianity is concerned we should find that as a consequent of this piety men would be as carefull as they could to find out all Truths and the sence of all Revelations which may concern their duty and where men were miserable and could not yet others that lived good lives too would also be so charitable as not to adde affliction to this misery and both of them are parts of good life To be compassionate and to help to bear one another's burthens not to destroy the weak but to entertain him meekly that 's a precept of charity and to edeavour to find out the whole will of God that also is a part of the obedience the choice and the excellency of Faith and he lives not a good life that does not doe both these But men think they have more reason to be zealous against Heresie then against a vice in manners because Heresie is infectious and dangerous and the principle of much evil Indeed if by an Heresie we mean that which is against an Article of Creed and breaks part of the Covenant made between God and man by the mediation of Jesus Christ I grant it to be a very grievous crime a calling God's veracity into question and a destruction also of good life because upon the Articles of Creed obedience is built and it lives or dies as the effect does by its proper cause for Faith is the moral cause of obedience But then Heresie that is such as this is also a vice and the person criminal and so the sin is to be esteemed in its degrees of malignity and let men be as zealous against it as they can and employ the whole Arsenal of the spiritual armour against it such as this is worse then adultery or murther inasmuch as the Soul is more noble then the Body and a false Doctrine is of greater dissemination and extent then a single act of violence or impurity Adultery or murther is a duel but Heresie truly and indeed such is an unlawful war it slays thousands The losing of Faith is like digging down a foundation all the superstructures of hope and patience and charity fall with it And besides this Heresie of all crimes is the most inexcusable and of least temptation for true Faith is most commonly kept with the least trouble of any grace in the world and Heresie of itself hath not onely no pleasure in it but is a very punishment because Faith as it opposes heretical or false Opinions and distinguishes from charity consists in mere acts of believing which because they are of true Propositions are natural and proportionable to the understanding and more honourable then false But then concerning those things which men now a-days call Heresie they cannot be so formidable as they are represented and if we consider that drunkenness is certainly a damnable sin and that there are more drunkards then Hereticks and that drunkenness is parent of a thousand vices it may better be said of this vice then of most of those opinions which we call Heresies it is infectious and dangerous and the principle of much evil and therefore as fit an object for a pious zeal to contest against as is any of those Opinions which trouble mens ease or reputation for that is the greatest of their malignity But if we consider that Sects are made and Opinions are called Heresies upon interest and the grounds of emolument we shall see that a good life would cure much of this mischief For First the Church of Rome which is the great Dictatrix of dogmatical Resolutions and the declarer of Heresie and calls Heretick more then all the world besides hath made that the rule of Heresie which is the conservatory of interest and the ends of men For to recede from the Doctrine of the Church with them makes Heresie that is to disrepute their Authority and not to obey them not to be their subjects not to give them the empire of our Conscience is the great 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Heresie So that with them Heresie is to be esteemed clearly by humane ends not by Divine Rules that is formal Heresie which does materially disserve them And it would make a suspicious man a little inquisitive into their particular Doctrines and when he finds that Indulgences and Jubilees and Purgatories and Masses and Offices for the dead are very profitable that the Doctrine of Primacy of Infallibility of Superiority over Councils of indirect power in temporals are great instruments of secular honour he would be apt enough to think that if the Church of Rome would learn to lay her honour at the feet of the Crucifix and despise the world and prefer Jerusalem before Rome and Heaven above the Lateran that these Opinions would not have in them any native strength to support them against the perpetual assaults of
of men with such a power In the mean time he that submits his understanding to all that he knows God hath said and is ready to submit to all that he hath said if he but know it denying his own affections and ends and interests and humane perswasions laying them all down at the foot of his great Master Jesus Christ that man hath brought his understanding into subjection and every proud thought unto the obedience of Christ and this is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the obedience of Faith which is the duty of a Christian. 14. But to proceed Besides these heresies noted in Scripture the age of the Apostles and that which followed was infested with other heresies but such as had the same formality and malignity with the precedent all of them either such as taught practical impieties or denied an Article of the Creed Egesippus in Eusebius reckons seven only prime heresies that sought to deflour the purity of the Church That of Simon that of Thebutes of Cleobius of Dositheus of Gortheus of Masbotheus I suppose Cerinthus to have been the seventh man though he express him not But of these except the last we know no particulars but that Egesippus says they were false Christs and that their doctrine was directly against God and his blessed Son Menander also was the first of a Sect but he bewitched the people with his Sorceries Cerinthus his doctrine pretended Enthusiasm or a new Revelation and ended in lust and impious theorems in matter of uncleanness The Ebionites denied Christ to be the Son of God and affirmed him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 begot by natural generation by occasion of which and the importunity of the Asian Bishops St. John writ his Gospel and taught the observation of Moses Law Basilides taught it lawful to renounce the faith and take false oaths in time of Persecution Carpocrates was a very bedlam half-witch and quite mad-man and practised lust which he called the secret operations to overcome the Potentates of the World Some more there were but of the same nature and pest not of a nicety in dispute not a question of secret Philosophy not of atomes and undiscernable propositions but open defiances of all Faith of all sobriety and of all sanctity excepting only the doctrine of the Millenaries which in the best Ages was esteemed no heresy but true Catholick Doctrine though since it hath justice done to it and hath suffered a just condemnation 15. Hitherto and in these instances the Church did esteem and judge of heresies in proportion to the rules and characters of Faith For Faith being a Doctrine of piety as well as truth that which was either destructive of fundamental verity or of Christian sanctity was against Faith and if it made a Sect was heresy if not it ended in personall impiety and went no farther But those who as S. Paul says not onely did such things but had pleasure in them that doe them and therefore taught others to doe what they impiously did dogmatize they were Hereticks both in matter and form in doctrine and deportment towards God and towards man and judicable in both tribunals 16. But the Scripture and Apostolical Sermons having expressed most high indignation against these masters of impious Sects leaving them under prodigious characters and horrid representments as calling them men of corrupt minds reprobates concerning the faith given over to strong delusions to the belief of a lie false Apostles false Prophets men already condemned and that by themselves Anti-Christs enemies to God and heresy it self a work of the flesh excluding from the kingdom of heaven left such impressions in the minds of all their successors and so much zeal against such Sects that if any opinion commenced in the Church not heard of before it oftentimes had this ill luck to run the same fortune with an old heresy For because the Hereticks did bring in new opinions in matters of great concernment every opinion de novo brought in was liable to the same exception and because the degree of malignity in every errour was oftentimes undiscernable and most commonly indemonstrable their zeal was alike against all and those Ages being full of piety were sitted to be abused with an over-active zeal as wise persons and learned are with a too much indifferency 17. But it came to pass that the further the succession went from the Apostles the more forward men were in numbring heresies and that upon slighter and more uncertain grounds Some footsteps of this we shall find if we consider the Sects that are said to have sprung in the first three hundred years and they were pretty and quick in their springs and falls fourscore and seven of them are reckoned They were indeed reckoned afterward and though when they were alive they were not condemn'd with as much forwardness as after they were dead yet even then confidence began to mingle with opinions less necessary and mistakes in judgment were oftner and more publick than they should have been But if they were forward in their censures as sometimes some of them were it is no great wonder they were deceived For what principle or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had they then to judge of heresies or condemn them besides the single dictates or decretals of private Bishops for Scripture was indifferently pretended by all and concerning the meaning of it was the Question now there was no general Council all that while no opportunity for the Church to convene and if we search the communicatory letters of the Bishops and Martyrs in those days we shall find but few sentences decretory concerning any Question of Faith or new sprung opinion And in those that did for ought appears the persons were mis-reported or their opinions mistaken or at most the sentence of condemnation was no more but this Such a Bishop who hath had the good fortune by posterity to be reputed a Catholick did condemn such a man or such an opinion and yet himself erred in as considerable matters but meeting with better neighbours in his life-time and a more charitable posterity hath his memory preserved in honour It appears plain enough in the case of Nicholas the Deacon of Antioch upon a mistake of his words whereby he taught 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to abuse the flesh viz. by acts of austerity and self-denial and mortification some wicked people that were glad to be mistaken and abused into a pleasing crime pretended that he taught them to abuse the flesh by filthy commixtures and pollutions This mistake was transmitted to posterity with a full cry and acts afterwards found out to justifie an ill opinion of him For by S. Hierom's time it grew out of Question but that he was the vilest of men and the worst of Hereticks Nicolaus Antiochenus omnium immunditiarum conditor choros duxit foemineos And again Iste Nicolaus Diaconus ita immundus extitit ut etiam in praesepi Domini nefas perpetrârit Accusations
toy in respect of the excellent blessings of peace and charity it were good that Alexander and Arius should leave contending keep their opinions to themselves ask each other forgiveness and give mutual toleration This is the substance of Constantine's letter and it contains in it much reason if he did not undervalue the Question but it seems it was not then thought a question of Faith but of nicety of dispute they both did believe one God and the holy Trinity Now then that he afterward called the Nicene Council it was upon occasion of the vileness of the men of the Arian part their eternal discord and pertinacious wrangling and to bring peace into the Church that was the necessity and in order to it was the determination of the Article But for the Article it self the Letter declares what opinion he had of that and this Letter was by Socrates called a wonderful exhortation full of grave and sober counsels and such as Hosius himself who was the messenger pressed with all earnestness with all the skill and Authority he had 27. I know the opinion the world had of the Article afterward is quite differing from this censure given of it before and therefore they have put it into the Creed I suppose to bring the world to unity and to prevent Sedition in this Question and the accidental blasphemies which were occasioned by their curious talkings of such secret mysteries and by their illiterate resolutions But although the Article was determined with an excellent spirit and we all with much reason profess to believe it yet it is another consideration whether or no it might not have been better determined if with more simplicity and another yet whether or no since many of the Bishops who did believe this thing yet did not like the nicety and curiosity of expressing it it had not been more agreeable to the practice of the Apostles to have made a determination of the Article by way of Exposition of the Apostles Creed and to have lest this in a rescript for record to all posterity and not to have enlarged the Creed with it for since it was an Explication of an Article of the Creed of the Apostles as Sermons are of places of Scripture it was thought by some that Scripture might with good profit and great truth be expounded and yet the Expositions not put into the Canon or go for Scripture but that left still in the naked Original simplicity and so much the rather since that Explication was further from the foundation and though most certainly true yet not penn'd by so infallible a spirit as was that of the Apostles and therefore not with so much evidence as certainty And if they had pleased they might have made use of an admirable precedent to this and many other great and good purposes no less than of the blessed Apostles whose Symbol they might have imitated with as much simplicity as they did the Expressions of Scripture when they first composed it For it is most considerable that although in reason every clause in the Creed should be clear and so inopportune and unapt to variety of interpretation that there might be no place left for several sences or variety of Expositions yet when they thought fit to insert some mysteries into the Creed which in Scripture were expressed in so mysterious words that the last and most explicite sence would still be latent yet they who if ever any did understood all the sences and secrets of it thought it not fit to use any words but the words of Scripture particularly in the Articles of Christs descending into Hell and sitting at the right hand of God to shew us that those Creeds are best which keep the very words of Scripture and that Faith is best which hath greatest simplicity and that it is better in all cases humbly to submit than curiously to enquire and pry into the mystery under the cloud and to hazard our Faith by improving our knowledge If the Nicene Fathers had done so too possibly the Church would never have repented it 28. And indeed the experience the Church had afterwards shewed that the Bishops and Priests were not satisfied in all circumstances nor the schism appeased nor the persons agreed nor the Canons accepted nor the Article understood nor any thing right but when they were overborn with Authority which Authority when the scales turned did the same service and promotion to the contrary 29. But it is considerable that it was not the Article or the thing it self that troubled the disagreeing persons but the manner of representing it For the five Dissenters Eusebius of Nicomedia Theognis Maris Theonas and Secundus believed Christ to be very God of very God but the clause of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they derided as being perswaded by their Logick that he was neither of the substance of the Father by division as a piece of a lump nor derivation as children from their Parents nor by production as buds from trees and no body could tell them any other way at that time and that made the fire to burn still And that was it I said if the Article had been with more simplicity and less nicety determined charity would have gained more and faith would have lost nothing And we shall find the wisest of them all for so Eusebius Pamphilus was esteemed published a Creed or Confession in the Synod and though he and all the rest believed that great mystery of Godliness God manifested in the flesh yet he was not fully satisfied nor so soon of the clause of one substance till he had done a little violence to his own understanding for even when he had subscribed to the clause of one substance he does it with a protestation that heretofore he never had been acquainted nor accustomed himself to such speeches And the sence of the word was either so ambiguous or their meaning so uncertain that Andreus Fricius does with some probability dispute that the Nicene Fathers by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did mean Patris similitudinem non essentiae unitatem Sylva 4. c. 1. And it was so well understood by personages disinterested that when Arius and Euzoius had confessed Christ to be Deus verbum without inserting the clause of one substance the Emperour by his Letter approved of his Faith and restored him to his Countrey and Office and the Communion of the Church And a long time after although the Article was believed with nicety enough yet when they added more words still to the mystery and brought in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saying there were three hypostases in the holy Trinity it was so long before it could be understood that it was believed therefore because they would not oppose their Superiours or disturb the peace of the Church in things which they thought could not be understood in so much that Saint Hierom writ to Damascus in these words Discerne si placet obsecro non timebo
doctrine of the Church of Rome which they learnt from St. Augustin and others also do from hence baptize Infants though with a less opinion of its absolute necessity And yet the same manner of precept in the same form of words in the same manner of threatning by an exclusive negative shall not enjoyn us to communicate Infants though damnation at least in form of words be exactly and per omnia alike appendant to the neglect of holy Baptism and the venerable Eucharist If nisi quis renatus shall conclude against the Anabaptist for necessity of baptizing Infants as sure enough we say it does why shall not an equal nisi comederitis bring Infants to the holy Communion The Primitive Church for some two whole ages did follow their own principles where ever they led them and seeing that upon the same ground equal results must follow they did Communicate Infants as soon as they had baptized them And why the Church of Rome should not do so too being she expounds nisi comederitis of Oral manducation I cannot yet learn a reason And for others that expound it of a spiritual manducation why they shall not allow the disagreeing part the same liberty of expounding nisi quis renatus too I by no means can understand And in these cases no external determiner can be pretended in answer For whatsoever is extrinsecal to the words as Councils Traditions Church Authority and Fathers either have said nothing at all or have concluded by their practice contrary to the present opinion as is plain by their communicating Infants by virtue of nisi comederitis 8. Fifthly I shall not need to urge the mysteriousness of some points in Scripture which ex natura rei are hard to be understood though very plainly represented For there are some secreta Theologiae which are only to be understood by persons very holy and spiritual which are rather to be felt than discoursed of and therefore if peradventure they be offered to publick consideration they will therefore be opposed because they run the same fortune with many other Questions that is not to be understood and so much the rather because their understanding that is the feeling such secrets of the Kingdom are not the results of Logick and Philosophy nor yet of publick revelation but of the publick spirit privately working and in no man is a duty but in all that have it is a reward and is not necessary for all but given to some producing its operations not regularly but upon occasions personal necessities and new emergencies Of this nature are the spirit of obsignation belief of particular salvation special influences and comforts coming from a sense of the spirit of adoption actual fervours and great complacencies in devotion spiritual joyes which are little drawings aside of the curtains of peace and eternity and antepasts of immortality But the not understanding the perfect constitution and temper of these mysteries and it is hard for any man so to understand as to make others do so too that feel them not is cause that in â—any Questions of secret Theology by being very apt and easie to be mistaken there is a necessity in forbearing one another and this consideration would have been of good use in the Question between Soto and Catharinus both for the preservation of their charity and explication of the mystery 9. Sixthly But here it will not be unseasonable to consider that all systems and principles of science are expressed so that either by reason of the Universality of the terms and subject matter or the infinite variety of humane understandings and these peradventure swayed by interest or determined by things accidental and extrinsecal they seem to divers men nay to the same men upon divers occasions to speak things extreamly disparate and sometimes contrary but very often of great variety And this very thing happens also in Scripture that if it were not in re sacrâ seriâ it were excellent sport to observe how the same place of Scripture serves several turns upon occasion and they at that time believe the words sound nothing else whereas in the liberty of their judgment and abstracting from that occasion their Commentaries understand them wholly to a differing sence It is a wonder of what excellent use to the Church of Rome is tibi dabo claves It was spoken to Peter and none else sometimes and therefore it concerns him and his Successours only the rest are to derive from him And yet if you question them for their Sacrament of Penance and Priestly Absolution then tibi dabo claves comes in and that was spoken to S. Peter and in him to the whole College of the Apostles and in them to the whole Hierarchy If you question why the Pope pretends to free souls from Purgatory tibi dabo claves is his warrant but if you tell him the Keys are only for binding and loosing on Earth directly and in Heaven consequently and that Purgatory is a part of Hell or rather neither Earth nor Heaven nor Hell and so the Keys seem to have nothing to do with it then his Commission is to be enlarged by a suppletory of reason and consequences and his Keys shall unlock this difficulty for it is clavis scientiae as well as authoritatis And these Keys shall enable him to expound Scriptures infallibly to determine Questions to preside in Councils to dictate to all the World Magisterially to rule the Church to dispence with Oaths to abrogate Laws And if his Key of knowledge will not the Key of Authority shall and tibi dabo claves shall answer for all We have an instance in the single fancy of one man what rare variety of matter is afforded from those plain words of Oravi pro te Petre Luke 22. for that place says Bellarmine is otherwise to be understood of Peter otherwise of the Popes and otherwise of the Church of Rome And pro te signifies that Christ prayed that Peter might neither err personally nor judicially and that Peters Successors if they did err personally might not err judicially and that the Roman Church might not err personally All this variety of sence is pretended by the fancy of one man to be in a few words which are as plain and simple as are any words in Scripture And what then in those thousands that are intricate So is done with pasce oves which a man would think were a Commission as innocent and guiltless of designs as the sheep in the folds are But if it be asked why the Bishop of Rome calls himself Universal Bishop Pasces oves is his warrant Why he pretends to a power of deposing Princes Pasce oves said Christ to Peter the second time If it be demanded why also he pretends to a power of authorizing his subjects to kill him Pasce agnos said Christ the third time And pasce is doce and pasce is Impera and pasce is occide Now if others should take the same
Parents 9. Seventhly If the words were never so appropriate to Peter or also communicated to his Successors yet of what value will the consequent be what prerogative is entailed upon the Chair of Rome For that S. Peter was the Ministerial Head of the Church is the most that is desired to be proved by those and all other words brought for the same purposes and interests of that See Now let the Ministerial Head have what Dignity can be imagined let him be the first and in all Communities that are regular and orderly there must be something that is first upon certain occasions where an equal power cannot be exercised and made pompous or ceremonial But will this Ministerial Headship inferr an infallibility will it inferr more then the Headship of the Jewish Synagogue where clearly the High Priest was supreme in many senses yet in no sense infallible will it inferr more to us then it did amongst the Apostles amongst whom if for order's sake S. Peter was the first yet he had no compulsory power over the Apostles there was no such thing spoke of nor any such thing put in practice And that the other Apostles were by a personal privilege as infallible as himself is no reason to hinder the exercise of jurisdiction or any compulsory power over them for though in Faith they were infallible yet in manners and matter of fact as likely to erre as S. Peter himself was and certainly there might have something happened in the whole Colledge that might have been a Record of his Authority by transmitting an example of the exercise of some Judicial power over some one of them If he had but withstood any of them to their faces as S. Paul did him it had been more then yet is said in his behalf Will the Ministerial Headship inferr any more then that when the Church in a Community or a publick capacity should do any Act of Ministery Ecclesiasticall he shall be first in Order Suppose this to be a dignity to preside in Councils which yet was not always granted him suppose it to be a power of taking cognizance of the Major Causes of Bishops when Councils cannot be called suppose it a double voice or the last decisive or the negative in the causes exteriour suppose it to be what you will of dignity or externall regiment which when all Churches were united in Communion and neither the interest of States nor the engagement of opinions had made disunion might better have been acted then now it can yet this will fall infinitely short of a power to determine Controversies infallibly and to prescribe to all mens faith and consciences A Ministerial Headship or the prime Minister cannot in any capacity become the foundation of the Church to any such purpose And therefore men are causelesly amused with such premisses and are afraid of such Conclusions which will never follow from the admission of any sense of these words that can with any probability be pretended 10. Eighthly I consider that these Arguments from Scripture are too weak to support such an Authority which pretends to give Oracles and to answer infallibly in Questions of Faith because there is greater reason to believe the Popes of Rome have erred and greater certainty of demonstration then these places give that they are infallible as will appear by the instances and perpetual experiment of their being deceived of which there is no Question but of the sense of these places there is And indeed if I had as clear Scripture for their infallibility as I have against their half Communion against their Service in an unknown tongue worshipping of Images and divers other Articles I would make no scruple of believing but limit and conform my understanding to all their Dictates and believe it reasonable all Prophesying should be restrained But till then I have leave to discourse and to use my reason And to my reason it seems not likely that neither Christ nor any of his Apostles not S. Peter himself not S. Paul writing to the Church of Rome should speak the least word or tittle of the infallibility of their Bishops for it was certainly as convenient to tell us of a remedy as to foretell that certainly there must needs be heresies and need of a remedy And it had been a certain determination of the Question if when so rare an opportunity was ministred in the Question about Circumcision that they should have sent to Peter who for his infallibility in ordinary and his power of Headship would not onely with reason enough as being infallibly assisted but also for his Authority have best determined the Question if at least the first Christians had known so profitable and so excellent a secret And although we have but little Record that the first Council at Jerusalem did much observe the solennities of Law and the forms of Conciliary proceedings and the Ceremonials yet so much of it as is recorded is against them S. James and not S. Peter gave the final sentence and although S. Peter determined the Question pro libertate yet S. James made the Decree and the Assumentum too and gave sentence they should abstain from some things there mentioned which by way of temper he judged most expedient And so it passed And S. Peter shewed no sign of a Superiour Authority nothing of Superiour jurisdiction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 11. So that if the Question be to be determined by Scripture it must either be ended by plain places or by obscure Plain places there are none and these that are with greatest fancy pretended are expounded by Antiquity to contrary purposes But if obscure places be all the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by what means shall we infallibly find the sense of them The Pope's interpretation though in all other cases it might be pretended in this cannot for it is the thing in Question and therefore cannot determine for itself Either therefore we have also another infallible guide besides the Pope and so we have two Foundations and two Heads for this as well as the other upon the same reason or else which is indeed the truth there is no infallible way to be infallibly assured that the Pope is infallible Now it being against the common condition of men above the pretences of all other Governours Ecclesiasticall against the Analogie of Scripture and the deportment of the other Apostles against the Oeconomy of the Church and S. Peter's own entertainment the presumption lies against him and these places are to be left to their prime intentions and not put upon the rack to force them to confess what they never thought 12. But now for Antiquity if that be deposed in this Question there are so many circumstances to be considered to reconcile their words and their actions that the process is more troublesome then the Argument can be concluding or the matter considerable But I shall a little consider it so far at least as to shew either Antiquity said
any Synod General National or Provincial be receded from by the Church of the later Age as there have been very many then so many Fathers as were then assembled and united in opinion are esteemed no Authority to determine our perswasions Now suppose 200 Fathers assembled in such a Council if all they had writ Books and 200 Authorities had been alledged in confirmation of an opinion it would have made a mighty noise and loaded any man with an insupportable prejudice that should dissent And yet every opinion maintained against the Authority of any one Council though but Provincial is in its proportion such a violent recession and neglect of the Authority and Doctrine of so many Fathers as were then assembled who did as much declare their opinion in those Assemblies by their Suffrages as if they had writ it in so many books and their opinion is more considerable in the Assembly then in their writings because it was more deliberate assisted united and more dogmaticall In pursuance of this observation it is to be noted by way of instance that Saint Austin and two hundred and seventeen Bishops and all their Successors for a whole Age together did consent in denying Appeals to Rome and yet the Authority of so many Fathers all true Catholicks is of no force now at Rome in this Question but if it be in a matter they like one of these Fathers alone is sufficient The Doctrine of Saint Austin alone brought in the Festival and veneration of the Assumption of the blessed Virgin and the hard sentence passed at Rome upon unbaptized Infants and the Dominican opinion concerning Predetermination derived from him alone as from their Original So that if a Father speaks for them it is wonderfull to see what Tragedies are stirred up against them that dissent as is to be seen in that excellent nothing of Campian's Ten reasons But if the Fathers be against them then Patres in quibusdam non leviter lapsi sunt says Bellarmine and Constat quosdam ex praecipuis it is certain the chiefest of them have foully erred Nay Posa Salmeron and Wadding in the Question of the immaculate Conception make no scruple to dissent from Antiquity to prefer new Doctors before the old and to justifie themselves bring instances in which the Church of Rome had determined against the Fathers And it is not excuse enough to say that singly the Fathers may erre but if they concur they are certain Testimony For there is no question this day disputed by persons that are willing to be tried by the Fathers so generally attested on either side as some points are which both sides dislike severally or conjunctly And therefore 't is not honest for either side to press the Authority of the Fathers as a concluding Argument in matter of dispute unless themselves will be content to submit in all things to the Testimony of an equal number of them which I am certain neither side will do 3. If I should reckon all the particular reasons against the certainty of this Topick it would be more then needs as to this Question and therefore I will abstain from all disparagement of those worthy personages who were excellent lights to their several Dioceses and Cures And therefore I will not instance that Clemens Alexandrinus taught that Christ felt no hunger or thirst but eat onely to make demonstration of the verity of his Humane nature nor that Saint Hilary taught that Christ in his sufferings had no sorrow nor that Origen taught the pains of Hell not to have an eternall duration nor that S. Cyprian taught Rebaptization nor that Athenagoras condemned second Marriages nor that Saint John Damascen said Christ onely prayed in appearance not really and in truth I will let them all rest in peace and their memories in honour for if I should inquire into the particular probations of this Article I must doe to them as I should be forced to doe now if any man should say that the Writings of the School-men were excellent argument and Authority to determine mens perswasions I must consider their writings and observe their defaillances their contradictions the weakness of their Arguments the mis-allegations of Scripture their inconsequent deductions their false opinions and all the weaknesses of humanity and the failings of their persons which no good man is willing to doe unless he be compelled to it by a pretence that they are infallible or that they are followed by men even into errours or impiety And therefore since there is enough in the former instances to cure any such misperswasion and prejudice I will not instance in the innumerable particularities that might perswade us to keep our Liberty intire or to use it discreetly For it is not to be denied but that great advantages are to be made by theiâ— writings probabile est quod omnibus quod pluribus quod sapientibus videtur If one wise man says a thing it is an argument to me to believe it in its degree of probation that is proportionable to such an assent as the Authority of a wise man can produce and when there is nothing against it that is greater and so in proportion higher and higher as more wise men such as the old Doctors were do affirm it But that which I complain of is that we look upon wise men that lived long agoe with so much veneration and mistake that we reverence them not for having been wise men but that they lived long since But when the Question is concerning Authority there must be something to build it on a Divine Commandment humane Sanction excellency of spirit and greatness of understanding on which things all humane Authority is regularly built But now if we had lived in their times for so we must look upon them now as they did who without prejudice beheld them I suppose we should then have beheld them as we in England look on those Prelates who are of great reputation for learning and sanctity here onely is the difference when persons are living their Authority is depressed by their personal defaillances and the contrary interests of their contemporaries which disband when they are dead and leave their credit intire upon the reputation of those excellent books and monuments of learning and piety which are left behind But beyond this why the Bishop of Hippo shall have greater Authority then the Bishop of the Canaries caeteris paribus I understand not For did they that lived to instance in Saint Austin's time beâ—ieve all that he wrote If they did they were much to blame or else himself was to blame for retracting much of it a little before his death And if while he lived his affirmative was no more Authority then derives from the credit of one very wise man against whom also very wise men were opposed I know not why his Authority should prevail farther now for there is nothing added to the strength of his reason since that time but onely
received 1004. Alexander III. in a Council condemned Pet. Lombard of Heresy from which sentence without repentance or leaving his opinion after 36 years he was absolved by Innocent III. 1005. Infallible The Romanists hold the Scripture for no infallible rule 381. No man affirms but J.S. that the Fathers are infallible 373 374 375. Whether the representative Church be infallible 389. General Councils not infallible 392. Bellarmine confesseth that for 1500 years the Pope's judgement was not held infallible 453. Infants What punishment Adam's sin can bring upon Infants that die 714 n. 29. It was the general opinion of the Fathers before Saint Augustine that Infants unbaptized were not condemned to the pains of Hell 755 756 n. 16 17. The reason on which the Baptism of Infants is grounded 718 n. 42. Infirmity What is the state of Infirmity 771 n. 3. It excuses no man ibid. That state which some men call a state of Infirmity is a state of sin and death 777 n. 26. What are sins of infirmity 789 n. 47. Sins of infirmity consist more in the imperfection of obedience then in the commission of any evil 790 n. 51. A sin of infirmity cannot be but in a small matter 791 n. 54. What are not sins of infirmity 792 n. 55. Violence of passion excuseth none under the title of sins of infirmity 792 n. 56. Sins of infirmity not accounted in the same manner to young men as to others 793 n. 59. The greatness of the temptation doth not make sin excusable upon the account of sins of infirmity 793 n. 60. The smallest instance if observed ceases to be a sin of infirmity 794 n. 61. A man's will hath no infirmity 794 n. 62. Nothing is a sin of infirmity but what is in some sense involuntary 794 n. 63. Sins of inculpable ignorance are sins of infirmity 794 n. 64. There is no pardonable state of infirmity 797 n. 98. Job Chap. 31. v. 18. explained 721. Gospel of Saint John Chap. 3. v. 5. Vnless a man be born of water and of the holy Spirit explained 5 6 b. Chap. 6. v. 53. Vnless ye eat the flesh of the Son of God and drink his bloud 8 b. Chap. 8. 47. He that is of God heareth God's word 679 n. 62. Chap. 9.34 Thou wast altogether born in sin and dost thou teach us 721 n. 49. Chap. 14.17 The world cannot receive him explained 785 n. 37. Chap. 20.23 Whosoever's sins ye remit explained 816 n. 66. 1. Epistle of Saint John Chap. 5. v. 17. There is a sin not unto death explained 643 n. 31. and 809 810. Chap. 3.9 He that is born of God sinneth not nor can he explained 810. Chap. 1.9 If we confess our sins God is faithful to forgive our sins explained 830 n. 34. Chap. 5.7 The Father the Word and the Spirit and these three are one explained 967 n. 4. Irenaeus He mentions an impostor that essayed to counterfeit Transubstantiation long before the Roman Church decreed it 228 § 10. Isaiah Chap. 53. v. 10. explained 712 n. 15. Judgment That of man and God proceed in several methods and relie upon different grounds 614 615 n. 15. Jurisdiction Mere Presbyters had not in the Church any Jurisdiction in causes criminal otherwise then by delegation 82 § 21. What persons are under that of Bishops 123 § 36. Justice God's Justice and Mercy reconciled about his exacting the Law 580. Justification Of our Justification by imputation of Christ's righteousness 901 902. Guilt cannot properly and really be traduced from one person to another 902 915. Of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 903. K. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 WHat it signifieth 636 n. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Of that word and its use 638 n. 12. Keys Wherein that kind of power consisteth 841 n. 58. Kings The Episcopal power encroacheth not upon the Regal 120 § 36. The seal of Confession the Romanists will not suffer to be broken to save the life of a Prince or the whole State 343 c. 3. § 2. An excommunicate King the Romans teach may be deposed or killed 344 c. 3. § 3. The Pope takes upon him to depose Kings that are not heretical 345. The Roman Religion no friend to Kings 345. Their opinions so injurious to Kings are not the doctrines of private men onely 345. Father Arnald Confessor to Lewis XIII of France did cause that King in private confession to take such an oath as did in a manner depose him 489. L. Laiety NO Ecclesiastical presidency ever given to the Laiety 114 § 36. The Oeconomus of the Church might not be a Lay-man 164 § 50. The Laiety sometime admitted to vote in Councils 394 395. Lay-Elders never had authority in the Church 165 § 51. Latin Photius was the first authour of the Schism between the Greek and Latin Church 109 § 33. Law The Papists corrupted the Imperial Law of Justinian in the matter of Prayers in an unknown Language 304 c. 1. § 7. The difference between the Law and Gospel 574. Of the possibility of keeping the Law 576. Arguments to prove that perfect obedience to God's Law is impossible 576 577 n. 15. ad 19. In what sense it is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 574. It s severity made the Gospel better received ibid. Difference between it and the Gospel 673 n. 46. and 574 575. and 580 581. Of the difference between Saint Augustine and Saint Hierome concerning the possibility of keeping the Law of God 579 n. 30 31. In what measures God exacteth it 580 581. His mercy and justice reconciled about that thing 580 581. To keep the Law naturally possible but morally impossible 580 n. 34. No man can keep the Law of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but he may 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 585 n. 50. The Law of works imposed on Adam onely 587 n. 1. The state of men under the Law 778. A threefold Law in man flesh or members the mind or conscience the spirit 781 n. 29. The contention between the Law of the flesh and conscience is no sign of Regeneration but the contention between the Law of the flesh and spirit is 782 n. 31. The Law of Moses and of the Gospel were not impossible of themselves but in respect of our circumstances 580 n 33. All that which was insupportable in Moses's Law was nothing but the want of Repentance ibid. Laws indirectly occasion sin 771 n. 6. Lawful Every thing that is lawful or the utmost of what is lawful not always 〈◊〉 to be done 856 857. Life The necessity of good life 799 n. 25. The natural evils of man's life 734 n. 82. Loose What in the promise of Christ is signified by binding and loosing 836 n. 45 46 47. Saint Luke Chap. 22.25 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 explained 153 § 48. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that Text what it meaneth ibid. 154. Chap. 15.7 explained 801 n. 5. Chap. 11.41 explained 848. Chap. 13.14 explained 786 40. Lukewarmness How it comes to be a
desire to do natural or moral good things but even spiritual 784 4o. he may leave many sins which he is commanded to forsake 785 5o. he may leave some sins not only for temporal interest but out of fear of God and regard to his Law ibid. 6o. he may besides abstinence from evil do many good things 786 7 o he may have received the Spirit of God and yet be in a state of distance from God ibid. 6. The character of the unregenerate state or person n. 42.787 7. What are properly and truly sins of infirmity and how far they can consist with the regenerate estate 789 8. Practical advices to be added to the foregoing considerations 795. n. 65. Chap. IX Of the effect of Repentance viz. remission of Sins 800 Sect. 1. There is no sin but with Repentance may be pardoned ibid. 2. Of pardon of sins committed after baptism 802 3. Of the difficulty of obtaining pardon The doctrine and practice of the Primitive Church in this Article 803 4. Of the sin against the H. Ghost and in what sence it may be unpardonable 808 5. What sin is spoken of by our Lord Matth. 12.32 and that final impenitence is not it 810 6. The former doctrines reduced to practice 815 Chap. X. Of Ecclesiastical Penance or the fruits of Repentance 820 Sect. 1. What the fruits of Repentance are in general ibid. 2. Of Contrition or godly sorrow the reasons measures and constitution of it 821 3. Of the nature and differences of Attrition and Contrition 828 4. Of Confession 830 1o. Confession is necessary to Repentance ibid. 2o. It is due only to God 831 3o. In the Primitive Church there was no judicial absolution used in their Liturgies n. 54.838 4o. The judicial absolution of a Priest does effect no material change in the Penitent as to giving of pardon 841. n. 60 5. Attrition or imperfect Repentance though with absolution is not sufficient 842 6. Of Penance or satisfactions 844. 1o. sorrow and mourning 2o. Corporal austerities 3o. Prayers 847. 4o. Alms 848. 5o. forgiving injuries 6 o restitution 849 7. The former doctrine reduced to practice 850 8. The practice of Confession 854 9. The practice of Penances and corporal austerities 858 A Discourse in Vindication of Gods Attributes of Goodness and Justice in the matter of Original Sin against the Calvinists way of understanding it 1o. THe truth of the Article with the errors and mistakes about it 869 2o. Arguments to prove the truth 872 3o. Objections answered 881 4o. An Explication of Rom. 5.12 ad 19. 887 An Answer to the Bishop of Rochesters First Letter written concerning the Sixth Chapter of Original Sin in the Discourse of Repentance 895 The Bishop of Rochesters Second Letter upon the same subject 907 An Answer to the Second Letter from the Bishop of Rochester 909 The Liberty of Prophesying EPist Dedicatory Introduction Sect. 1. Of the nature of Faith and that the duty of it is compleated in believing the Articles of the Apostles Creed 941 2. Of Heresie its nature and measures That it is to be accounted according to the stricter capacity of the Christian Faith and not in opinions speculative nor ever to pious persons 947 3. Of the difficulty and uncertainty of arguments from Scripture in Questions not simply necessary nor literally determined 965 4. Of the difficulty of expounding Scripture 971 5. Of the insufficiency and uncertainty of Tradition to expound Scripture or determine questions 976 6. Of the insufficiency and uncertainty of Councils Ecclesiastical to expound Scripture or determine questions 984 7. Of the fallibility of the Pope and the uncertainty of his expounding Scripture and resolving Questions 995 8. How unable the Fathers or Writers Ecclesiastical are to determine our questions with certainty and truth 1007 9. How incompetent the Church in its diffusive capacity is to be Judge of controversies and how impertinent that pretence of the Spirit is 1011 10. Of the authority of reason and that it proceeding on the best grounds is the best Judge 1013 11. Of some causes of error in the exercise of reason which are in themselves inculpable 1016 12. How innocent error of mere opinion is in a pious person 1022 13. Of the deportment to be used toward persons disagreeing and reasons why they are not to be punished with death 1025 14. Of the practice of Christian Churches toward persons disagreeing and when persecution first came in use 1031 15. How far the Church or Governours may act to the restraining false or differing opinions 1034 16. Whether it be lawful for a Prince to give toleration to several Religions 1036 17. Of complying with disagreeing persons or weak Consciences in general 1038 18. A particular instance in the opinion of the Anabaptists to shew that there is so much reason on both sides of the Question that a pious person mistaking may be innocent in his error 1040 1o. The arguments usually alledged for baptizing Infants n. 3. ad 12.1041 1042 2o. How much the Anabaptists have to say in opposition to those arguments and to justifie their own tenent n. 12. ad 34.1043 ad 1051 3o. A reply to the arguments of the Anabaptists by the Author since the first Edition wherein the lawfulness of the Churches practice is established n. 34. ad fin Sect. 1051. ad 1068 19. That there ought not to be any toleration of doctrines inconsistent with piety or the publick good 1069 20. How far the Religion of the Church of Rome may be tolerated 1070 21. Of the duty of particular Churches in allowing Communion 1076 22. That particular men may communicate with Churches of different perswasions and how far they may do it 1077 The Discourse of Confirmation INtroduction Sect. 1. Of the Divine Original Warranty and Institution of the Rite of Confirmation 3 2. The Rite of Confirmation is a perpetual and never-ceasing Ministery 12 3. That Confirmation which by laying on of Hands gives the H. Spirit was actually continued and practised by all succeeding Ages of the Primitive Church 15 4. The Bishops were always and are still the only Ministers of Confirmation 18 5. The whole procedure of Confirmation is by prayer and laying on of Hands 22 6. Many great Graces and Blessings are consequent to the worthy reception and due ministery of Confirmation 24 7. Of preparation to Confirmation and the circumstances of receiving it 28 A Discourse of Friendship 1. HOw far a perfect Friendship is authorized by the principles of Christianity 35 2. What are the requisites of Friendship 38 3. What are the lawful expressions and acts of Friendship 42 4. Whether a Friend may be dearer than a Husband or Wife 47 5. What are the duties of Friendship 49 6. Ten Rules to be observed in the conduct of Friendship 50 Five Letters about change of Religion 53 THE AUTHORS PREFACE TO THE APOLOGY FOR AUTHORIZED and SET FORMS OF LITURGY WHEN Judges were instead of Kings and Hophni and Phinehas were among the Priests every
the Roman Sea yet a viper sprung out of Queen Maries sires which at Frankford first leap'd upon the hand of the Church but since that time it hath gnawn the bowels of its own Mother and given it self life by the death of its Parent and Nurse 15. For as for the Adversaries from the Roman party they were so convinc'd by the piety and innocence of the Common-Prayer-Book that they could accuse it of no deformity but of imperfection of a want of some things which they judged convenient because the error had a wrinkle on it and the face of antiquity And therefore for ten or eleven years they came to our Churches joyn'd in our devotions and communicated without scruple till a temporal interest of the Church of Rome rent the Schism wider and made it gape like the jaws of the grave And let me say it adds no small degree to my confidence and opinion of the English Common-Prayer-Book that amongst the numerous Armies sent from the Roman Seminaries who were curious enough to enquire able enough to find out and wanted no anger to have made them charge home any error in our Liturgy if the matter had not been unblameable and the composition excellent there was never any impiety or Heresie charg'd upon the Liturgy of the Church for I reckon not the calumnies of Harding for they were only in general calling it Darkness c. from which aspersion it was worthily vindicated by M. Deering The truth of it is the Compilers took that course which was sufficient to have secur'd it against the malice of a Spanish Inquisitor or the scrutiny of a more inquisitive Presbytery for they put nothing of controversie into their prayers nothing that was then matter of question only because they could not prophesie they put in some things which since then have been called to question by persons whose interest was highly concerned to find fault with something But that also hath been the fate of the Penmen of holy Scripture some of which could prophesie and yet could not prevent this But I do not remember that any man was ever put to it to justifie the Common-Prayer against any positive publick and professed charge by a Roman Adversary Nay it is transmitted to us by the testimony of persons greater than all exceptions that Paulus Quartus in his private entercourses and Letters to Queen Elizabeth did offer to confirm the English Common-Prayer-Book if she would acknowledge his Primacy and authority and the Reformation derivative from him And this lenity was pursued by his Successor Pius Quartus with an omnia de nobis tibi polliceare he assured her she should have any thing from him not only things pertaining to her soul but what might conduce to the establishment and confirmation of her Royal Dignity amongst which that the Liturgy new established by her authority should not be rescinded by the Popes power was not the least considerable 16. And possibly this hath cast a cloud upon it in the eyes of such persons who never will keep charity or so much as civility but with those with whom they have made a league offensive and defensive against all the world This hath made it to be suspected of too much compliance with that Church and her Offices of devotion and that it is a very Cento composed out of the Mass-Book Pontifical Breviaries Manuals and Portuises of the Roman Church 17. I cannot say but many of our Prayers are also in the Roman Offices But so they are also in the Scripture so also is the Lords Prayer and if they were not yet the allegation is very inartificial and the charge peevish and unreasonable unless there were nothing good in the Roman Books or that it were unlawful to pray a good prayer which they had once stain'd with red letters The Objection hath not sence enough to procure an answer upon its own stock but by reflection from a direct truth which uses to be like light manifesting it self and discovering darkness 18. It was first perfected in King Edward the Sixths time but it was by and by impugned through the obstinate and dissembling malice of many They are the words of M. Fox in his Book of Martyrs Then it was reviewed and published with so much approbation that it was accounted the work of God but yet not long after there were some persons qui divisionis occasionem arripiebant saith Alesius vocabula pene syllabas expendendo they tried it by points and syllables and weighed every word and sought occasions to quarrel which being observed by Archbishop Cranmer he caused it to be translated into Latin and sent it to Bucer requiring his judgment of it who returned this answer That although there are in it some things quae rapi possunt ab inquietis ad materiam contentionis which by peevish men may be cavill'd at yet there was nothing in it but what was taken out of the Scriptures or agreeable to it if rightly understood that is if handled and read by wise and good men The zeal which Archbishop Grindal Bishop Ridly Dr. Taylor and other the holy Martyrs and Confessors in Queen Maries time expressed for this excellent Liturgy before and at the time of their death defending it by their disputations adorning it by their practice and sealing it with their bloods are arguments which ought to recommend it to all the sons of the Church of England for ever infinitely to be valued beyond all the little whispers and murmurs of argument pretended against it and when it came out of the flame and was purified in the Martyrs sires it became a vessel of honour and used in the house of God in all the days of that long peace which was the effect of Gods blessing and the reward as we humbly hope of an holy Religion and when it was laid aside in the days of Queen Mary it was to the great decay of the due honour of God and discomfort to the Professors of the truth of Christs Religion they are the words of Queen Elizabeth and her grave and wise Parliament 19. Archbishop Cranmer in his purgation A. D. 1553. made an offer if the Queen would give him leave to prove All that is contained in the Common-Prayer-Book to be conformable to that order which our blessed Saviour Christ did both observe and command to be observed And a little after he offers to joyn issue upon this point That the Order of the Church of England set out by authority of the innocent and godly Prince Edward the Sixth in his high Court of Parliament is the same that was used in the Church fifteen hundred years past 20. And I shall go near to make his words good For very much of our Liturgy is the very words of Scriptures The Psalms and Lessons and all the Hymns save one are nothing else but Scripture and owe nothing to the Roman Breviaries for their production or authority So that the matter of them is out
4 deprecations and 5 prayers and 6 intercessions and 7 giving of thanks will warrant and commend as so many parts of duty all the portions of the English Liturgy 34. If it were worth the pains it were very easie to enumerate the Authors and especially the occasions and time when the most minute passages such I mean as are known by distinct appellatives came into the Church that so it may appear our Liturgy is as ancient and primitive in every part as it is pious and unblameable and long before the Church got such a beam in one of her eyes which was endeavoured to be cast out at the Reformation But it will not be amiss to observe that very many of them were inserted as Antidotes and deleteries to the worst of Heresies as I have discours'd already and such was that clause through Jesus Christ our Lord who liveth and reigneth with thee in the unity of the holy Spirit ever one God and some other phrases parallel were put in in defiance of the Macedonians and all the species of the Antitrinitarians and used by S. Ambrose in Millain S. Austin in Africa and Idacius Clarus in Spain and in imitation of so pious precedents the Church of England hath inserted divers clauses into her Offices 35. There was a great instance in the administration of the blessed Sacrament For upon the change of certain clauses in the Liturgy upon the instance of Martin Bucer instead of the bloud of our Lord Jesus Christ which was given for you preserve your body and soul unto everlasting life was substituted this take and eat this in remembrance c. and it was done lest the people accustomed to the opinion of Transubstantiation and the appendant practices should retain the same doctrine upon intimation of the first clause But in the beginning of Queen Elizabeths reign when certain persons of the Zuinglian opinion would have abused the Church with Sacramentary doctrine and pretended the Church of England had declared for it in the second clause of 1552 the wisdom of the Church thought it expedient to joyn both the clauses the first lest the Church should be suspected to be of the Sacramentary opinion the latter lest she should be mistaken as a Patroness of Transubstantiation And both these with so much temper and sweetness that by her care she rather prevented all mistakes than by any positive declaration in her prayers engaged her self upon either side that she might pray to God without strife and contention with her brethren For the Church of England had never known how to follow the names of men but to call Christ only her Lord and Master 36. But from the inserting of these and the like clauses which hath been done in all ages according to several opportunities and necessities I shall observe this advantage which is in many but is also very signally in the English Liturgy we are thereby enabled and advantaged in the meditation of those mysteries de quibus festivatur in sacris as the Casuists love to speak which upon solemn days we are bound to meditate and make to be the matter and occasion of our address to God for the offices are so ordered that the most indifferent and careless cannot but be reminded of the mystery in every Anniversary which if they be summ'd up will make an excellent Creed and then let any man consider what a rare advantage it will be to the belief of such propositions when the very design of the Holy-day teaches the hard handed Artizan the name and meaning of an Article and yet the most forward and religious cannot be abused with any semblances of superstition The life and death of the Saints which is very precious in the eyes of God is so remembred by his humble and afflicted handmaid the Church of England that by giving him thanks and praise God may be honoured the Church instructed by the proposition of their example and we give testimony of the honour and love we owe and pay unto Religion by the pious veneration and esteem of those holy and beatified persons 37. Certain it is that there is no part of Religion as it is a distinct vertue and is to be exercised by interiour acts and forms of worship but is in the offices of the Church of England For if the Soul desires to be humbled she hath provided forms of Confession to God before his Church if she will rejoyce and give God thanks for particular blessings there are forms of thanksgiving described and added by the Kings authority upon the Conference at Hampton-Court which are all the publick solemn and foreseen occasions for which by Law and order provision could be made if she will commend to God the publick and private necessities of the Church and single persons the whole body of Collects and devotions supplies that abundantly if her devotion be high and pregnant and prepared to fervency and importunity of congress with God the Litanies are an admirable pattern of devotion full of circumstances proportionable for a quick and an earnest spirit when the revolution of the Anniversary calls on us to perform our duty of special meditation and thankfulness to God for the glorious benefits of Christs Incarnation Nativity Passion Resurrection and Ascension blessings which do as well deserve a day of thanksgiving as any other temporal advantage though it be the pleasure of a victory then we have the offices of Christmass the Annunciation Easter and Ascension if we delight to remember those holy persons whose bodies rest in the bed of peace and whose souls are deposited in the hands of Christ till the day of restitution of all things we may by the Collects and days of Anniversary festivity not only remember but also imitate them too in our lives if we will make that use of the proportions of Scripture allotted for the festival which the Church intends to which if we add the advantages of the whole Psalter which is an intire body of devotion by it self and hath in it forms to exercise all graces by way of internal act and spiritual intention there is not any ghostly advantage which the most religious can either need or fancy but the English Liturgy in its entire constitution will furnish us withal And certainly it was a very great wisdom and a very prudent and religious Constitution so to order that part of the Liturgy which the ancients called the Lectionarium that the Psalter should be read over twelve times in the year the Old Testament once and the New Testament thrice beside the Epistles and Gospels which renew with a more frequent repetition such choice places as represent the entire body of faith and good life There is a defalcation of some few Chapters from the entire body in the order but that also was part of the wisdom of the Church not to expose to publick ears and common judgments some of the secret rites of Moses's Law or the more mysterious prophecies of the New
be changed or else time must stand still and things be ever in the same state and possibility Both the Consequents are extremely full of inconvenience For if it be left to humane prudence then either the government of the Church is not in immediate order to the good and benison of souls or if it be that such an institution in such immediate order to eternity should be dependant upon humane prudence it were to trust such a rich commodity in a cock-boat that no wise Pilot will be supposed to do But if there be often changes in government Ecclesiastical which was the other consequent in the publick frame I mean and constitution of it either the certain infinity of Schisms will arise or the dangerous issues of publick inconsistence and innovation which in matters of Religion is good for nothing but to make men distrust all and come the best that can come there will be so many Church-Governments as there are humane Prudences For so if I be not mis-informed it is abroad in some Towns that have discharged Episcopacy As Saint Galles in Switzerland there the Ministers and Lay-men rule in Common but a Lay-man is President But the Consistories of Zurick and Basil are wholly consistent of Lay-men and Ministers are joyned as Assistants only and Counsellors but at Schaff-hausen the Ministers are not admitted to so much but in the Huguenot Churches of France the Ministers do all 3. In such cases where there is no power of the sword for a compulsory and confessedly of all sides there can be none in Causes and Courts Ecclesiastical if there be no opinion of Religion no derivation from a Divine authority there will be sure to be no obedience and indeed nothing but a certain publick calamitous irregularity For why should they obey Not for Conscience for there is no derivation from Divine authority Not for fear for they have not the power of the sword 4. If there be such a thing as the power of the Keys by Christ concredited to his Church for the binding and losing Delinquents and Penitents respectively on earth then there is clearly a Court erected by Christ in his Church for here is the delegation of Judges Tu Petrus vos Apostoli whatsoever ye shall bind Here is a compulsory ligaveritis Here are the causes of which they take cognizance quodcunque viz. in materiâ scandali For so it is limited Matth. 18. but it is indefinite Matth. 16. and Universal John 20. which yet is to be understood secundùm materiam subjectam in causes which are emergent from Christianity ut sic that secular jurisdictions may not be intrenched upon But of this hereafter That Christ did in this place erect a Jurisdiction and establish a government besides the evidence of fact is generally asserted by primitive exposition of the Fathers affirming that to Saint Peter the Keys were given that to the Church of all ages a power of binding and loosing might be communicated Has igitur claves dedit Ecclesiae ut quae solveret in terrâ soluta essent in coelo scil ut quisquis in Ecclesia ejus dimitti sibi peccata crederet seque ab iis correctus averteret in ejusdem Ecclesiae gremio constitutus eâdem fide atque correctione sanaretur So S. Austin And again Omnibus igitur sanctis ad Christi corpus inseparabiliter pertinentibus propter hujus vitae procellosissima gubernaculum ad liganda solvenda peccata claves regni coelorum primus Apostolorum Petrus accepit Quoniam nec ille solus sed universa Ecclesia ligat solvitque peccata Saint Peter first received the government in the power of binding and loosing But not he alone but all the Church to wit all succession and ages of the Church Vniversa Ecclesia viz. in Pastoribus solis as Saint Chrysostom In Episcopis Presbyteris as S. Hierome The whole Church as it is represented in the Bishops and Presbyters The same is affirmed by Tertullian S. Cyprian S. Chrysostom S. Hilary Primasius and generally by the Fathers of the elder and Divines of the middle ages 5. When our blessed Saviour had spoken a parable of the sudden coming of the Son of Man and commanded them therefore with diligence to stand upon their watch the Disciples asked him Speakest thou this parable to us or even to all And the Lord said Who then is that faithful and wise steward whom his Lord shall make ruler over his houshold to give them their portion of meat in due season As if he had said I speak to You for to whom else should I speak and give caution for the looking to the house in the Masters absence You are by office and designation my stewards to feed my servants to govern my house 6. In Scripture and other Writers to Feed and to Govern is all one when the office is either Political or Oeconomical or Ecclesiastical So he Fed them with a faithful and true heart and Ruled them prudently with all his power And Saint Peter joyns 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 together 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So does Saint Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rulers or Overseers in a Flock Pastors It is ordinary 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Homer i. e. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euripides calls the Governours and Guides of Chariots 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And our blessed Saviour himself is called the Great Shepherd of our souls and that we may know the intentum of that compellation it is in conjunction also with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He is therefore our Shepherd for he is our Bishop our Ruler and Overseer Since then Christ hath left Pastors or Feeders in his Church it is also as certain he hath left Rulers they being both one in name in person in office But this is of a known truth to all that understand either Laws or Languages 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Philo they that feed have the power of Princes and Rulers the thing is an undoubted truth to most men but because all are not of a mind something was necessary for confirmation of it SECT II. This Government was first committed to the Apostles by Christ. THIS Government was by immediate substitution delegated to the Apostles by Christ himself in traditione clavium in spiratione Spiritûs in missione in Pentecoste When Christ promised them the Keys he promised them power to bind and loose when he breathed on them the Holy Ghost he gave them that actually to which by the former promise they were intitled and in the Octaves of the Passion he gave them the same authority which he had received from his Father and they were the faithful and wise stewards whom the Lord made Rulers over his Houshold But I shall not labour much upon this Their founding all the Churches from East to West and so by being Fathers derived their authority from the nature of the
is granted But did the Church ever interpret Scripture to signifie Transubstantiation and say that by the force of the words of Scripture it was to be believed If she did not then to say she is a betrer Interpreter is to no purpose for though the Church be a better Interpreter than they yet they did not contradict each other and their sence might be the sence of the Church But if the Church before their time had expounded it against their sence and they not submit to it how do you reckon them Catholicks and not me For it is certain if the Church expounding Scripture did declare it to signifie Transubstantiation they did not submit themselves and their writings to the Church But if the Church had not in their times done it and hath done it since that is another consideration and we are left to remember that till Cajetans time that is till Luthers time the Church had not declared that Scripture did prove Transubstantiation and since that time we know who hath but not the Church Catholick 5. And indeed it had been strange if the Cardinals of Cambray de Sanctovio and of Rochester that Scotus and Biel should never have heard that the Church had declared that the words of Scripture did infer Transubstantiation And it is observable that all these lived long after the Article it self was said to be decreed in the Lateran where if the Article it self was declared yet it was not declared as from Scripture or if it was they did not believe it But it is an usual device amongst their writers to stifle their reason or to secure themselves with a submitting to the authority of their Church even against their argument and if any one speaks a bold truth he cannot escape the Inquisition unless he complement the Church and with a civility tell her that she knows better which in plain English is no otherwise than the fellow that did penance for saying the Priest lay with his wife he was forced to say Tongue thou liest though he was sure his eyes did not lie And this is that which Scotus said Transubstantiation without the determination of the Church is not evidently inferred from Scripture This I say is a complement and was only to secure the Frier from the Inquisitors or else was a direct stifling of his reason for it contains in it a great error or a worse danger For if the Article be not contained so in Scripture as that we are bound to believe it by his being there then the Church must make a new Article or it must remain as it was that is obscure and we uncompell'd and still at liberty For she cannot declare unless it be so she declares what is or what is not If what is not she declares a lie if what is then it is in Scripture before and then we are compelled that is we ought to have believed it If it be said it was there but in it self obscurely I answer then so it is still for if it was obscurely there and not only quoad nos or by defect on our part she cannot say it is plain there neither can she alter it for if she sees it plain then it was plain if it be obscure then she sees it obscurely for she sees it as it is or else she sees it not at all and therefore must declare it to be so that is probably obscurely peradventure but not evidently compellingly necessarily 6. So that if according to the Casuists especially of the Jesuits order it be lawful to follow the opinion of any one probable Doctor here we have five good men and true besides Ocham Bassolis and Melchior Canus to acquit us from our search after this question in Scripture But because this although it satisfies me will not satisfie them that follow the decree of Trent we will try whether this doctrine be to be found in Scripture Pede pes SECT III. Of the sixth Chapter of Saint Johns Gospel 1. IN this Chapter it is earnestly pretended that our blessed Saviour taught the mystery of Transubstantiation but with some different opinions for in this question they are divided all the way some reckon the whole Sermon as the proof of it from verse 33 to 58 though how to make them friends with Bellarmine I understand not who says Constat it is known that the Eucharist is not handled in the whole Chapter for Christ there discourses of Natural bread the miracle of the loaves of Faith and of the Incarnation is a great part of the Chapter Solùm igitur quaestio est de illis verbis Panis quem ego dabo caro mea est pro mundi vitâ de sequentibus fere ad finem capitis The question only is concerning those words verse 51. The bread which I will give is my flesh which I will give for the life of the world and so forward almost until the end of the Chapter The reason which is pretended for it is because Christ speaks in the future and therefore probably relates to the institution which was to be next year but this is a trifle for the same thing in effect is before spoken in the future tense and by way of promise Labour not for the meat that perisheth but for that meat that endureth to everlasting life which the Son of man shall give unto you The same also is affirmed by Christ under the expression of water S. John 4.14 He that drinketh the water which I shall give him shall never thirst but the water which I shall give him shall be a fountain of water springing up to life eternal The places are exactly parallel and yet as this is not meant of Baptism so neither is the other of the Eucharist but both of them of spiritual sumption of Christ. And both of them being promises to them that shall come to Christ and be united to him it were strange if they were not expressed in the future for although they always did signifie in present and in sensu currenti yet because they are of never failing truth to express them in the future is most proper that the expectation of them may appertain to all Ad natos natorum qui nascentur ab illis But then because Christ said The bread which I will give is my flesh which I will give for the life of the World to suppose this must be meant of a corporal manducation of his flesh in the holy Sacrament is as frivolous as if it were said that nothing that is spoken in the future can be figurative and if so then let it be considered what is meant by these To him that overcomes I will give to eat of the tree of life and To him that overcomes I will give to eat of the hidden Manna These promises are future but certainly figurative and therefore why it may not be so here and be understood of eating Christ spiritually or by faith I am certain there is no cause
the mystical signes recede from their nature for they abide in their proper substance figure and form and may be seen and touched c. So the humanity of Christ and a little after So that body of Christ hath the ancient form figure superscription and to speak the summe of all the substance of the body although after the resurrection it be immortal and free from all corruption Now these words spoken upon this occasion to this purpose in direct opposition to a contradicting person but casting his Article wholly upon supposition of a substantial change and opposing to him a ground contrary to his upon which only he builds his answer cannot be eluded by any little pretence Bellarmine and the lesser people from him answer that by nature he understands the exterior qualities of nature such as colour taste weight smell c. 1. I suppose this but does he mean so by Substantia too 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Does he by substance mean accidents but suppose that a while yet 2. If he had answered thus how had Theodoret confuted the Eutychians For thus says Eranistes As the bread is changed in substance into the body of Christ so is the humanity into the divinity yea but says Theodoret according to Bellarmine The substances of bread is not changed for the colour the shape the bigness and the smell remain or thus the accidents remain which I call substance for there are two sorts of substances substances and accidents and this latter sort of substances remain but not the former and so you are confuted Eranistes But what if Eranistes should reply if you say all of bread is changed excepting the accidents then my argument holds for I only contend that the substance of the humanity is changed as you say the substance of bread is To this nothing can be said unless Theodoret may have leave to answer as otherwise men must But now Theodoret answered that the substance of bread is not changed but remains still and by substance he did mean substance and not the accidents for if he had he had not spoken sence Either therefore the testimony of Theodoret remaineth unsatisfied by our adversaries or the argument of the Eutychians is unanswered by Theodoret. 3. Theodoret in these places opposes Nature to Grace and says all remains without any change but of Grace 4. He also explicates Nature by Substance so that it is a Substantial Nature he must mean 5. He distinguishes substance from form and figure and therefore by substance cannot mean form and figure as Bellarmine dreams 6. He affirms concerning the body of Christ that in the resurrection it is changed in accidents being made incorruptible and immortal but affirms that the substance remains therefore by substance he must mean as he speaks without any prodigious sence affixed to the word 7. Let me observe this by the way that the doctrine of the substantial change of bread into the body of Christ was the perswasion of the Heretick the Eutychian Eranistes but denied by the Catholick Theodoret So that if they will pretend to antiquity in this doctrine their plea is made ready and framed by the Eutychian from whom they may if they please derive the original of their doctrine or if they please from the elder Marcosites but it will be but vain to think the Eutychian did argue from thence as if it had been a Catholick ground reason we might have had to suppose it if the Catholick had not denied it But the case is plain as the Sadduces disputed with Christ about the Article of no Spirits no Resurrection though in the Church of the Jews the contrary was the more prevailing opinion so did the Eutychians upon a pretence of a Substantial conversion in the Sacrament which was then their fancy and devised to illustrate their other opinion But it was disavowed by the Catholicks 31. Gelasius was ingaged against the same persons in the same cause and therefore it will be needful to say nothing but to describe his words For they must have the same efficacy with the former and prevail equally Certè Sacramenta c. Truly the Sacraments of the body and blood of Christ which we receive are a Divine thing for that by them we are made partakers of the Divine nature and yet it ceases not to be the substance or nature of bread and wine And truly an image and similitude of the body and blood of Christ are celebrated in the action of the mysteries These are his words concerning which this only is to be considered beyond what I suggested concerning Theodoret that although the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek which we render substantia might be apt to receive divers interpretations though in his discourse he confined it to his proper meaning as appears above yet in Gelasius who was a Latin Author the word substantia is not capable of it and I think there is no example where substantia is taken for an accidental nature It may as all other words can suffer alterations by tropes and figures but never signifie grammatically any thing but it self and his usual significations and if there be among us any use of Lexicons or Vocabularies if there be any notices conveyed to men by forms of speech then we are sure in these things and there is no reason we should suffer our selves to be out-faced out of the use of our senses and our reason and our language It is usually here replied that Gelasius was an obscurer person Bishop of Caesarea and not Pope of Rome as is supposed I answer that he was Bishop of Rome that writ the book out of which these words are taken is affirmed in the Bibliotheca PP approved by the Theological faculty in Paris 1576 and Massonius de Episcopis urbis Romae in the life of Pope Gelasius saith that Pope John cited the book de duabus naturis and by Fulgentius it is so too 2. But suppose he was not Pope that he was a Catholick Bishop is not denied and that he lived above a 1000 years ago which is all I require in this business For any other Bishop may speak truth as well as the Bishop of Rome and his truth shall be of equal interest and perswasion But so strange a resolution men have taken to defend their own opinions that they will in despite of all sence and reason say something to every thing and that shall be an answer whether it can or no. 32. After all this it is needless to cite authorities from the later ages It were Indeed easie to heap up many and those not obscure either in their name or in their testimony Such as Facundus Bishop of Hermian in Africa in the year 552. in his ninth book and last Chapter written in defence of Theod. Mopsuest c. hath these words The Sacrament of his body and blood we call his body and blood not that bread is properly his body or the cup his blood
the nature of the imployment for I love not to be as S. Paul calls it one of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Disputers of this world For I suppose skill in Controversies as they are now us'd to be the worst part of learning and time is the worst spent in them and men the least benefited by them that is when the Questions are curious and impertinent intricate and unexplicable not to make men better but to make a Sect. But when the Propositions disputed are of the foundation of Faith or lead to good life or naturally do good to single persons or publick Societies then they are part of the depositum of Christianity of the Analogy of faith and for this we are by the Apostle commanded to contend earnestly and therefore Controversies may become necessary but because they are not often so but oftentimes useless and always troublesome and as an ill diet makes an ill habit of body so does the frequent use of controversies baffle the understanding and makes it crafty to deceive others it self remaining instructed in nothing but useless notions and words of contingent signification and distinctions without difference which minister to pride and contention and teach men to be pertinacious troublesome and uncharitable therefore I love them not But because by the Apostolical Rule I am tyed to do all things without murmurings as well as without disputings I consider'd it over again and found my self reliev'd by the subject matter and the grand consequent of the present Questions For in the present affair the case is not so as in the others here the Questions are such that the Church of Rome declares them to reach a◠far as eternity and damn all that are not of their opinions and the Protestants have much more reason to fear concerning the Papists such who are not excus'd by ignorance that their condition is very sad and deplorable and that it is charity to snatch them as a brand from the fire and indeed the Church of Rome maintains Propositions which if the Ancient Doctors of the Church may be believ'd are apt to separate from God I instance in their superaddition of Articles and Propositions derived only from a pretended tradition and not contain'd in Scripture Now the doing of this is a great sin and a great danger Adoro Scripturae plenitudinem Si non est scriptum timeat vae illud adjicientibus detrahentibus destinatum said Tertullian I adore the fulness of Scripture and if it be not written let Hermogenus fear the woe that is destin'd to them that detract from or add to it S. Basil says Without doubt it is a most manifest argument of infidelity and a most certain sign of pride to introduce any thing that is not written in the Scriptures our blessed Saviour having said My sheep hear my voice and the voice of strangers they will not hear and to detract from Scriptures or add any thing to the Faith that is not there is most vehemently forbidden by the Apostle saying If it be but a mans Testament nemo superordinat no man adds to it And says also This was the Will of the Testator And Theophilus Alexandrinus says plainly It is the part of a Devillish spirit to think any thing to be Divine that is not in the authority of the holy Scriptures and therefore S. Athanasius affirms that the Catholicks will neither speak nor endure to hear any thing in Religion that is a stranger to Scripture it being immodestiae vaecordia an evil heart of immodesty to speak those things which are not written Now let any man judge whether it be not our duty and a necessary work of charity and the proper office of our Ministery to perswade our charges from the immodesty of an evil heart from having a Devillish spirit from doing that which is vehemently forbidden by the Apostle from infidelity and pride and lastly from that eternal Woe which is denounc'd against them that add other words and doctrines than what is contain'd in the Scriptures and say Dominus dixit The Lord hath said it and he hath not said it If we had put these severe censures upon the Popish doctrine of Tradition we should have been thought uncharitable but because the holy Fathers do so we ought to be charitable and snatch our Charges from the ambient flame And thus it is in the question of Images Dubium non est quin Religio nulla sit ubicunque simulacrum est said Lactantius Without all peradventure where ever an Image is meaning for worship there is no Religion and that we ought rather to die than pollute our Faith with such impieties said Origen It is against the Law of Nature it being expresly forbidden by the second Commandment as Irenaeus affirms Tertullian Cyprian and S. Augustine and therefore is it not great reason we should contend for that Faith which forbids all worship of Images and oppose the superstition of such Guides who do teach their people to give them veneration to prevaricate the Moral Law and the very Law of Nature and do that which whosoever does has no Religion We know Idolatry is a damnable sin and we also know that the Roman Church with all the artifices she could use never can justifie her self or acquit the common practices from Idolatry and yet if it were but suspicious that it is Idolatry it were enough to awaken us for God is a jealous God and will not endure any such causes of suspicion and motives of jealousie I instance but once more The Primitive Church did excommunicate them that did not receive the holy Sacrament in both kinds and S. Ambrose says that he who receives the Mystery other ways than Christ appointed that is but in one kind when he hath appointed it in two is unworthy of the Lord and he cannot have Devotion Now this thing we ought not to suffer that our people by so doing should remain unworthy of the Lord and for ever be indevout or cozen'd with a false shew of devotion or fall by following evil Guides into the sentence of Excommunication These matters are not trifling and when we see these errors frequently taught and own'd as the only true Religion and yet are such evils which the Fathers say are the way of damnation we have reason to hope that all wise and good men lovers of souls will confess that we are within the circles of our duty when we teach our people to decline the crooked ways and to walk in the ways of Scripture and Christianity But we have observed amongst the generality of the Irish such a declension of Christianity so great credulity to believe every superstitious story such confidence in vanity such groundless pertinacy such vicious lives so little sense of true Religion and the fear of God so much care to obey the Priests and so little to obey God such intolerable ignorance such fond Oaths and manners of swearing thinking
found out a remedy for those of old so he will also for the poor misled people of Ireland and will take away the evil minds or the opportunities of the Adversaries hindring the people from Instruction and make way that the Truths we have here taught may approach to their ears and sink into their hearts and make them wise unto Salvation Amen A DISSUASIVE FROM POPERY To the People of IRELAND PART I. The INTRODVCTION THE Questions of difference between Our Churches and the Church of Rome have been so often disputed and the evidences on both sides so often produc'd that to those who are strangers to the present constitution of affairs it may seem very unnecessary to say them over again and yet it will seem almost impossible to produce any new matter or if we could it will not be probable that what can be newly alledged can prevail more than all that which already hath been so often urged in these Questions But we are not deterr'd from doing our duty by any such considerations as knowing that the same Medicaments are with success applied to a returning or an abiding Ulcer and the Preachers of God's Word must for ever be ready to put the People in mind of such things which they already have heard and by the same Scriptures and the same Reasons endeavour to destroy their sin or prevent their danger and by the same word of God to exstirpate those errors which have had opportunity in the time of our late disorders to spring up and grow stronger not when the Keepers of the field slept but when they were wounded and their hands cut off and their mouths stopp'd lest they should continue or proceed to do the work of God thoroughly A little warm Sun and some indulgent showers of a softer Rain have made many weeds of erroneous Doctrine to take root greatly and to spread themselves widely and the Bigots of the Roman Church by their late importune boldness and indiscreet forwardness in making Proselytes have but too manifestly declar'd to all the World that if they were rerum potiti Masters of our affairs they would suffer nothing to grow but their own Colocynths and Gourds And although the Natural remedy for this were to take away that impunity upon the account of which alone they do encrease yet because we shall never be Authors of such Counsels but confidently rely upon God the Holy Scriptures right Reason and the most venerable and prime Antiquity which are the proper defensatives of truth for its support and maintenance yet we must not conceal from the People committed to our charges the great evils to which they are tempted by the Roman Emissaries that while the King and the Parliament take care to secure all the publick interests by instruments of their own we also may by the word of our proper Ministery endeavour to stop the progression of such errors which we know to be destructive of Christian Religion and consequently dangerous to the interest of Souls In this procedure although we shall say some things which have not been alwayes plac'd before their eyes and others we shall represent with a fittingness to their present necessities and all with Charity too and zeal for their souls yet if we were to say nothing but what hath been often said already we are still doing the work of God and repeating his voice and by the same remedies curing the same diseases and we only wait for the blessing of God prospering that importunity which is our duty according to the advice of Solomon In the Morning sow thy seed and in the Evening withhold not thy hand for thou knowest not whether shall prosper either this or that or whether they both shall be alike good CHAP. I. The Doctrine of the Roman Church in the Controverted Articles is neither Catholick Apostolick nor Primitive SECT I. IT was the challenge of Saint Augustine to the Donatists who as the Church of Rome does at this day inclos'd the Catholick Church within their own circuits Ye say that Christ is Heir of no Lands but where Donatus is Co-heir Read this to us out of the Law and the Prophets out of the Psalms out of the Gospel it self or out of the Letters of the Apostles Read it thence and we believe it Plainly directing us to the Fountains of our Faith the Old and New Testament the words of Christ and the words of the Apostles For nothing else can be the Foundation of our Faith whatsoever came in after these foris est it belongs not unto Christ To these we also add not as Authors or Finishers but as Helpers of our Faith and Heirs of the Doctrine Apostolical the Sentiments and Catholick Doctrine of the Church of God in the Ages next after the Apostles Not that we think them or our selves bound to every private Opinion even of a Primitive Bishop and Martyr but that we all acknowledge that the whole Church of God kept the Faith entire and transmitted faithfully to the after-Ages the whole faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the form of doctrine and sound words which was at first delivered to the Saints and was defective in nothing that belong'd unto salvation and we believe that those Ages sent millions of Saints to the bosome of Christ and seal'd the true Faith with their lives and with their deaths and by both gave testimony unto Jesus and had from him the Testimony of his Spirit And this method of procedure we now chuse not only because to them that know well how to use it to the Sober and Moderate the Peaceable and the Wise it is the best the most certain visible and tangible most humble and satisfactory but also because the Church of Rome does with greatest noises pretend her Conformity to Antiquity Indeed the present Roman Doctrines which are in difference were invisible and unheard-of in the first and best Antiquity and with how ill success their Quotations are out of the Fathers of the first three Ages every inquiring Man may easily discern But the noises therefore which they make are from the Writings of the succeeding Ages where secular interest did more prevail and the Writings of the Fathers were vast and voluminous full of controversie and ambiguous sences fitted to their own times and questions full of proper Opinions and such variety of sayings that both sides eternally and inconfutably shall bring sayings for themselves respectively Now although things being thus it will be impossible for them to conclude from the sayings of a number of Fathers that their Doctrine which they would prove thence was the Catholick Doctrine of the Church because any number that is less than all does not prove a Catholick consent yet the clear sayings of one or two of these Fathers truly alledged by us to the contrary will certainly prove that what many of them suppose it do affirm and which but two or three as good Catholicks as the other do deny was not then
the Fathers were not against them what need these Arts Why should they use them thus Their own expurgatory indices are infinite testimony against them both that they do so and that they need it But besides these things we have thought it fit to represent in one aspect some of their chief Doctrines of difference from the Church of England and make it evident that they are indeed new and brought into the Church first by way of opinion and afterwards by power and at last by their own authority decreed into Laws and Articles SECT II. FIRST We alledge that that this very power of making new Articles is a Novelty and expresly against the Doctrine of the Primitive Church and we prove it first by the words of the Apostle saying If we or an Angel from Heaven shall preach unto you any other Gospel viz. in whole or in part for there is the same reason of them both than that which we have preached let him be Anathema and secondly by the sentence of the Fathers in the third General Council that at Ephesus That it should not be lawful for any Man to publish or compose another Faith or Creed than that which was defin'd by the Nicene Council and that whosoever shall dare to compose or offer any such to any Persons willing to be converted from Paganism Judaism or Heresie if they were Bishops or Clerks they should be depos'd if Lay-men they should be accursed And yet in the Church of Rome Faith and Christianity increase like the Moon Bromyard complain'd of it long since and the mischief increases daily They have now a new Article of Faith ready for the stamp which may very shortly become necessary to salvation we mean that of the immaculate conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary Whether the Pope be above a Council or no we are not sure whether it be an Article of Faith amongst them or not It is very near one if it be not Bellarmine would fain have us believe that the Council of Constance approving the Bull of Pope Martin the fifth declar'd for the Popes Supremacy But John Gerson who was at the Council sayes that the Council did abate those heights to which flattery had advanc'd the Pope and that before that Council they spoke such great things of the Pope which afterwards moderate Men durst not speak but yet some others spake them so confidently before it that he that should then have spoken to the contrary would hardly have escap'd the note of Heresie and that these Men continued the same pretensions even after the Council But the Council of Basil decreed for the Council against the Pope and the Council of Lateran under Leo the tenth decreed for the Pope against the Council So that it is cross and pile and whether for a penny when it can be done it is now a known case it shall become an Article of Faith But for the present it is a probationary Article and according to Bellarmine's expression is serè de fide it is almost an Article of Faith they want a little age and then they may go alone But the Council of Trent hath produc'd a strange new Article but it is sine controversiâ credendum it must be believ'd and must not be controverted that although the ancient Fathers did give the Communion to Infants yet they did not believe it necessary to salvation Now this being a matter of fact whether they did or did not believe it every man that reads their writings can be able to inform himself and besides that it is strange that this should be determin'd by a Council and determin'd against evident truth it being notorious that divers of the Fathers did say it is necessary to salvation the decree it self is beyond all bounds of modesty and a strange pretension of Empire over the Christian belief But we proceed to other Instances SECT III. THE Roman Doctrine of Indulgences was the first occasion of the great change and Reformation of the Western Churches begun by the Preachings of Martyn Luther and others and besides that it grew to that intolerable abuse that it became a shame to it self and a reproach to Christendom it was also so very an Innovation that their great Antoninus confesses that concerning them we have nothing expresly either in the Scriptures or in the sayings of the ancient Doctors And the same is affirmed by Sylvester Prierias Bishop Fisher of Rochester sayes that in the beginning of the Church there was no use of Indulgences and that they began after the people were a while affrighted with the torments of Purgatory and many of the School-men confess that the use of Indulgences began in the time of Pope Alexander the third towards the end of the twelfth Century but Agrippa imputes the beginning of them to Boniface the eighth who liv'd in the Reign of King Edward the first of England 1300. years after Christ. But that in his time the first Jubilee was kept we are assur'd by Crantzius This Pope lived and died with great infamy and therefore was not likely from himself to transfer much honour and reputation to the new institution But that about this time Indulgences began is more than probable much before it is certain they were not For in the whole Canon Law written by Gratian and in the sentences of Peter Lombard there is nothing spoken of Indulgences Now because they liv'd in the time of Pope Alexander the third if he had introduc'd them and much rather if they had been as ancient as Saint Gregory as some vainly and weakly pretend from no greater authority than their own Legends it is probable that these great Men writing Bodies of Divinity and Law would have made mention of so considerable a Point and so great a part of the Roman Religion as things are now order'd If they had been Doctrines of the Church then as they are now it is certain they must have come under their cognisance and discourses Now lest the Roman Emissaries should deceive any of the good Sons of the Church we think it fit to acquaint them that in the Primitive Church when the Bishops impos'd severe penances and that they were almost quite perform'd and a great cause of pity intervened or danger of death or an excellent repentance or that the Martyrs interceded the Bishop did sometimes indulge the penitent and relax some of the remaining parts of his penance and according to the example of Saint Paul in the case of the incestuous Corinthian gave them ease lest they should be swallowed up with too much sorrow But the Roman Doctrine of Indulgences is wholly another thing nothing of it but the abused name remains For in the Church of Rome they now pretend that there is an infinite of degrees of Christ's merits and satisfaction beyond what is necessary for the salvation of his servants and for fear Christ should not have enough the Saints have a surplusage of
merits or at least of satisfactions more than they can spend or themselves do need and out of these the Church hath made her a treasure a kind of poor-mans box and out of this a power to take as much as they list to apply to the poor souls in Purgatory who because they did not satisfie for their venial sins or perform all their penances which were imposed or which might have been imposed and which were due to be paâ—d to God for the temporal pains reserved upon them after he had forgiven them the guilt of their deadly sins are forc'd sadly to roar in pains not inferiour to the pains of Hell excepting only that that they are not eternal That this is the true state of their Article of Indulgences we appeal to Bellarmine Now concerning their new foundation of Indulgences the first stone of it was laid by Pope Clement the sixth in his extravagant Vnigenitus de poenitentiis remissionibus A. D. 1350. This Constitution was published fifty years after the first Jubilee and was a new device to bring in Customers to Rome at the second Jubilee which was kept in Rome in this Popes time What ends of profit and interest it serv'd we are not much concern'd to enquire but this we know that it had not yet passed into a Catholick Doctrine for it was disputed against by Franciscus de Mayronis and Durandus not long before this extravagant and that it was not rightly form'd to their purposes till the stirs in Germany rais'd upon the occasion of Indulgences made Leo the tenth set his Clerks on work to study the point and make something of it But as to the thing it self it is so wholly new so meerly devis'd and forged by themselves so newly created out of nothing from great mistakes of Scripture and dreams of shadows from Antiquity that we are to admonish our charges that they cannot reasonably expect many sayings of the Primitive Doctors against them any more than against the new fancies of the Quakers which were born but yesterday That which is not cannot be numbred and that which was not could not be confuted But the perfect silence of Antiquity in this whole matter is an abundant demonstration that this new nothing was made in the later Laboratories of Rome For as Durandus said the Holy Fathers Ambrose Hillary Hierom Augustine speak nothing of Indulgences And whereas it is said that Saint Gregory six hundred years after Christ gave Indulgences at Rome in the stations Magister Angularis who lived about two hundred years since sayes he never read of any such any where and it is certain there is no such thing in the Writings of Saint Gregory nor in any History of that Age or any other that is authentick and we could never see any History pretended for it by the Roman Writers but a Legend of Ledgerus brought to us the other day by Surius which is so ridiculous and weak that even their own parties dare not avow it as true story and therefore they are fain to make use of Thomas Aquinas upon the Sentences and Altisiodorensis for story and record And it were strange that if this power of giving Indulgences to take off the punishment reservâ—d by God after the sin is pardoned were given by Christ to his Church that no one of the ancient Doctors should tell any thing of it insomuch that there is no one Writer of authority and credit not the more ancient Doctors we have named nor those who were much later Rupertus Tuitiensis Anselm or Saint Bernard ever took notice of it but it was a Doctrine wholly unknown to the Church for about one thousand two hundred years after Christ and Cardinal Cajetan told Pope Adrian the sixth that to him that readeth the Decretals it plainly appears that an Indulgence is nothing else but an absolution from that penance which the Confessor hath imposed and therefore can be nothing of that which is now adayes pretended True it is that the Canonical penances were about the time of Burchard lessen'd and alter'd by commutations and the ancient Discipline of the Church in imposing penances was made so loose that the Indulgence was more than the Imposition and began not to be an act of mercy but remisness and absolution without amends It became a Trumpet and a Leavy for the Holy War in Pope Vrban the Seconds time for he gave a plenary Indulgence and remission of all sins to them that should go and fight against the Sarazens and yet no man could tell how much they were the better for these Indulgences for concerning the value of Indulgences the complaint is both old and doubtful said Pope Adrian and he cites a famous gloss which tells of four Opinions all Catholick and yet vastly differing in this particular but the Summa Angelica reckons seven Opinions concerning what that penalty is which is taken off by Indulgences No man could then tell and the Point was but in the infancy and since that they have made it what they please but it is at last turn'd into a Doctrine and they have devised new Propositions as well as they can to make sence of it and yet it is a very strange thing a solution not an absolution it is the distinction of Bellarmine that is the sinner is let to go free without punishment in this World or in the world to come and in the end it grew to be that which Christendom could not suffer a heap of Doctrines without Grounds of Scripture or Catholick Tradition and not only so but they have introduc'd a way of remitting sins that Christ and his Apostles taught not a way destructive to the repentance and remission of sins which was preached in the Name of Jesus it brought into the Church false and fantastick hopes a hope that will make men asham'd a hope that does not glorifie the merits and perfect satisfaction of Christ a doctrine expresly dishonourable to the full and free pardon given us by God through Jesus Christ a practice that supposes a new bunch of Keyes given to the Church besides that which the Apostles receiv'd to open and shut the Kingdom of Heaven a Doctrine that introduces pride among the Saints and advances the opinion of their works beyond the measures of Christ who taught us That when we have done all that is commanded we are unprofitable servants and therefore certainly cannot supererogate or do more than what is infinitely recompenc'd by the Kingdom of Glory to which all our doings and all our sufferings are not worthy to be compar'd especially since the greatest Saint cannot but say with David Enter not into judgment with thy servant for in thy sight no flesh living can be justified It is a practice that hath turn'd Penances into a Fair and the Court of Conscience into a Lombard and the labours of Love into the labours of Pilgrimages superstitious and useless wandrings from place to
thanks for them or praying to them but a direct praying for them even for holy Bishops Confessors Martyrs that God meaning in much mercy would remember them that is make them to rest in the bosom of Abraham in the Region of the living as Saint James expresses it And in the Liturgies of the Churches of Egypt attributed to Saint Basil Gregory Nazianzen and Saint Cyril the Churches pray Be mindful O Lord of thy Saints vouchsafe to receive all thy Saints which have pleas'd thee from the beginning our Holy Fathers the Patriarchs Prophets Apostles Martyrs Confessors Preachers Evangelists and all the Souls of the Just which have died in the faith but chiefly of the holy glorious and perpetual Virgin Mary the Mother of God of Saint John Baptist the Forerunner and Martyr Saint Stephen the first Deacon and first Martyr Saint Mark Apostle Evangelist and Martyr Of the same spirit were all the Ancient Liturgies or Missals and particularly that under the name of Saint Chrysostom is most full to this purpose Let us pray to the Lord for all that before time have laboured and performed the holy Offices of Priesthood For the memory and remission of sins of them that built this holy House and of all them that have slept in hope of the resurrection and eternal life in thy society of the Orthodox Fathers and our Brethren 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 O thou lover of men pardon them And again Moreover we offer unto thee this reasonable service for all that rest in Faith our Ancestors Fathers Patriarchs Prophets and Apostles Preachers Evangelists Martyrs c. especially the most holy and unspotted Virgin Mary and after concludes with this prayer Remember them all who have slept in hope of Resurrection to Eternal life and make them to rest where the light of thy countenance looks over them Add to these if you please the Greek Mass of Saint Peter To them O Lord and to all that rest in Christ we pray that thou indulge a place of refreshing light and peace So that nothing is clearer than that in the Greek Canon they prayed for the souls of the best of all the Saints whom yet because no man believes they ever were in Purgatory it follows that prayer for the dead us'd by the Ancients does not prove the Roman Purgatory To these add the Doctrine and Practice of the Greek Fathers Dionysius speaking of a person deceased whom the Ministers of the Church had publickly pronounced to be a happy man and verily admitted into the society of the Saints that have been from the beginning of the world yet the Bishop prayed for him That God would forgive him all the sins which he had committed through humane infirmity and bring him into the light and region of the living into the bosoms of Abraham Isaac and Jacob where pain and sorrow and sighing have no place To the same purpose is that of Saint Gregory Nazianzen in his Funeral Oration upon his Brother Caesarius of whom he had expresly declar'd his belief that he was rewarded with those honours which did befit a new created soul yet he presently prayes for his soul Now O Lord receive Caesarius I hope I have said enough concerning the Greek Church their Doctrine and practice in this particular and I desire it may be observed that there is no greater testimony of the Doctrine of a Church than their Liturgy Their Doctors may have private Opinions which are not against the Doctrine of the Church but what is put into their publick devotions and consign'd in their Liturgies no man scruples it but it is the Confession and Religion of the Church But now that I may make my Reader some amends for his trouble in reading the trifling Objections of these Roman Adversaries and my Defences I shall also for the greater conviction of my Adversaries shew that they would not have oppos'd my Affirmation in this particular if they had understood their own Mass-book for it was not only thus from the beginning until now in the Greek Church but it is so to this very day in the Latin Church In the old Latin Missal we have this prayer Suscipe sancta Trinitas hanc oblationem quam tibi offerimus pro omnibus in tui nominis confessione defunctis ut te dextram auxilii tui porrigente vitae perennis requiem habeant à poenis impiorum segregati semper in tuae laudis laetitia perseverent And in the very Canon of the Mass which these Gentlemen I suppose if they be Priests cannot be ignorant in any part of they pray Memento Domine famulorum famularumque tuarum qui nos praecesserunt cum signo fidei dormiunt in somno pacis Ipsis Domine omnibus in Christo quiescentibus locum refrigerii lucis pacis ut indulgeas deprecamur Unless all that are at rest in Christ go to Purgatory it is plain that the Church of Rome prayes for Saints who by the confession of all sides never were in Purgatory I could bring many more testimonies if they were needful but I summ up this particular with the words of Saint Austin Non sunt praetermittendae supplicationes pro spiritibus mortuorum quas faciendas pro omnibus in Christiana Catholica societate defunctis etiam tacitis nominibus quorumque sub generali commemoratione suscepit Ecclesia The Church prayes for all persons that died in the Christian and Catholick Faith And therefore I wonder how it should drop from Saint Austin's Pen Injuriam facit Martyri qui orat pro Martyre But I suppose he meant it only in case the prayer was made for them as if they were in an uncertain state and so it is probable enough but else his words were not only against himself in other places but against the whole practice of the Ancient Catholick Church I remember that when it was ask'd of Pope Innocent by the Archbishop of Lyons why the Prayer that was in the old Missal for the soul of Pope Leo Annue nobis Domine animae famuli tui Leonis haec prosit oblatio it came to be chang'd into Annue nobis Domine ut intercessione famuli tui Leonis haec prosit oblatio Pope Innocent answered him that who chang'd it or when he knew not but he knew how that is he knew the reason of it because the Authority of the Holy Scripture said he does injury to a Martyr that prayes for a Martyr the same thing is to be done for the like reason concerning all other Saints The good man had heard the saying somewhere but being little us'd to the Bible he thought it might be there because it was a pretty saying However though this change was made in the Mass-books and prayer for the soul of Saint Leo was chang'd into a prayer to Saint Leo and the Doctors went about to defend it as well as they could yet because they did it so pitifully they had reason to
be asham'd of it and in the Missal reformed by order of the Council of Trent it is put out again and the prayer for Saint Leo put in again That by these offices of holy attonement viz. the celebration of the Holy Sacrament a blessed reward may accompany him and the gifts of thy grace may be obtain'd for us Another Argument was us'd in the Dissuasive against the Roman Doctrine of Purgatory viz. How is Purgatory a Primitive and Catholick Doctrine when generally the Greek and many of the Latin Fathers taught that the souls departed in some exterior place expect the day of judgment but that no soul enters into the supreme Heaven or the place of Eternal bliss till the day of judgment but at that day say many of them all must pass through the universal fire To these purposes respectively the words of very many Fathers are brought by Sixtus Senensis to all which being so evident and apparent the Gentlemen that write against the Dissuasive are pleas'd not to say one word but have left the whole fabrick of the Roman Purgatory to shift for it self against the battery of so great Authorities only one of them striving to find some fault sayes that the Dissuader quotes Sixtus Senensis as saying That Pope John the 22. not only taught and declar'd the Doctrine that before the day of judgment the souls of men are kept in certain receptacles but commanded it to be held by all as saith Adrian in 4. Sent. when Sixtus Senensis saith not so of Pope John c. but only reports the opinion of others To which I answer that I did not quote Senensis as saying any such thing of his own Authority For besides that in the body of the discourse there is no mention at all of John 22. in the margent also it is only said of Sixtus Enumerat S. Jacobum Apostolum Johannem Pontif. Rom. but I add of my own afterwards that Pope John not only taught and declar'd that sentence but commanded it to be held by all men as saith Adrian Now although in his narrative of it Adrian begins with novissime fertur it is reported yet Senensis himself when he had said Pope John is said to have decreed this he himself adds that Ocham and Pope Adrian are witnesses of this Decree 2. Adrian is so far a witness of it that he gives the reason of the same even because the University of Paris refus'd to give promotion to them who denied or did refuse to promise for ever to cleave to that Opinion 3. Ocham is so fierce a witness of it that he wrote against Pope John the 22. for the Opinion 4. Though Senensis be not willing to have it believed yet all that he can say against it is that apud probatos scriptores non est Vndequaque certum 5. Yet he brings not one testimony out of Antiquity against this charge against Pope John only he sayes that Pope Benedict the Eleventh affirms that John being prevented by death could not finish the Decree 6. But this thing was not done in a corner the Acts of the University of Paris and their fierce adhering to the Decree were too notorious 7. And after all this it matters not whether it be so or no when it is confessed that so many Ancient Fathers expresly teach the Doctrine contrary to the Roman as it is this day and yet the Roman Doctors care not what they say insomuch that Saint Bernard having fully and frequently taught That no souls go to Heaven till they all go neither the Saints without the common people nor the spirit without the flesh that there are three states of souls one in the tabernacles viz. of our bodies a second in atriis or outward Courts and a third in the House of God Alphonsus à Castro admonishes that this sentence is damn'd and Sixtus Senensis adds these words which thing also I do not deny yet I suppose he ought to be excus'd ob ingentem numerum illustrium Ecclesiae patrum for the great number of the illustrious Fathers of the Church who before by their testimony did seem to give authority to this Opinion But that the present Doctrine of the Roman Purgatory is but a new Article of Faith is therefore certain because it was no Article of Faith in Saint Austin's time for he doubted of it And to this purpose I quoted in the margent two places of Saint Austin The words I shall now produce because they will answer for themselves In the 68. Chapter of his Manual to Laurentius he takes from the Church of Rome their best Armour in which they trusted and expounds the words of Saint Paul He shall be saved yet so as by fire to mean only the loss of such pleasant things as most delighted them in this world And in the beginning of the next Chapter he adds That such a thing may also be done after this life is not incredible and whether it be so or no it may be inquir'd aut inveniri aut latere and either be found or lie hid Now what is that which thus may or may not be found out This that some faithful by how much more or less they lov'd perishing goods by so much sooner or later they shall be sav'd by a certain Purgatory fire This is it which Saint Austin sayes is not incredible only it may be inquir'd whether it be so or no. And if these be not the words of doubting it is not incredible such a thing may be it may be inquir'd after it may be found to be so or it may never be found but lie hid then words signifie nothing yea but the doubting of Saint Austin does not relate to the matter or question of Purgatory but to the manner of the particular punishment viz. Whether or no that pain of being troubled for the loss of their goods be not a part of the Purgatory flames sayes E. W. A goodly excuse as if Saint Austin had troubled himself with such an impertinent Question whether the poor souls in their infernal flames be not troubled that they left their lands and money behind them Indeed it is possible they might wish some of the waters of their Springs or Fish-ponds to cool their tongues but Saint Austin surely did not suspect that the tormented Ghosts were troubled they had not brought their best clothes with them and money in their purses This is too pitiful and strain'd an Answer the case being so evidently clear that the thing Saint Austin doubted of was since there was to some of the faithful who yet were too voluptuous or covetous persons a Purgatory in this world even the loss of their Goods which they so lov'd and therefore being lost so grieved for whether or no they should not also meet with another Purgatory after death that is whether besides the punishment suffered here they should not be punish'd after death how by grieving for the loss
of their Goods Ridiculous What then Saint Austin himself tells us by so much as they lov'd their goods more or less by so much sooner or later they shall be sav'd And what he said of this kind of sin viz. too much worldliness with the same Reason he might suppose of others this he thought possible but of this he was not sure and therefore it was not then an Article of Faith and though now the Church of Rome hath made it so yet it appears that it was not so from the beginning but is part of their new fashion'd faith And E. W. striving so impossibly and so weakly to avoid the pressure of this Argument should do well to consider whether he have not more strained his Conscience than the words of Saint Austin But this matter must not pass thus Saint Austin repeats this whole passage verbatim in his Answer to the 8. Quest. of Dulcitius Quest. 1. and still answers in this and other appendant Questions of the same nature viz. Whether Prayers for the dead be available c. Quest. 2. And whether upon the instant of Christ's appearing he will pass to judgment Quest 3. In these things which we have describ'd our and the infirmity of others may be so exercis'd and instructed nevertheless that they pass not for Canonical Authority And in the Answer to the first Question he speaks in the style of a doubtful person Whether men suffer such things in this life only or also such certain judgments follow even after this life this Understanding of this sentence is not as I suppose abhorrent from truth The same words he also repeats in his Book de fide operibus Chap. 16. There is yet another place of S. Austin in which it is plain he still is a doubting person in the Question of Purgatory His sence is this After the death of the body until the resurrection if in the interval the spirits of the dead are said to suffer that kind of fire which they feel not who had not such manners and loves in their life-time that their wood hay and stubble ought to be consum'd but others feel who brought such buildings along with them whether there only or whether here and there or whether therefore here that it might not be there that they feel a fire of a transitory tribulation burning their secular buildings though escaping from damnation I reprove it not for peradventure it is true So Saint Austin's peradventure yea is alwayes peradventure nay and will the Bigots of the Roman Church be content with such a confession of faith as this of Saint Austin in the present Article I believe not But now after all this I will not deny but Saint Austin was much inclin'd to believe Purgatory fire and therefore I shall not trouble my self to answer the citations to that purpose which Bellarmine and from him these Transcribers bring out of this Father though most of them are drawn out of Apocryphal spurious and suspected pieces as his Homilies de S. S. c. yet that which I urge is this that Saint Austin did not esteem this to be a Doctrine of the Church no Article of Faith but a disputable Opinion and yet though he did incline to the wrong part of the Opinion yet it is very certain that he sometimes speaks expresly against this Doctrine and other times speaks things absolutely inconsistent with the Opinion of Purgatory which is more than an Argument of his confessed doubting for it is a declaration that he understood nothing certain in this affair but that the contrary to his Opinion was the more probable And this appears in these few following words Saint Austin hath these words Some suffer temporary punishments in this life only others after death others both now and then Bellarmine and from him Diaphanta urges this as a great proof of Saint Austin's Doctrine But he destroyes it in the words immediately following and makes it useless to the hypothesis of the Roman Church This shall be before they suffer the last and severest judgment meaning as Saint Austin frequently does such sayings of the General conflagration at the end of the world But whether he does so or no yet he adds But all of them come not into the everlasting punishments which after the Judgment shall be to them who after death suffer the temporary By which Doctrine of Saint Austin viz. that those who are in his Purgatory shall many of them be damn'd and the temporary punishments after death do but usher in the Eternal after judgment he destroyes the salt of the Roman fire who imagines that all that go to Purgatory shall be sav'd Therefore this testimony of Saint Austin as it is nothing for the avail of the Roman Purgatory so by the appendage it is much against it which Coquaeus Torrensis and especially Cardinal Perron observing have most violently corrupted these words by falsely translating them So Perron Tous ceux qui souffrent des peines temporelles apres lâ— mort ne viennent pas aux peines Eternelles qui auront tien apres le judgement which reddition is expresly against the sence of Saint Austin's words 2. But another hypothesis there is in Saint Austin to which without dubitation he does peremptorily adhere which I before intimated viz. that although he admit of Purgatory pains after this life yet none but such as shall be at the day of Judgment Whoever therefore desires to avoid the eternal pains let him be not only baptiz'd but also justified in Christ and truly pass from the Devil unto Christ. But let him not think that there shall be any Purgatory pains but before that last and dreadful Judgment meaning not only that there shall be none to cleanse them after the day of Judgment but that then at the approach of that day the General fire shall try and purge And so himself declares his own sence All they that have not Christ in the foundation are argued or reproved when in the day of Judgment but they that have Christ in the foundation are chang'd that is purg'd who build upon this foundation wood hay stubble So that in the day of Judgment the trial and escape shall be for then shall the trial and the condemnation be But yet more clear are his words in other places So at the setting of the Sun that is at the end viz. of the world the day of judgment is signified by that fire dividing the carnal which are to be sav'd by fire and those who are to be damned in the fire nothing is plainer than that Saint Austin understood that those who are to be sav'd so as by fire are to be sav'd by passing through the fire at the day of judgment that was his Opinion of Purgatory And again out of these things which are spoken it seems more evidently to appear that there shall be certain purgatory pains of some persons in that judgment For what thing else
can be understood where it is said who shall endure the day of his coming c. 3. Saint Austin speaks things expresly against the Doctrine of Purgatory Know ye that when the soul is pluck'd from the body presently it is plac'd in Paradise according to its good deservings or else for her sins is thrown headlong in inferni Tartara into the hell of the damned for I know not well how else to render it And again the soul retiring is receiv'd by Angels and plac'd either in the bosom of Abraham if she be faithful or in the custody of the infernal prison if it be sinful until the appointed day comes in which she shall receive her body pertinent to which is that of Saint Austin if he be Author of that excellent Book de Eccles. dogmatibus which is imputed to him After the ascension of our Lord to the Heavens the souls of all the Saints are with Christ and going from the body go unto Christ expecting the resurrection of their body But I shall insist no further upon these things I suppose it very apparent that Saint Austin was no way confident of his fancy of Purgatory and that if he had fancied right yet it was not the Roman Purgatory that he fancied There is only one Objection which I know of which when I have clear'd I shall pass on to other things Saint Austin speaking of such who have liv'd a middle kind of an indifferent pious life saith Constat autem c. but it is certain that such before the day of judgment being purg'd by temporal pains which their spirits suffer when they have receiv'd their bodies shall not be deliver'd to the punishment of Eternal fire here is a positive determination of the Article by a word of confidence and a full certificate and therefore Saint Austin in this Article was not a doubting person To this I answer it may be he was confident here but it lasted not long this fire was made of straw and soon went out for within two Chapters after he expresly doubts as I have provâ—d 2. These words may refer to the purgatory fire at the general conflagration of the world and if they be so referred it is most agreeable to his other sentiments 3. This Constat or decretory phrase and some lines before or after it are not in the old Books of Bruges and Colein nor in the Copies printed at Friburg and Ludovicus Vives supposes they were a marginal note crept since into the Text. Now this Objection being remov'd there remains no ground to deny that Saint Austin was a doubting person in the Article of Purgatory And this Erasmus expresly affirm'd of him and the same is said of him by Hofmeister but modestly and against his doubting in his Enchiridion he brings only a testimony in behalf of prayer for the dead which is nothing to the purpose and this is also sufficiently noted by Alphonsus à Castro and by Barnesius Well! but suppose Saint Austin did doubt of Purgatory This is no warranty to the Church of England for she does not doubt of it as Saint Austin did but plainly condemns it So one of my Adversaries objects To which I answer That the Church of England may the rather condemn it because Saint Austin doubted of it for if it be no Catholick Doctrine it is but a School point and without prejudice to the Faith may be rejected But 2. I suppose the Church of England would not have troubled her self with the Doctrine if it had been left as Saint Austin left it that is but as a meer uncertain Opinion but when the wrong end of the Opinion was taken and made an Article of Faith and damnation threatned to them that believed it not she had reason to consider it and finding it to be chaff wholly to scatter it away 3. The Church of England is not therefore to be blamed if in any case she see more than Saint Austin did and proceed accordingly for it is certain the Church of Rome does decree against divers things of which Saint Austin indeed did not doubt but affirm'd confidently I instance in the necessity of communicating Infants and the matter of appeals to Rome The next Authority to be examin'd is that of Otho Frisingensis concerning which there is a heavy quarrel against the Dissuasive for making him to speak of a Purgatory before whereas he speaks of one after the day of Judgment with a Quidam asserunt some affirm it viz. that there is a place of Purgatory after death nay but you are deceiv'd sayes E. W. and the rest of the Adversaries he means that some affirm there is a place of Purgatory after the day of judgment Now truly that is more than I said but that Otho said it is by these men confess'd But his words are these I think it ought to be search'd whether the judgment being pass'd besides the lower hell there remain a place for lighter punishments for that there is below or in hell a Purgatory place in which they that are to be savâ—d are either affected afficiantur invested punish'd with darkness only or else are boiled in the fire of expiation some do affirm What is or can be more plainly said of Purgatory for the places of Scripture brought to confirm this Opinion are such which relate to the interval between death and the last judgment Juxta illud Patriarchae lugens descendam ad inferos illud Apostoli ipse autem salvus erit sic tamen quasi per ignem I hope the Roman Doctors will not deny but these are meant of Purgatory before the last day and therefore so is the Opinion for the proof of which these places are brought 2. By post judicium in the title and transacto judicio in the Chapter Otho means the particular judgment passing upon every one at their death which he in a few lines after calls terminatis in judicio causis singulorum 3. He must mean it to be before the last great day because that which he sayes some do affirm quidam asserunt is that those which are salvandi to be sav'd hereafter are either in darkness or in a Purgatory fire which therefore must be meant of the interval for after the day of judgment is pass'd and the books shut and the sentence pronounc'd none can be sav'd that are not then acquitted unless Origen's Opinion of the salvation of Devils and damned souls be reintroduc'd which the Church before Otho many Ages had exploded and therefore so good and great a person would not have thought that fit to be then disputed and it was not then a Question nor a thing Undetermin'd in the Church 4. Whether Otho means it of a Purgatory before or after the day of the last judgment it makes very much against the present Roman Doctrine for Otho applies the Question to the case of Infants dying without Baptism now if their Purgatory be before the day of judgment
But the thing is this Biel reckon'd three opinions which in Lombards time were in the Church the first of Consubstantiation which was the way which long since then Luther followed The second that the substance of bread is made the flesh of Christ but ceases not to be what it was But this is not the Doctrine of Transubstantiation for that makes a third opinion which is that the substance of bread ceases to be and nothing remains but the accident Quartam opinionem addit Magister that is Peter Lombard adds a fourth opinion that the substance of bread is not converted but is annihilated this is made by Scotus to be the second opinion Now of these four opinions all which were then permitted and disputed Peter Lombard seems to follow the second but if this was his opinion it was no more for he could not determine whether that were the truth or no. But whether he does or no truly I think it is very hard for any man to tell for this question was but in the forge not polished not made bright with long handling And this was all that I affirm'd out of the Master of Sentences I told of no opinion of his at all but that in his time they did not know whether it viz. the doctrine of Transubstantiation were true or no that is the generality of the Roman Catholicks did not know and he himself could not define it And this appears unanswerably by Peter Lombards bringing their several sentiments in this Article and they that differ in their judgments about an Article and yet esteem the others Catholick may think what they please but they Cannot tell certainly what is truth But then as for Peter Lombard himself all that I said of him was this that he could not tell he could not determine whether there was any substantial change or no. If in his after discourse he declares that the change is of substances he told it for no other than as a meer opinion if he did let him answer for that not I for that he could not determine it himself expresly said it in the beginning of the eleventh distinction And therefore these Gentlemen would better have consulted with truth and modesty if they had let this alone and not have made such an outcry against a manifest truth Now let me observe one thing which will be of great use in this whole affair and demonstrate the cange of this doctrine These three opinions were all held by Catholicks and the opinions are recorded not only by Pope Innocentius 3. but in the Gloss of the Canon Law it self For this opinion was not fix'd and setled nor as yet well understood but still disputed as we see in Lombard and Scotus And although they all agreed in this as Salmeron observes of these three opinions as he cites them out of Scotus that the true body of Christ is there because to deny this were against the faith and therefore this was then enough to cause them to be esteem'd Catholicks because they denied nothing which was then against the â—aith but all agreed in that yet now the case is otherwise for whereas one of the opinions was that the substance of bread remains and another opinion that the substance of bread is annihilated but is not converted into the body of Christ now both of these opinions are made heresie and the contrary to them which is the third opinion pass'd into an article of faith Quod vero ibi substantia panis non remanet jam etiam ut articulus fidei definitum est conversionis sive transubstantiationis nomen evictum So Salmeron Now in Peter Lombards time if they who believed Christs real presence were good Catholicks though they believed no Transubstantiation or Consubstantiation that is did not descend into consideration of the manner why may they not be so now Is there any new revelation now of the manner Or why is the way to Heaven now made narrower than in Lombards time For the Church of England believes according to one of these opinions and therefore is as good a Catholick Church as Rome was then which had not determined the manner Nay if we use to value an Article the more by how much the more Ancient it is certainly it is more honourable that we should reform to the Ancient model rather than conform to the new However this is also plainly consequent to this discourse of Salmeron The abettâ—râ— of those three opinions some of them do deny something that is of faith therefore the faith of the Church of Rome now is not the same it was in the days of Peter Lombard Lastly this also is to be remark'd that to prove any ancient Author to hold the doctrine of Transubstantiation as it is at this day an Article of faith at Rome it is not enough to say that Peter Lombard or Durand or Scotus c. did say that where bread was before there is Christs body now for they may say that and more and yet not come home to the present Article and therefore E. W. does argue weakly when he denies Lombard to say one thing viz. that he could not define whether there was a substantial change or no which indeed he spake plainly because he brings him saying something as if he were resolv'd the change were substantial which yet he speaks but obscurely And the truth is this question of Transubstantiation is so intricate and involved amongst them seems so contrary to sense and reason and does so much violence to all the powers of the soul that it is no wonder if at first the Doctors could not make any thing distinctly of it However whatever they did make of it certain it is they more agreed with the present Church of England than with the present Church of Rome for we say as they said Christs body is truly there and there is a conversion of the Elements into Christs body for what before the Consecration in all sences was bread is after Consecration in some sence Christs body but they did not all of them say that the substance of bread was destroyed and some of them denied the conversion of the bread into the flesh of Christ which whosoever shall now do will be esteemed no Roman Catholick And therefore it is a vain procedure to think they have prov'd their doctrine of Transubstantiation out of the Fathers also if the Fathers tell us That bread is chang'd out of his nature into the body of Christ that by holy invocation it is no more common bread that as water in Cana of Galilee was chang'd into wine so in the Evangelist wine is changed into blood That bread is only bread before the sacramental words but after consecration is made the body of Christ. For though I very much doubt all these things in equal and full measures cannot be prov'd out of the Fathers yet suppose they were yet all this comes not up to the Roman
both often and many ways The Council was in the year 305. of 19. Bishops who in the 36. Canon decreed this placuit picturas in Ecclesiis esse non debere It hath pleas'd us that pictures ought not to be in Churches That 's the decree The reason they give is ne quod colitur adoratur in parietibus depingatur lest that which is worshipped be painted on the walls So that there are two propositions 1. Pictures ought not to be in Churches 2. That which is worshipped ought not to be painted upon walls E. W. hath a very learned Note upon this Canon Mark first the Council supposeth worship and adoration due to pictures ne quod colitur adoratur By which Mark E. W. confesses that pictures are the object of his adoration and that the Council took no care and made no provision for the honour of God who is and ought to be worshipp'd and ador'd in Churches illi soli servies but only were good husbands for the pictures for fear 1. they should be spoiled by the moisture of the walls or 2. defaced by the Heathen the first of these is Bellarmines the latter is Perrons answer But too childish to need a severer consideration But how easie had it been for them to have commanded that all their pictures should have been in frames upon boards or cloth as it is in many Churches in Rome and other places 2. Why should the Bishops forbid pictures to be in Churches for fear of spoiling one kind of them they might have permitted others though not these 3. Why should any man be so vain as to think that in that age in which the Christians were in perpetual disputes against the Heathens for worshipping pictures and images they should be so curious to preserve their pictures and reserve them for â—doration 4. But then to make pictures to be the subject of that caution ne quod colitur adoratur and not to suppose God and his Christ to be the subject of it is so unlike the religion of Christians the piety of those ages the Oeconomy of the Church and the analogy of the Commandment that it betrays a refractory and heretical spirit in him that shall so perversly invent an Unreasonable Commentary rather than yield to so pregnant and easie testimony But some are wiser and consider that the Council takes not care that pictures be not spoil'd but that they be not in the Churches and that what is adorable be not there painted and not be not there spoiled The not painting them is the utmost of their design not the preserving them for we see vast numbers of them every where painted on walls and preserved well enough and easily repaired upon decay therefore this is too childish to blot them out for fear they be spoiled and not to bring them into Churches for fear they be taken out Agobardus Bishop of Lions above 800. years since cited this Canon in a book of his which he wrote de picturis imaginibus which was published by Papirius Massonus and thus illustrates it Recte saith he nimirum ob hujusmodi evacuandam superstitionem ab Orthodoxis patribus definitum est picturas in Ecclesia fieri non debere Nec quod colitur adoratur in parietibus depingatur Where first he expresly affirms these Fathers in this Canon to have intended only rooting up this superstition not the ridiculous preserving the pictures So it was Understood then But then 2. Agobardus reads it Nec not Ne quod colitur which reading makes the latter part of the Canon to be part of the sanction and no reason of the former decree pictures must not be made in Churches neither ought that to be painted upon walls which is worshipped and adored This was the doctrine and sentiment of the wise and good men above 800. years since By which also the Unreasonable supposition of Baronius that the Canon is not genuine is plainly confuted this Canon not being only in all copies of that Council but own'd for such by Agobardus so many ages before Baronius and so many ages after the Council And he is yet farther reproved by Cardinal Perron who tells a story that in Granada in memory of this Council they use frames for pictures and paint none upon the wall at this day It seems they in Granada are taught to understand that Canon according unto the sence of the Patrons of images and to mistake the plain meaning of the Council For the Council did not forbid only to paint upon the walls for that according to the common reading is but accidental to the decree but the Council commanded that no picture should be in Churches Now then let this Canon be confronted with the Council of Trent Sess. 25. decret de S. S. invoc Imagines Christi Deiparae virginis aliorum sanctorâ—m in templis praesertim habendas retinendas that the images of Christ and of the Virgin Mother of God and of other Saints be had and kept especially in Churches and in the world there cannot be a greater contradiction between two than there is between Eliberis and Trent the old and the new Church for the new Church not only commands pictures and images to be kept in Churches but paints them upon walls and neither fears thieves nor moisture There are divers other little answers amongst the Roman Doctors to this uneasie objection but they are only such as venture at the telling the secret reasons why the Council so decreed as Alan Cope saith it was so decreed lest the Christians should take them for Gods or lest the Heathen should think the Christians worshipped them so Sanders But it matters not for what reason they decreed Only if either of these say true then Bellarmine and Perron are false in their conjectures of the reason But it matters not for suppose all these reasons were concentred in the decree yet the decree it self is not observ'd at this day in the Roman Church but a doctrine and practice quite contrary introduced And therefore my opinion is that Melchior Canus answers best aut nimis duras aut parum rationi consentaneas à Consiliis provincialibus interdum editas non est negandum Qualis illa non impudenter modo verum etiam impie à Concilio Elibertino de tollendis imaginibus By this we may see not only how irreverently the Roman Doctors use the Fathers when they are not for their turns but we may also perceive how the Canon condemns the Roman doctrine and practice in the matter of images The next inquiry is concerning matter of History relating to the second Synod of Nice in the East and that of Francfurt in the West In the Dissuasive it was said that Eginardus Hincmarus Aventinus c. affirmed 1. That the Bishops assembled at Francfurt and condemned the Synod of Nice 2. That they commanded it should not be called a General Council 3. They published a book under the name of the
his disciples should not wear rings or engrave them with the images of their Gods as Moses many ages before made an express law that no man should make any graven cast or painted image and of this he gives two reasons 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that we may not attend to sensible things but pass on to the things discernible by the understanding 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The custome of seeing so readily causes that the Majesty of God becomes vile and contemptible and by matter to worship that which is perceiv'd intellectually is to disesteem him by sensation Now the Reader may perceive that S. Clemens speaks against the making of any images not only of Jupiter and the Heathen Gods but of the true God of whatsoever intelligible being we ought to worship and that upon such reasons which will greatly condemn the Roman practices But hence also it is plain how careless and trifling this objector is minding no truth but the number of objections See yet further out of S. Clement Nobis enim est aperte vetitum fallacem artem exercere Non facies enim inquit Propheta cujusvis rei similitudinem we are forbidden to exercise that cosening art viz. of making pictures or images for says the prophet meaning Moses thou shalt not make the likeness of any thing E. W. it seems could not find these words of S. Clement in his Paraenetick He should have said his Protreptick for I know of no Paraenetick that he hath written But E. W. followed the Printers error in the Margent of the Dissuasive and very carefully turned over a book that was not and compared it in bigness with a book that was But I will not suppose this to be ignorance in him but only want of diligence however the words are to be found in the 41. page of this Protreptick or his admonition to the Gentiles and now they are quoted and the very page named only I desire E. W. to observe that in this place S. Clement uses not the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not simulachrum but cujusvis rei similitudinem In the place which was quoted out of Origen in his fourth book against Celsus speaking of the Jews he hath these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All makers of Images were turned from their common-wealth for not a painter or a statuary was admitted their laws wholly forbidding them lest any occasion should be given to dull men or that their mind should be turned from the worship of God to earthly things by these temptations Then he quotes the law of God against making images and adds by which law this was intended that being content with the truth of things they should beware of lying figments There it is plain that Origen affirms the law of God to have forbidden the making images any similitude of things in Heaven Earth or Waters which law also he in another place affirms to be of a moral and eternal obligation that is not to be spoken to them only who came out of the terrestrial Egypt and therefore is of Christian duty And of the same mind are S. Irenaeus Tertullian S. Cyprian and S. Austin affirming the whole decalogue except the law of the Sabbath to be an unalterable or natural law But for the further verification of the testimony from Origen against the worship of images in the Primitive Church I thought fit to add the concurrent words of the prudent and learned Cassander Quantum autem veteres initio Ecclesiae ab omni veneratione imaginum abhorruerunt declarat unus Origenes adversus Celsum but of this I shall have occasion to speak yet once more And so at last all the quotations are found to be exact and this Gentleman to be greatly mistaken From the premisses I infer if in the Primitive Church it was accounted unlawful to make images certainly it is unimaginable they should worship them and the argument is the stronger if we understand their opinion rightly for neither the second Commandment nor yet the Ancient Fathers in their Commentaries on them did absolutely prohibit all making of Images but all that was made for religious worship and in order to Adoration according as it is expressed in him who among the Jews collected the negative precepts which Arias Montanus translated in Latin the second of which is signum cultus causa ne facito the third simulachrum Divinum nullo pacto conflato the fourth signa religiosa nulla ex materia facito The authorities of these Fathers being rescued from slander and prov'd very pungent and material I am concerned in the next place to take notice of some authorities which my adversaries urge from antiquity to prove that in the Primitive Church they did worship images Concerning their general Council viz. the second Nicene I have already made account in the preceeding periods The great S. Basil is with great solemnity brought into the Circus and made to speak for images as apertly plainly and confidently as Bellarmine or the Council of Trent it self His words are these I admit the holy Apostles and Prophets and Martyrs and in my prayer made to God call upon them that by their intercession God may be propitious unto me Whereupon I honour and adore the characters of their images and especially those things being delivered from the holy Apostles and not prohibited but are manifested or seen in all our Churches Now I confess these words are home enough and do their business at the first sight and if they prove right S. Basil is on their side and therefore E. W. with great noise and preface insults and calls them Unanswerable The words he says are found in S. Basils 205. Epistle ad Julianum I presently consulted S. Basils works such as I had with me in the Countrey of the Paris Edition by Guillard 1547. and there I found that S. Basil had not 205. Epistles in all the number of all written by him and to him being but 180. of which that to Julianus is one viz. Epistle 166. and in that there is not one word to any such purpose as is here pretended I was then put to a melius inquirendum Bellarmine though both he and Lindan and Harding cry up this authority as irrefragable quotes this authority not upon his own credit but as taking it from the report of a book published 1596 called Synodus Parisiensis which Bellarmine calls Vnworthy to see the light From hence arises this great noise and the fountain being confessedly corrupt what wholsome thing can be expected thence But in all the first and voluminous disputations of Bellarmine upon this Question he made no use of this authority he never saw any such thing in S. Basils works or it is not to be imagined that he would have omitted it But the words are in no ancient Edition of S. Basil nor in any Manuscript that is known in
object like that of the wife of Ajax in Sophocles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 She did him most strange zealous services as if her affection had no measure It signifies also violent desires of equalling or excelling another for honours sake ambition and envy mixt together it is a violent pursuit after a thing that deserves it not A consequent of these is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Seditions or Schisms and Heresies 15. That is Divisions in the Church upon diversity of Opinions or upon Pride Faction and Interest as in chusing Bishops in Prelations and Governments Ecclesiastical from factious Rulers or factious Subjects which are properly Schisms but use commonly to belch forth into Heresie according to that saying Plerunque schisma in haeresin eructat AN EVIL EYE 16. That is a repining at the good of others Envy a not rejoycing in the prosperity of our Neighbours a grieving because he grieves not Aut illi nescio quid incommodi accidit aut nescio cui aliquid boni when good happens to another it is as bad as if evil happened to himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This is one of the worst of Crimes for a man to hate him that is prosperous hate him whom God loves or blesses It bears part of its punishment along with it the sin hath in it no pleasure but very much torment Nam sese excruciat qui beatis invidet A part of this is Vnthankfulness those who do not return kindnesses to others from whom they have received any neither are apt to acknowledge them which is properly an envying to our friend the noblest of all graces that of Charity or it is Pride or Covetousness for from any of these roots this equivocal issue can proceed LOVERS OF PLEASVRES 17. Such who study and spend their time and money to please their senses rarum memorabile magni Gutturis exemplum conducendúsque Magister Rare Epicures and Gluttons such which were famous in the Roman Luxury and fit to be Presidents of a Greek Symposiack not for their skill in Philosophy but their witty Arts of drinking Ingeniosa gula est Siculo scarus aequore mersus Ad mensam vivus perducitur Sensual men Such who are dull and unaffected with the things of God and transported with the lusts of the lower belly persons that are greedy of baser pleasures 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said the Scholiast upon Aristotle The wicked man allows to himself too large a portion of sweet things Licorishness is the common word to express this vice in the matter of eating and drinking BVSIE-BODIES 18. That is such who invade the offices or impertinently obtrude their advice and help when there is no need and when it is not lik'd nor out of charity but of curiosity or of a trifling spirit and this produces talking of others and makes their conversation a scene of Censure and Satyr against others never speaking of their own duty but often to the reproach of their Neighbours something that may lessen or disparage him The Fearful and the Vnbelievers 19. That is they that fear man more than God that will do any thing but suffer nothing that fall away in persecution such who dare not trust the Promises but fear want and fear death and trust not God with chearfulness and joy and confidence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They that take pleasure in those that do these things 20. That is they who in any sence incourage or promote or love the sin of another are guilty themselves not of the others sin but of their own He that commands a man to swear is not guilty of that swearing but of that commanding him It is a sin to do so but that sin to which the man is encouraged or tempted or assisted is his own sin and for it he is to repent every man for his own For it is in artificially said by the Masters of Moral Theology that by many ways we are guilty of the sins of others by many ways indeed we can procure them to sin and every such action of ours is a sin against charity and the matter of that Commandment in which the temptation was instanc'd But their sin is not ours their sin does not properly load us neither does our being author of it excuse them It was the case of Adam and Eve and the Serpent who yet did every one bear their own burden Aristotle Zeno and Chrysippus were notorious in this kind Non est enim immunis à scelere qui ut fieret imperavit nec est alienus à crimine cujus consensu licèt à se non admissum crimen tamen publicè legitur said S. Cyprian He that commands and he that consents and he that delights and he that commends and he that maintains and he that counsels and he that tempts or conceals or is silent in anothers danger when his speaking will prevent it is guilty before God Corrumpere corrumpi saeculum vocatur This evil is of a great extent but receives its degrees according to the influence or causality it hath in the sins of others 21. These I have noted and explicated because they are not so notorious as others which have a publick name and filthy character and easie definition Such as adulteries fornication drunkenness idolatry hating of God and good men perjury malicious lies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as S. Paul adds and such like these and those and all that are like these exclude us from the Kingdom of Heaven They are the works of the flesh but these which are last reckoned are such which all the world condemns and they are easily discerned as smoak or a cloud upon the face of the Sun but the other are sometimes esteemed innocent often excused commonly neglected always undervalued But concerning all these the sentence is sad and decretory They that are such shall not inherit the Kingdom of Heaven But they shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone Now if we list to observe it many of these are such which occur so frequently in our daily conversation are so little noted and so confidently practised that to try men concerning their hopes of Heaven by such measures would seem strange and hard but it is our faults that it is so these are the measures of the Sanctuary and not to be prejudg'd by later and looser customs SECT II. Whether every single act of these Sins puts a man out of Gods favour 22. IN this Question by a single act I mean a deliberate act a wilful observ'd known act for concerning acts by surprize by incogitancy by imperfection I shall give a special account in a Chapter on purpose To this therefore I answer by several propositions 23. I. There are some acts of sin so vile and mischievous that they cannot be acted but by a great malice or depravation of the will and do
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a root of bitterness such as was in Esau when he undid himself and repented too late an evil heart in turning from the living Lord a sear'd conscience a walking according to the Prince of this world enemies of the cross of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as cannot cease from sin enemies that will not have Christ but the Devil to reign over them for this is the true state and constitution of vicious habits This is more than an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or hindrance of doing our duty it is a direct 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a disorder and corruption inherent in all our faculties 22. This is signally describ'd by S. Paul who calls it a concupiscence wrought by sin For sin saith he wrought in me all manner of concupiscence it is called by him a law in the members fighting against the law in my mind and the man he calls carnal sold under sin dead killed and the sin it self inhabitants peccatum sin dwelling in me and flesh in which dwelleth no good 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the carnal mind These things as is evident cannot be spoken of the single actions of sin but of the law the power the dominion the reign the habit of sin It is that which was wrought by sin viz. by the single actions of sin and therefore he does not mean single actions neither can he mean the remanent guilt of the past action but he speaks of a direct state of sinfulness which is prolifical and productive of sin For sin wrought this concupiscence and carnal-mindedness and this carnal-mindedness is such a propensity and desire to sin and hath in it such easiness to act that it bringeth forth many sins and they bring forth death and therefore the Apostle says expresly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this carnal mindedness is death and enmity against God this is that state in which whosoever abides cannot please God To the same purpose are those other expressions of Scripture calling this state Vias Balaam the ways of Balaam the son of Bosor a walking perversly with God a being sold under sin and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hearts excercised or imployed and used to covetousness and it follows 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sons of cursing The fault or charge is more than that of single actions and the curse is greater than ordinary as the sin is so is the curse the one is apportion'd to the other and appropriate 23. III. But I consider further A single act of sin does not in all cases denominate a man vicious A man is not called a drunkard for having been once drunk but for being often for repeating the act or continuing the affection Every single act provokes God to anger but that anger can be as soon rescinded as the act is past if it remains not by something that is habitual Indeed he is called a thief or an adulterer that does one action of those crimes because his consent in such things is great enough to equal a habit in lesser things The effect is notorious the prohibition severe the dangers infinite the reasons of them evident they are peccata vastantia conscientiam quae uno actu perimunt as S. Austin says they kill with one blow and therefore God exacts them highly and men call the criminal by the name of the vice But the action gives denomination but in some cases but the habit in all No man lives without sin and in the state of regeneration our infirmities still press upon us and make our hands shake and our foot to stumble and sometimes the enemy makes an inroad and is presently beaten out again and though the good man resolves against all and contends against all Pauca tamen suberunt priscae vestigia fraudis there will be something for him to be humbled at something to contest against to keep him watchful and upon his guard But if he be ebriosus or petulans if he be a drunkard or wanton an extortioner or covetous that is if he have a habit of any sin whatsoever then he is not the son of God but an heir of death and hell That therefore which in all cases denominates a man such both before God and before men when the actions do not that must needs have in it a proper malignity of its own and that 's the habit 24. IV. This we may also see evidently in the matter of smaller sins and the trifles of our life which though they be often repeated yet if they be kept asunder by the intercision of the actions of repentance do not discompose our state of grace but if they be habitual they do though it may be the single instances by some accident being hindred do not so often return and this is confess'd on all hands But then the consequent of this is that the very being habitual is a special irregularity 25. V. This also appears by the nature and malignity of the greater sins A vicious habit is a principle of evil naturally and directly And therefore as the capital sins are worse than others because they are an impure root and apt to produce accursed fruits as covetousness is the root of all evil and pride and envy and idolatry so is every habit the mother of evil not accidentally and by chance but by its proper efficacy and natural germination and therefore is worse than single actions 26. VI. If natural concupiscence hath in it the nature of sin and needs a laver of regeneration and the blood of Christ to wash it off much more shall our habitual and acquir'd concupiscence For this is much worse procur'd by our own act introduc'd by our consent brought upon us by the wrath of God which we have deserved springing from the baseness of our own manners the consequent of our voluntary disobedience So that if it were unreasonable that our natural concupiscence should be charged upon us as criminal as being involuntary yet for the same Reason it is most reasonable that our habitual sins our superinduc'd concupiscence should be imputed to us as criminal because it is voluntary in its cause which is in us and is voluntary in the effect that is it is delighted in and seated in the will But however this argument ought to prevail upon all that admit the article of original sin as it is usually taught in Schools and Churches For upon the denial of it Pelagius also introduc'd this opinion against which I am now disputing And lest concupiscence might be reckon'd a sin he affirm'd that no habitude no disposition nothing but an act could be a sin But on the other side lest concupiscence should be accounted no sin S. Austin disputes earnestly largely affirming and proving that a sinful habit is a special sinfulness distinct from that of evil actions malus thesaurus cordis the evil treasure of the heart out of which proceeds all mischief and a continual defluxion of impurities 27. VII And therefore as God
or lust and anger and grief and all things else which need great constancy and wisdom lest the storm should drown reason in us in the gulf of sin For these affections or passions were not sin but the excess of them not being bridled did effect this The same he affirms in Homl. 11. ad 6. Rom. and the 12. Homil. on Rom. 7. And not much unlike this was that excellent discourse of Lactantius in his seventh Book de Divino praemio cap. 5. But Theodoret in his Commentaries upon the Romans follows the same discourse exactly And this way of explicating the entrance and facility of sin upon us is usual in antiquity affirming that because we derive a miserable and an afflicted body from Adam upon that stock sin enters Quae quia materiam peccati ex fomite carnis Consociata trahit nec non simul ipsa sodali Est incentivum peccaminis implicat ambas Vindex poena reas peccantes mente sub unâ PeccandÃque cremet socias cruciatibus aequis Because the soul joyned to the body draws from the society of the flesh incentives and arguments to sin therefore both of them are punished as being guilty by consociation But then thus it was also before the fall For by this it was that Adam fell So the same Prudentius Haec prima est natura animae sic condita simplex Decidit in vitium per sordida foedera carnis The soul was created simple and pure but fell into vice by the evil combination with the flesh But if at first the appetites and necessities and tendencies of the body when it was at ease and health and blessed did yet tempt the soul to forbidden instances much more will this be done when the body is miserable and afflicted uneasie and dying For even now we see by a sad experience that the afflicted and the miserable are not only apt to anger and envy but have many more desires and more weaknesses and consequently more aptnesses to sin in many instances than those who are less troubled And this is that which was said by Arnobius Proni ad culpas ad libidinis varios appetitus vitio sumus infirmitatis ingenitae By the fault of our natural infirmity we are prone to the appetites of lust and sins 7. From hence it follows that naturally a man cannot do or perform the Law of God because being so weak so tempted by his body and this life being the bodies day that is the time in which its appetites are properly prevailing to be born of Adam is to be born under sin that is under such inclinations to it that as no man will remain innocent so no man can of himself keep the Law of God Vendidit se prior ac per hoc omne semen subjectum est peccato Quamobrem infirmum esse hominem ad praecepta legis servanda said the Author of the Commentary on S. Paul's Epistles usually attributed to S. Ambrose But beyond this there are two things more considerable the one is that the soul of man being devested by Adam's fall by way of punishment of all those supernatural assistances which God put into it that which remained was a reasonable soul fitted for the actions of life and of reason but not of any thing that was supernatural For the soul being immerged in flesh feeling grief by participation of evils from the flesh hath and must needs have discourses in order to its own ease and comfort that is in order to the satisfaction of the bodies desires which because they are often contradicted restrained and curbed and commanded to be mortified and killed by the laws of God must of necessity make great inlets for sin for while reason judges of things in proportion to present interests and is less apprehensive of the proportions of those good things which are not the good things of this life but of another the reason abuses the will as the flesh abuses the reason And for this there is no remedy but the grace of God the holy Spirit to make us be born again to become spiritual that is to have new principles new appetites and new interests The other thing I was to note is this That as the Devil was busie to abuse mankind when he was fortified by many advantages and favours from God So now that man is naturally born naked and devested of those graces and advantages and hath an infirm sickly body and enters upon the actions of life through infancy and childhood and youth and folly and ignorance the Devil it is certain will not omit his opportunities but will with all his power possess and abuse mankind and upon the apprehension of this the Primitive Church used in the first admission of infants to the entrance of a new birth to a spiritual life pray against the power and frauds of the Devil and that brought in the ceremony of Exsufflation for ejecting of the Devil The ceremony was fond and weak but the opinion that introduced them was full of caution and prudence For as Optatus Milevitanus said Neminem fugit quod omnis homo qui nascitur quamvis de Christianis parentibus nascitur sine Spiritu immundo esse non possit quem necesse sit ante salutare lavacrum ab homine excludi ac separari It is but too likely the Devil will take advantages of our natural weaknesses and with his temptations and abuses enter upon children as soon as they enter upon choice and indeed prepossess them with imitating follies that may become customs of sinfulness before they become sins and therefore with rare wisdom it was done by the Church to prevent the Devils frauds and violences by an early Baptism and early offices 8. As a consequent of all this it comes to pass that we being born thus naked of the Divine grace thus naturally weak thus incumbred with a body of sin that is a body apt to tempt to forbidden instances and thus assaulted by the frauds and violences of the Devil all which are helped on by the evil guises of the world it is certain we cannot with all these disadvantages and loads soar up to Heaven but in the whole constitution of affairs are in sad dispositions to enter into the Devils portion and go to Hell Not that if we die before we consent to evil we shall perish but that we are evilly disposed to do actions that will deserve it and because if we die before our new birth we have nothing in us that can according to the revelations of God dispose us to Heaven according to these words of the Apostle In me that is in my flesh dwelleth no good thing But this infers not that in our flesh or that in our soul there is any sin properly inherent which makes God to be our present enemy that is the only or the principal thing I suppose my self to have so much reason to deny But that the state of the body is a
World by Adam's sin was Death Eternal that is God then decreed to punish sinners with the portion of Devils It is likely he did so but that this was the death introduced for the sin of Adam upon all Man-kind is not at all affirmed in Scripture but temporal death is the effect of Adam's sin in Adam we all die and the Death that Adam's sin brought in is such as could have a remedy or recompence by Christ but Eternal Death hath no recompence and shall never be destroyed but temporal death shall But that which I say is this that for Adam's sin alone no man but himself is or can justly be condemned to the bitter pains of Eternal Fire This depends also upon the former accounts because meer Nature brings not to Hell but choice Nihil ardet in inferno nisi propria voluntas said S. Bernard and since Original sin is not properly ours but only by imputation if God should impute Adam's sin so as to damn any one for it all our good we receive from God is much less than that evil and we should be infinitely to seek for justifications of God's justice and glorifications of his mercy or testimonies of his goodness But now the matter is on this side so reasonable in it self that let a man take what side he will he shall have parties enough and no prejudices or load of a consenting authority can be against him but that there shall be on the side of reason as great and leading persons as there are of those who have been abused by errour and prejudice In the time of S. Augustine Vincentius Victor and some others did believe that Infants dying without Baptism should never the less be saved although he believed them guilty of Original sin Bucer Peter Martyr and Calvin affirmed the same of the children of faithful Parents but Zuinglius affirmed it of all and that no Infant did lose Heaven for his Original stain and corruption Something less than this was the Doctrine of the Pelagians who exclude Infants unbaptized from the Kingdom of Heaven but promised to them an eternal and a natural beatitude and for it S. Augustine reckons them for Hereticks as indeed being impatient of every thing almost which they said But yet the opinion was imbraced lately by Ambrosius Catherinus Albertus Pighius and Hieronymus Savanarola And though S. Augustine sometimes calls as good Men as himself by the Name of Pelagians calling all them so that assign a third place or state to Infants yet besides these now reckoned S. Gregory Nazianzen and his Scholiast Nicetes did believe and reach it and the same is affirmed also by S. Athanasius or whoever is the Author of the Questions to Antiochus usually attributed to him and also by S. Ambrose or the Author of the Commentaries on S. Paul's Epistles who lived in the time of Pope Damasus that is before 400. Years after Christ and even by S. Augustine himself expresly in his third Book de libero arbitrio cap. 23. But when he was heated with his disputations against the Pelagians he denied all and said that a middle place or state was never heard of in the Church For all this the opinion of a middle state for unbaptized Infants continued in the Church and was expresly affirmed by Pope Innocent the third who although he says Infants shall not see the face of God yet he expresly denies that they shall be tormented in Hell and he is generally followed by the Schoolmen who almost universally teach that Infants shall be deprived of the Vision Beatifical but shall not suffer Hell torments but yet they stoop so much towards S. Augustin's harsh and fierce Opinion that they say this deprivation is a part of Hell not of torment but of banishment from God and of abode in the place of torment Among these they are also divided some affirming that they have some pain of sense but little and light others saying they have none even as they pleased to fancy for they speak wholly without ground and meerly by chance and interest and against the consent of Antiquity as I have already instanced But Gregorius Ariminensis Driedo Luther Melancthon and Tilmanus Heshusius are fallen into the worst of S. Augustine's opinion and sentence poor Infants to the flames of Hell for Original sin if they die before Baptism To this I shall not say much more than what I have said otherwhere But that no Catholick Writer for 400. Years after Christ did ever affirm it but divers affirmed the contrary And indeed if the Unavoidable want of Baptism should damn Infants for the fault which was also unavoidable I do not understand how it can in any sence be true that Christ died for all if at least the Children of Christian Parents shall not find the benefit of Christ's Death because that without the fault of any man they want the ceremony Upon this account some good men observing the great sadness and the injustice of such an accident are willing upon any terms to admit Infants to Heaven even without Baptism if any one of their Relatives desire it for them or if the Church desires it which in effect admits all Christian infants to Heaven Of this opinion were Gerson Biel Cajetan and some others All which to my sence seems to declare that if men would give themselves freedom of judgment and speak what they think most reasonable they would speak honour of God's mercy and not impose such fierce and unintelligibe things concerning his justice and goodness since our blessed Saviour concerning infants and those only who are like infants affirms that of such is the Kingdom of Heaven But now in the midst of this great variety of Opinions it will be hard to pick out any thing that is certain For my part I believe this only as certain That Nature alone cannot bring them to Heaven and that Adam left us in a state in which we could not hope for it but this I know also that as soon as this was done Christ was promised and that before there was any birth of Man or Woman and that God's Grace is greater and more communicative than sin and Christ was more Gracious and effective than Adam was hurtful and that therefore it seems very agreeable to God's goodness to bring them to happiness by Christ who were brought to misery by Adam and that he will do this by himself alone in ways of his own finding out And yet if God will not give them Heaven by Christ he will not throw them into Hell by Adam if his goodness will not do the first his Goodness and his Justice will not suffer him to do the second and therefore I consent to Antiquity and the Schoolmens opinion thus far that the destitution or loss of God's sight is the effect of Original sin that is by Adam's sin we were left so as that we cannot by it go to Heaven But here I differ Whereas they
as to agree with Scripture and reason and as may best glorifie God and that they require it I will not pretend to believe that those Doctors who first fram'd the Article did all of them mean as I mean I am not sure they did or that they did not but this I am sure that they fram'd the words with much caution and prudence and so as might abstain from grieving the contrary minds of differing men And I find that in the Harmony of confessions printed in Cambridge 1586 and allowed by publick Authority there is no other account given of the English confession in this Article but that every Person is born in sin and leadeth his life in sin and that no body is able truly to say his heart is clean That the most righteous person is but an unprofitable servant That the Law of God is perfect and requireth of us perfect and full obedience that we are able by no means to fulfill that Law in this worldly life that there is no mortal Creature which can be justified by his own deserts in God's sight Now this was taken out of the English Confession inserted in the General Apology written in the year 1562 in the very year the Articles were fram'd I therefore have reason to believe that the excellent men of our Church Bishops and Priests did with more Candor and Moderation opine in this Question and therefore when by the violence and noises of some parties they were forced to declare something they spake warily and so as might be expounded to that Doctrine which in the General Apology was their allowed sence However it is not unusual for Churches in matters of difficulty to frame their Articles so as to serve the ends of peace and yet not to endanger truth or to destroy liberty of improving truth or a further reformation And since there are so very many Questions and Opinions in this point either all the Dissenters must be allowed to reconcile the Article and their Opinion or must refuse her Communion which whosoever shall inforce is a great Schismatick and an Uncharitable Man This only is certain that to tye the Article and our Doctrine together is an excellent art of peace and a certain signification of obedience and yet is a security of truth and that just liberty of Understanding which because it is only God's subject is then sufficiently submitted to Men when we consent in the same form of words The Article is this Original Sin standeth not in the following of Adam as the Pelagians do vainly talk 28. THE following of Adam that is the doing as he did is actual sin and in no sence can it be Original sin for that is as vain as if the Pelagians had said the second is the first and it is as impossible that what we do should be Adam's sin as it is unreasonable to say that his should be really and formally our sin Imitation supposes a Copy and those are two termes of a Relation and cannot be coincident as like is not the same But then if we speak of Original sin as we have our share in it yet cannot our imitation of Adam be it possibly it may be an effect of it or a Consequent But therefore Adam's sin did not introduce a necessity of sinning upon us for if it did Original sin would be a fatal curse by which is brought to pass not only that we do but that we cannot choose but follow him and then the following of Adam would be the greatest part of Original sin expresly against the Article 29. But it is the fault and corruption of the Nature of every Man The fault vitium Naturae so it is in the Latine Copyes not a sin properly Non talia sunt vitia quae jam peccata dicenda sunt but a disease of the Soul as blindness or crookedness that is it is an imperfection or state of deficiency from the end whither God did design us we cannot with this nature alone go to Heaven for it having been debauch'd by Adam and disrobed of all its extraordinaries and graces whereby it was or might have been made fit for Heaven it is returned to its own state which is perfect in its kind that is in order to all natural purposes but imperfect in order to supernatural whither it was design'd The case is this The eldest Son of Craesus the Lydian was born dumb and by the fault of his Nature was unfit to govern the Kingdom therefore his Father passing him by appointed the Crown to his younger Brother But he in a Battail seeing his Father in danger to be slain in Zeal to save his Fathers life strain'd the ligatures of his tongue till that broke which bound him by returning to his speech he returned to his title We are born thus imperfect unfit to raign with God for ever and can never return to a title to our inheritance till we by the grace of God be redintegrate and made perfect like Adam that is freed from this state of imperfection by supernatural aides and by the grace of God be born again Corruption This word is exegetical of the other and though it ought not to signifie the diminution of the powers of the soul not only because the powers of the soul are not corruptible but because if they were yet Adams sin could not do it since it is impossible that an act proper to a faculty should spoil it of which it is rather perfective and an act of the will can no more spoil the will than an act of understanding can lessen the understanding Yet this word Corruption may mean a spoiling or disrobing our Nature of all its extraordinary investitures that is supernatural gifts and graces a Comparative Corruption so as Moses's face when the light was taken from it or a Diamond which is more glorious by a reflex ray of the Sun when the light was taken off falls into darkness and yet loses nothing of its Nature But Corruption relates to the body not to the soul and in this Article may very properly and aptly be taken in the same sence as it is used by S. Paul 1 Cor. 15. The body is sown in Corruption that is in all the effects of its mortality and this indeed is a part of Original sin or the effect of Adams sin it introduc'd Natural Corruption or the affections of mortality the solemnities of death for indeed this is the greatest parth of Original sin Fault and Corruption mean the Concupiscence and Mortality Of the Nature of every man This gives light to the other and makes it clear it cannot be in us properly a sin for sin is an affection of persons not of the whole Nature for an Universal cannot be the subject of circumstances and particular actions and personal proprieties as humane Nature cannot be said to be drunk or to commit adultery now because sin is an action or omission and it is made up of many particularities it cannot be
is guilty of murder and cannot pretend infirmity for his excuse because in an action of so great consequence and effect it is supposed he had time to deliberate all the foregoing parts of his life whether such an action ought to be done or not or the very horror of the action was enough to arrest his spirit as a great danger or falling into a river will make a drunken man sober and by all the laws of God and Man he was immur'd from the probability of all transports into such violences and the man must needs be a slave of passion who could by it be brought to go so far from reason and to do so great evil * If a man in the careless time of the day when his spirit is loose with a less severe imployment or his heart made more open with an innocent refreshment spies a sudden beauty that unluckily strikes his fancy it is possible that he may be too ready to entertain a wanton thought and to suffer it to stand at the doors of his first consent but if the sin passes no further the man enters not into the regions of death because the Devil entred on a sudden and is as suddenly cast forth But if from the first arrest of concupiscence he pass on to an imperfect consent from an imperfect consent to a perfect and deliberate and from thence to an act and so to a habit he ends in death because long before it is come thus far The salt water is taken in The first concupiscence is but like rain water it discolours the pure springs but makes them not deadly But when in the progression the will mingles with it it is like the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or waters of brimstone and the current for ever after is unwholsome and carries you forth into the dead Sea the lake of Sodom which is to suffer the vengeance of Eternal fire But then the matter may be supposed little till the will comes For though a man may be surprised with a wanton eye yet he cannot sight a duel against his knowledge or commit adultery against his will A man cannot against his will contrive the death of a man but he may speak a rash word or be suddenly angry or triflingly peevish and yet all this notwithstanding be a good man still These may be sins of Infirmity because they are imperfect actions in the whole and such in which as the man is for the present surpris'd so they are such against which no watchfulness was a sufficient guard as it ought to have been in any great matter and might have been in sudden murders A wise and a good man may easily be mistaken in a nice question but can never suspect an article of his Creed to be false a good man may have many fears and doubtings in matters of smaller moment but he never doubts of Gods goodness of his truth of his mercy or of any of his communicated perfections he may fall into melancholy and may suffer indefinite fears of he knows not what himself yet he can never explicitely doubt of any thing which God hath clearly revealed and in which he is sufficiently instructed A weak eye may at a distance mistake a man for a tree but he who sailing in a storm takes the Sea for dry land or a mushrome for an oak is stark blind And so is he who can think adultery to be excusable or that Treason can be duty or that by persecuting Gods Prophets he does God good service or that he propagates Religion by making the Ministers of the Altar poor and robbing the Churches A good man so remaining cannot suffer infirmity in the plain and legible lines of duty where he can see and reason and consider I have now told which are sins of infirmity and I have told all their measures For as for those other false opinions by which men flatter themselves into Hell by a pretence of sins of infirmity they are as unreasonable as they are dangerous and they are easily reproved upon the stock of the former truths Therefore 55. VI. Although our mere natural inclination to things forbidden be of it self a natural and unavoidable infirmity and such which cannot be cured by all the precepts and endeavours of perfection yet this very inclination if it be heightned by carelesness or evil customs is not a sin of infirmity Tiberius the Emperor being troubled with a fellow that wittily and boldly pretended himself to be a Prince at last when he could not by questions he discovered him to be a mean person by the rusticity and hardness of his body not by a callousness of his feet or a wart upon a finger but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 His whole body was hard and servile and so he was discovered The natural superfluities and excrescencies that inevitably adhere to our natures are not sufficient indications of a servile person or a slave to sin but when our natures are abused by choice and custom when the callousness is spread by evil and hard usages when the arms are brawny by the services of Egypt then it is no longer infirmity but a superinduc'd viciousness and a direct hostility When nature rules grace does not When the flesh is in power the spirit is not Therefore it matters not from what corner the blasting wind does come from whence soever it is it is deadly Most of our sins are from natural inclinations and the negative precepts of God are for the most part restraints upon them Therefore to pretend nature when our selves have spoil'd it is no excuse but that state of evil from whence the Spirit of God is to rescue and redeem us 56. VII Yea but although it be thus in nature yet it is hop'd by too many that it shall be allowed to be infirmity when the violence of our passions or desires overcomes our resolutions Against this I oppose this proposition When violence of desire or passion engages us in a sin whither we see and observe our selves entring that violence or transportation is not our excuse but our disease and that resolution is not accepted for innocence or repentance but the not performing what we did resolve is our sin and the violence of passion was the accursed principle 57. For to resolve is a relative and imperfect duty in order to something else It had not been necessary to resolve if it had not been necessary to do do it and if it be necessary to do it it is not sufficient to resolve it And for the understanding of this the better we must observe that to resolve and to endeavour are several things To resolve is to purpose to do what we may if we will some way or other the thing is in our power either we are able of our selves or we are help'd No man resolves to carry an Elephant or to be as wise as Solomon or to destroy a vast Army with his own hands He may endeavour this for To endeavour sometimes
in our first access to Christ because they for whom Christ and his Martyr S. Stephen prayed were not yet converted and so were to be saved by Baptismal Repentance Then the Power of the Keys is exercised and the gates of the Kingdom are opened then we enter into the Covenant of mercy and pardon and promise faith and perpetual obedience to the laws of Jesus and upon that condition forgiveness is promised and exhibited offer'd and consign'd but never after for it is in Christianity for all great sins as in the Civil Law for theft Qui eâ mente alienum quid contrectavit ut lucrifaceret tametsi mutato consilio id Domino postea reddidit fur est nemo enim tali peccato poenitentiâ suâ nocens esse desinit said Vlpian and Gaius Repentance does not here take off the punishment nor the stain And so it seems to be in Christianity in which every baptized person having stipulated for obedience is upon those terms admitted to pardon and consequently if he fails of his duty he shall fail of the grace 8. But that this objection may proceed no further it is certain that it is an infinite lessening of the mercy of God in Jesus Christ to confine pardon of sins only to the Font. For that even lapsed Christians may be restored by repentance and be pardoned appears in the story of the incestuous Corinthian and the precept of S. Paul to the spiritual man or the Curate of souls If any man be overtaken in a fault ye which are spiritual restore such a man in the spirit of meekness considering thy self lest thou also be tempted The Christian might fall and the Corinthian did so and the Minister himself he who had the ministery of restitution and reconciliation was also in danger and yet they all might be restored To the same sence is that of S. James Is any man sick among you let him send for the Presbyters of the Church and let them pray over him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 although he was a doer of sins they shall be forgiven him For there is an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a sin that is not unto death And therefore when S. Austin in his first Book de Sermone Dei had said that there is some sin so great that it cannot be remitted he retracts his words with this clause addendum fuit c. I should have added If in so great perverseness of mind he ends his life For we must not despair of the worst sinner we may not despair of any since we ought to pray for all 9. For it is beyond exception or doubt that it was the great work of the Apostles and of the whole new Testament to engage men in a perpetual repentance For since all men do sin all men must repent or all men must perish And very many periods of Scripture are directed to lapsed Christians baptized persons fallen into grievous crimes calling them to repentance So Simon Peter to Simon Magus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Repent of thy wickedness and to the Corinthian Christians S. Paul urges the purpose of his legation We pray you in Christ's stead be ye reconciled to God The Spirit of God reprov'd some of the Asian Churches for foul misdemeanours and even some of the Angels the Asian Bishops calling upon them to return to their first love and to repent and to do their first works and to the very Gnosticks and filthiest Hereticks he gave space to repent and threatned extermination to them if they did not do it speedily For 10. Baptism is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the admission of us to the Covenant of Faith and Repentance or as Mark the Anchoret call'd it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the introduction to repentance or that state of life that is full of labour and care and amendment of our faults for that is the best life that any man can live and therefore repentance hath its progress after baptism as it hath its beginning before for first repentance is unto baptism and then baptism unto repentance And if it were otherwise the Church had but ill provided for the state of her sons and daughters by commanding the baptism of Infants For if repentance were not allowed after then their early baptism would take from them all hopes of repentance and destroy the mercies of the Gospel and make it now to all Christendom a law of works in the greater instances because since in our infancy we neither need nor can perform repentance if to them that sin after baptism repentance be denied it is in the whole denied to them for ever to repent But God hath provided better things for us and such which accompany salvation 11. For besides those many things which have been already consider'd our admission to the holy Sacrament of the Lords Supper is a perpetual entertainment of our hopes because then and there is really exhibited to us the body that was broken and the blood that was shed for remission of sins still it is applied and that application could not be necessary to be done anew if there were not new necessities and still we are invited to do actions of repentance to examine our selves and so to eat all which as things are order'd would be infinitely useless to mankind if it did not mean pardon to Christians falling into foul sins even after baptism 12. I shall add no more but the words of S. Paul to the Corinthians Lest when I come again my God will humble me among you and that I shall bewail many who have sinn'd already and have not repented of the uncleanness and fornication and lasciviousness which they have committed Here is a fierce accusation of some of them for the foulest and the basest crimes and a reproof of their not repenting and a threatning them with censures Ecclesiastical I suppose this article to be sufficiently concluded from the premises The necessity of which proof they only will best believe who are severely penitent and full of apprehension and fear of the Divine anger because they have highly deserved it However I have serv'd my own needs in it and the need of those whose consciences have been or shall be so timorous as mine hath deserved to be But against the universality of this doctrine there are two grand objections The one is the severer practice and doctrine of the Primitive Church denying repentance to some kind of sinners after baptism The other the usual discourses and opinions concerning the sin against the Holy Ghost Of these I shall give account in the two following Sections SECT III. Of the Difficulty of obtaining Pardon The Doctrine and Practice of the Primitive Church in this Article 13. NOvatianus and Novatus said that the Church had not power to minister pardon of sins except only in Baptism which proposition when they had well digested and considered they did thus explicate That there are some capital sins crying and clamorous into
which if a Christian did fall after baptism the Church had nothing to do with him she could not absolve him 14. This opinion of theirs was a branch of the elder Heresie of Montanus which had abus'd Tertullian who fiercely declaims against the decree of Pope Zephyrinus because against the custom of his Decessors he admitted adulterers to repentance while at the same time he refus'd idolaters and murderers And this their severity did not seem to be put upon the account of a present necessity or their own zeal or for the avoiding scandal or their love of holiness but upon the nature of the thing it self and the sentences of Scripture An old man of whom Irenaeus makes mention said Non debemus superbi esse neque reprehendere veteres ne fortè post agnitionem Dei agentes aliquid quod non placet Deo remissionem non habeamus ultrà delictorum excludamur à regno ejus We must not be proud and reprove our Fathers lest after the knowledge of God we doing something that does not please God we may no more have remission of our sins but be excluded from his Kingdom To the same purpose is that Canon made by the Gallic Bishops against the false accusers of their brethren ut ad exitum ne communicent that they should not be admitted to the Communion or peace of the Church no not at their death And Pacianus Bishop of Barcinona gives a severe account of the doctrine of the Spanish Churches even in his time and of their refusing to admit idolaters murderers and adulterers to repentance Other sins may be cured by the exercise of good works But these three kill like the breath of a Basilisk and are to be feared like a deadly arrow They that were guilty of such crimes did despair What have I done to you was it not in your power to have let it alone Did no man admonish you Did none foretel the event Was the Church silent Did the Gospels say nothing Did the Apostles threaten nothing Did the Priest intreat nothing of you why do you seek for late comforts Then you might have sought for them when they were to be had But they that pronounce such men happy do but abuse you 15. This opinion and the consequent practice had its fate in several places to live longer or die sooner And in Africa the decree of Zephyrinus for the admission of penitent adulterers was not admitted even by the Orthodox and Catholicks but they dissented placidly and modestly and governed their own Churches by the old severity For there was then no thought of any necessity that other Churches should obey the sanctions of the Pope or the decrees of Rome but they retain'd the old Discipline But yet the piety and the reasonableness of the decree of Zephyrinus prevail'd by little and little and adulterers were admitted but the severity stuck longer upon idolaters or apostates for they were not to be admitted to the peace of the Church although they should afterwards suffer martyrdom for the name of Christ and for this they pretended the words of S. Paul Non possunt admitti secundum Apostolum as S. Cyprian expresly affirms and the same is the sentence of the first Canon of the Council of Eliberis 16. When they began to remit of this rigor which they did in or about S. Cyprians time they did admit these great criminals to repentance Once but no more as appears in Tertullian the Council of Eliberis the Synod at Syde in Pamphylia against the Messalians S. Ambrose S. Austin and Macedonius which makes it suspicious that the words of Origen are interpolated saying In gravioribus criminibus semel tantùm vel rarò poenitentiae conceditur locus But once or but seldom so the words are now but the practice of that age was not so remiss for they gave once and no more as appears in the foregoing Authors and in the eleventh Canon of the third Council of Toledo For as S. Clemens of Alexandria affirms Apparet sed non est poenitentia saepe petere de iis quae saepe peccantur It is but a seeming repentance that falls often after a frequent return 17. But this gentleness for it was the greatest they then had they ministred to such only as desir'd it in their health and in the days in which they could live the lives of penitents and make amends for their folly For if men had liv'd wickedly and on their death-bed desir'd to be admitted to repentance and pardon they refus'd them utterly as appears in that excellent Epistle of S. Cyprian to Antonianus Prohibendos omnino censuimus à specommunionis pacis si in infirmitate atque periculo coeperint deprecari at no hand are those to be admitted to Church communion who repent only in their danger and weakness because not repentance of their fault but the hasty warning of instant or approaching death compell'd them neither is he worthy in death to receive the comfort who did not think he was to die And consequently to this severity in his Sermon de lapsis he advises that every man should confess his sin while his confession can be admitted while his satisfaction may be acceptable and his pardon ratified by God The same was decreed by the Fathers in the Synod of Arles 18. This was severe if we judge of it by the manners and propositions of the present age But iniquity did so abound and was so far from being cured by this severe discipline that it made this discipline to be intolerable and useless And therefore even from this also they did quickly retire For in the time of Innocentius and S. Austin they began not only to impose penances on dying penitents but even after a wicked life to reconcile them They then first began to do it but as it usually happens in first attempts and insolent actions they were fearful and knew not the event and would warrant nothing To hinder them that are in peril of death from the use of the last remedy is hard and impious but to promise any thing in so late a cure is temerarious So Salvian and S. Chrysostome to Theodorus would not have such persons despaired so neither nourish'd up by hope only it is better nihil inexpertum relinquere quà m morientem nolle curare to try every way rather than that the dying penitent should fail for want of help But Isidore said plainly He who living wickedly repents in the time of his death as his damnation is uncertain so his pardon is doubtful 19. This was the most dangerous indulgence and easiness of doctrine that had as yet entred into the Church but now it was tumbling and therefore could not stop here but presently down went all severity All sinners and at all times and as often as they would might be admitted to repentance and pardon whether they could or could not perform the
appetites of the body and its desires whether reasonable or excessive and though these things were not direct sins to us in their natural abode and first principle yet they are proper inherent miseries and principles of sin to us in their emanation But from this state Christ came to redeem us all by his grace and by his spirit by his life and by his death by his Doctrine and by his Sacraments by his Promises and by his Revelations by his Resurrection and by his Ascension by his Interceding for us and Judging of us and if this be not a conjugation of glorious things great enough to amaze us and to merit from us all our services and all our love and all the glorifications of God I am sure nothing can be added to it by any supposed need of which we have no revelation There is as much done for us as we could need and more than we could ask Nempe quod optanti Divûm promittere nemo Auderet volvenda dies en attulit ultro Vivite foelices animae quibus est fortuna peracta Jam sua The meaning of which words I render or at least recompence with the verse of a Psalm To thee O Lord I 'le pay my vow My knees in thanks to thee shall bow For thou my life keep'st from the grave And dost my feet from falling save That with the living in thy sight I may enjoy eternal light For thus what Ahasuerus said to Ester Veteres literas muta Change the old Letters is done by the birth of our Blessed Saviour Eva is changed into Ave and although it be true what Bensirach said From the woman is the beginning of sin and by her we all die yet it is now changed by the birth of our Redeemer From a woman is the beginning of our restitution and in him we all live Thus are all the four quarters of the World renewed by the second Adam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The East West North and South are represented in the second Adam as well as the first and rather and to better purposes because if sin did abound Grace shall super-abound I have now Madam given to you such accounts as I hope being added to my other Papers may satisfie not only your Ladiship but those to whom this account may be communicated I shall only now beg your patience since you have been troubled with Questions and enquiries and objections and little murmurs to hear my answers to such of them as have been brought to me 1. I am complained of that I would trouble the World with a new thing which let it be never so true yet unless it were very useful will hardly make recompence for the trouble I put the world to in this inquiry I answer that for the newness of it I have already given accounts that the Opinions which I impugne as they are no direct parts of the Article of Original sin so they are newer than the truth which I have asserted But let what I say seem as new as the Reformation did when Luther first preached against Indulgences the pretence of Novelty did not and we say ought not to have affrighted him and therefore I ought also to look to what I say that it be true and the truth will prove its age But to speak freely Madam though I have a great reverence for Antiquity yet it is the prime antiquity of the Church the Ages of Martyrs and Holiness that I mean and I am sure that in them my opinion hath much more warrant than the contrary But for the descending Ages I give that veneration to the great names of them that went before us which themselves gave to their Predecessors I honour their memory I read their Books I imitate their piety I examine their arguments for therefore they did write them and where the reasons of the Moderns and theirs seem equal I turn the balance on the elder side and follow them but where a scruple or a grain of reason is evidently in the other balance I must follow that Nempe qui ante nos ista moverunt non Domini nostri sed Duces sunt Seneca Ep. 33. They that taught of this Article before me are good guides but no Lords and Masters for I must acknowledge none upon earth for so am I commanded by my Master that is in Heaven and I remember what we were taught in Palingenius when we were boys Quicquid Aristoteles vel quivis dicat eorum Dicta nihil moror à vero cum fortè recedunt Saepe graves magnosque viros famâque verendos Errare labi contingit plurima secum Ingenia in tenebras consueti nominis alti Authores ubi connivent deducere easdem If Aristotle be deceiv'd and say that 's true What nor himself nor others ever knew I leave his text and let his Scholars talk Till they be hoarse or weary in their walk When wise men erre though their fame ring like Bells I scape a danger when I leave their spells For although they that are dead some Ages before we were born have a reverence due to them yet more is due to truth that shall never die and God is not wanting to our industry any more than to theirs but blesses every Age with the understanding of his truths Aetatibus omnibus omnibus hominibus communis sapientia est nec illam ceu peculium licet antiquitati gratulari All Ages and all men have their advantages in their enquiries after truth neither is wisdom appropriate to our Fathers And because even wise men may be deceived and therefore that when I find it or suppose it so for that 's all one as to me and my duty I must go after truth where-ever it is certainly it will be less expected from me to follow the popular noises and the voices of the people who are not to teach us but to be taught by us and I believe my self to have reason to complain when men are angry at a doctrine because it is not commonly taught that is when they are impatient to be taught a truth because most men do already believe a lie Recti apud nos locum tenet error ubi publicus factus est so Seneca Epist. 123. complained in his time it is a strange title to truth which error can pretend for its being publick and we refuse to follow an unusual truth Quasi honestius sit quiafrequentius and indeed it were well to do so in those propositions which have no truth in them but what they borrow from mens opinions and are for nothing tolerable but that they are usual Object 2. But what necessity is there in my publication of this doctrine supposing it were true for all truths are not to be spoken at all times and if a truth gives offence it is better to let men alone than to disturb the peace I answer with the labouring mans Proverb a Penny-worth of ease is worth a Penny at any time and a little truth
my life confuting him and though I will not contend with him yet I will die with him in behalf of the Church if God shall call me but for other little things and trifling arrests and little murmurs I value none of it Quid verum atque decent curo rogo omnis in hoc sum Condo compono quod mox depromere possim Nullius addictus jurare in verba Magistri Quo me cunque rapit tempestas deferor I could translate these also into bad English verse as I do the others but that now I am earnest for my liberty I will not so much as confine my self to the measures of feet But in plain English I mean by rehearsing these Latin Verses that although I love every man and value worthy persons in proportion to their labours and abilities whereby they can and do serve God and Gods Church yet I inquire for what is fitting not what is pleasing I search after ways to advantage souls not to comply with humors and Sects and interests and I am tied to no mans private opinion any more than he is to mine if he will bring Scripture and right reason from any topick he may govern me and perswade me else I am free as he is but I hope I am before-hand with him in this question But one thing more I am willing to add By the confession of all the Schools of learning it is taught that Baptism hath infallibly all that effect upon Infants which God design'd and the Church intends to them in the ministery of that Sacrament because Infants cannot ponere obicem they cannot impede the gift of God and they hinder not the effect of Gods Spirit Now all hinderances of the operation of the Sacrament is sin and if sin before the ministration be not morally rescinded it remains and remaining is a disposition contrary to the effect of the Sacrament Every inherent sin is the obex bars the gates that the grace of the Sacrament shall not enter Since therefore Infants do not bar the gates do not hinder the effect of the Sacrament it follows they have no sin inherent in them but imputed only If it be replied that Original sin though it be properly a sin and really inherent yet it does not hinder the effect of the Sacrament I answer then it follows that Original sin is of less malignity than the least actual sin in the world and if so then either by it no man is hated by God to eternal damnation no man is by it an enemy of God a son of wrath an heir of perdition or if he be then at the same time he may be actually hated by God and yet worthily disposed for receiving the grace and Sacrament of Baptism and that sin which of all the sins of the world is supposed to be the greatest and of most universal and parmanent mischief shall do the least harm and is less opposed to Gods grace and indisposes a man less than a single wanton thought or the first consent to a forbidden action which he that can believe is very much in love with his own proposition and is content to believe it upon any terms I end with the words of Lucretius Desine quapropter novitate exterritus ipsâ Expuere ex animo rationem sed magis acri Judicio perpende si tibi vera videtur Dede manus aut si falsa est accingere contrá Fear not to own what 's said because 't is new Weigh well and wisely if the thing be true Truth and not conquest is the best reward 'Gainst falshood only stand upon thy guard Madam I Humbly beg you will be pleased to entertain these Papers not only as a Testimony of my Zeal for Truth and Peace below and for the Honour of God above but also of my readiness to seize upon every occasion whereby I may express my self to be Your most obliged and most Humble Servant in the Religion of the H. Jesus JER TAYLOR An ANSWER to a LETTER Written by the R. R. The Lord Bishop of ROCHESTER Concerning the Chapter of ORIGINAL SIN IN THE VNVM NECESSARIVM R. R. Father and my good Lord YOUR Lordships Letter Dated July 28. I received not till Septemb. 11. it seems R. Royston detained it in his hands supposing it could not come safely to me while I remain a prisoner now in Chepstow-Castle But I now have that liberty that I can receive any Letters and send any for the Gentlemen under whose custody I am as they are careful of their charges so they are civil to my person It was necessary I should tell this to your Lordship that I may not be under a suspicion of neglecting to give accounts in those particulars which with so much prudence and charity you were pleased to represent in your Letter concerning my discourse of Original Sin My Lord In all your Exceptions I cannot but observe your candor and your paternal care concerning me For when there was nothing in the Doctrine but your greater reason did easily see the justice and the truth of it and I am perswaded could have taught me to have said many more material things in confirmation of what I have taught yet so careful is your charity of me that you would not omit to represent to my consideration what might be said by captious and weaker persons or by the more wise and pious who are of a different judgment But my Lord First you are pleased to note that this discourse runs not in the ordinary channel True for if it did it must nurse the popular error but when the disease is Epidemical as it is so much the worse so the extraordinary remedy must be acknowledg'd to be the better And if there be in it some things hard to be understood as it was the fate of S. Paul's Epistles as your Lordship notes out of S. Peter yet this difficulty of understanding proceeds not from the thing it self nor from the manner of handling it but from the indisposition and prepossession of mens minds to the contrary who are angry when they are told that they have been deceived for it is usual with men to be more displeased when they are told they were in error than to be pleased with them who offer to lead them out of it But your Lordship doth with great advantages represent an objection of some captious persons which relates not to the material part of the Question but to the rules of art If there be no such thing as Original Sin transmitted from Adam to his posterity then all that Sixth Chapter is a strife about a shadow a Non ens Ans. It is true my Lord the Question as it is usually handled is so For when the Franciscan and Dominican do eternally dispute about the conception of the Blessed Virgin whether it was with or without Original Sin meaning by way of grace and special exemption this is de non ente for there was no need of any such
most eminent writers of the Primitive Christ I need not trouble my self with citations of many of them since Calvin lib. 3. Instit. c. 3. Sect. 10. confesses that S. Austin hath collected their testimonies and is of their opinion that Concupiscence is not a sin but an infirmity only But I will here set down the words of S. Chrysostome Homil. 13. in Epist. Rom. because they are very clear Ipsae passiones in se peccatum non sunt Effraenata verò ipsarum immoderantia peccatum operata est Concupiscentia quidem peccatum non est quando verò egressa modum foras eruperit tunc demum adulterium fit non à concupiscentia sed à nimio illicito illius luxu By the way I cannot but wonder why men are pleased where-ever they find the word Concupiscence in the New Testament presently to dream of Original Sin and make that to be the summ total of it whereas Concupiscence if it were the product of Adam's fall is but one small part of it Et ut exempli gratia unam illarum tractem said S. Chrysostome in the forecited place Concupiscence is but one of the passions and in the utmost extension of the word it can be taken but for one half of the passion for not only all the passions of the Concupiscible faculty can be a principle of sin but the Irascible does more hurt in the world that is more sensual this is more devillish The reason why I note this is because upon this account it will seem that concupiscence is no more to be called a sin than anger is and as S. Paul said Be angry but sin not so he might have said Desire or lust but sin not For there are some lustings and desires without sin as well as some Anger 's and that which is indifferent to vertue and vice cannot of it self be a vice To which I add that if Concupiscence taken for all desires be a sin then so are all the passions of the Irascible faculty Why one more than the other is not to be told but that Anger in the first motions is not a sin appears because it is not always sinful in the second a man may be actually angry and yet really innocent and so he may be lustful and full of desire and yet he may be not only that which is good or he may overcome his desires to that which is bad I have now considered what your Lordship received from others and gave me in Charge your self concerning Concupiscence Your next Charge is concerning Antiquity intimating that although the first antiquity is not clearly against me yet the second is For thus your Lordship is pleased to write their objection I confess I find not the Fathers so fully and plainly speaking of Original Sin till Pelagius had pudled the stream but after this you may find S. Jerome c. That the Fathers of the first Four Hundred years did speak plainly and fully of it is so evident as nothing more and I appeal to their testimonies as they are set down in the Papers annexed in their proper place and therefore that must needs be one of the little arts by which some men use to escape from the pressure of that authority by which because they would have other men concluded sometimes upon strict inquiry they find themselves entangled Original Sin as it is at this day commonly explicated was not the Doctrine of the Primitive Church but when Pelagius had pudled the stream S. Austin was so angry that he stampt and disturb'd it more And truly my Lord I do not think that the Gentlemen that urg'd against me S. Austin's opinion do well consider that I profess my self to follow those Fathers who were before him and whom S. Austin did forsake as I do him in the question They may as well press me with his authority in the Article of the damnation of Infants dying unbaptized or of absolute predestination In which Article S. Austin's words are equally urged by the Jansenists and Molinists by the Remonstrants and Contra-remonstrants and they can serve both and therefore cannot determine me But then my Lord let it be remembred that they are as much against S. Chrysostome as I am against S. Austin with this only difference that S. Chrysostome speaks constantly in the argument which S. Austin did not and particularly in that part of it which concerns Concupiscence For in the inquiry whether it be a sin or no he speaks so variously that though Calvin complains of him that he calls it only an infirmity yet he also brings testimonies from him to prove it to be a sin and let any man try if he can tie these words together De peccator mer. remission l. 1. c. 3. Concupiscentia carnis peccatum est quia inest illi inobedientia contra dominatum mentis Which are the words your Lordship quotes Concupiscence is a sin because it is a disobedience to the Empire of the spirit But yet in another place lib. 1. de civit Dei cap. 25. Illa Concupiscentialis inobedientia quanto magis absque culpa est in corpore non consentientis si absque culpa est in corpore dormientis It is a sin and it is no sin it is criminal but is without fault it is culpable because it is a disobedience and yet this disobedience without actual consent is not culpable If I do believe S. Austin I must disbelieve him and which part soever I take I shall be reproved by the same authority But when the Fathers are divided from each other or themselves it is indifferent to follow either but when any of them are divided from Reason and Scripture then it is not indifferent for us to follow them and neglect these and yet if these who object S. Austin's authority to my Doctrine will be content to subject to all that he says I am content they shall follow him in this too provided that they will give me my liberty because I will not not be tied to him that speaks contrary things to himself and contrary to them that went before him and though he was a rare person yet he was as fallible as any of my brethren at this day He was followed by many ignorant ages and all the world knows by what accidental advantages he acquired a great reputation but he who made no scruple of deserting all his predecessors must give us leave upon the strength of his own reasons to quit his authority All that I shall observe is this that the Doctrine of Original Sin as it is explicated by S. Austin had two parents one was the Doctrine of the Encratites and some other Hereticks who forbad Marriage and supposing it to be evil thought they were warranted to say it was the bed of sin and children the spawn of vipers and sinners And S. Austin himself and especially S. Hierome whom your Lordship cites speaks some things of marriage which if they were true then marriage were highly
such is the ambiguity and cloud of its face and representment as not to be necessary so much as by accident and therefore not to the particular sense of any one person And yet such is the iniquity of men that they suck in Opinions as wild Asses do the wind without distinguishing the wholsome from the corrupted air and then live upon it at a venture and when all their confidence is built upon zeal and mistake yet therefore because they are zealous and mistaken they are impatient of contradiction But besides that against this I have laid prejudice enough from the dictates of Holy Scripture it is observable that this with its appendant degrees I mean restraint of Prophesying imposing upon other mens understanding being masters of their Consciences and lording it over their Faith came in with the retinue and train of Antichrist that is they came as other abuses and corruptions of the Church did by reason of the iniquity of times and the cooling of the first heats of Christianity and the encrease of interest and the abatements of Christian simplicity when the Churche's fortune grew better and her Sons grew worse and some of her Fathers worst of all For in the first three hundred years there was no sign of persecuting any man for his Opinion though at that time there were very horrid Opinions commenced and such which were exemplary and parallel enough to determine this Question for they then were assaulted by new Sects which destroyed the common principles of nature of Christianity of innocence and publick society and they who used all the means Christian and Spiritual for their disimprovement and conviction thought not of using corporal force otherwise then by blaming such proceedings And therefore I do not onely urge their not doing it as an Argument of the unlawfulness of such proceeding but their defying it and speaking against such practices as unreasonable and destructive of Christianity For so Tertullian is express Humani juris naturalis potestatis unicuique quod putaverit colere sed nec religionis est cogere religionem quae suscipi debet sponte non vi The same is the Doctrine of S. Cyprian Lactantius S. Hilary Minutius Felix Sulpitius Severus S. Chrysostome S. Hierom S. Austin Damascen Theophylact Socrates Scholasticus and S. Bernard as they are severally referred to and urged upon occasion in the following Discourse To which I adde that all wise Princes till they were overborn with faction or solicited by peevish persons gave Toleration to differing Sects whose Opinions did not disturb the publick interest But at first there were some hereticall persons that were also impatient of an Adversary and they were the men who at first entreated the Emperours to persecute the Catholicks but till four hundred years after Christ no Catholick persons or very few did provoke the Secular arm or implore its aid against the Hereticks save onely that Arius behaved himself so seditiously and tumultuarily that the Nicene Fathers procured a temporary Decree for his relegation but it was soon taken off and God left to be his Judge who indeed did it to some purpose when he was trusted with it and the matter wholly left to him But as the Ages grew worse so men grew more cruel and unchristian and in the Greek Church Atticus and Nestorius of Constantinople Theodosius of Synada and some few others who had forgotten the mercies of their great Master and their own duty grew implacable and furious and impatient of contradiction It was a bold and an arrogant speech which Nestorius made in his Sermon before Theodosius the younger Da mihi O Imperator terram ab haereticis repurgatam ego tibi vicissim coelum dabo Disperde mecum haereticos ego tecum disperdam Persas It was as groundless and unwarrantable as it was bloudy and inhumane And we see the contrary events prove truer then this groundless and unlearned promise for Theodosius and Valentinian were prosperous Princes and have to all Ages a precious memory and the reputation of a great piety but they were so far from doing what Nestorius had suggested that they restrained him from his violence and immanity and Theodosius did highly commend the good Bishop Proclus for his sweetness of deportment towards erring persons far above the cruelty of his Predecessor Atticus And the experience which Christendom hath had in this last Age is Argument enough that Toleration of differing Opinions is so far from disturbing the publick peace or destroying the interest of Princes and Commonwealths that it does advantage to the publick it secures peace because there is not so much as the pretence of Religion left to such persons to contend for it being already indulged to them When France fought against the Huguenots the spilling of her own bloud was argument enough of the imprudence of that way of promoting Religion but since she hath given permission to them the world is witness how prosperous she hath been ever since But the great instance is in the differing temper Government and success which Margaret of Parma and the Duke of Alva had The clemency of the first had almost extinguished the flame but when she was removed D' Alva succeeded and managed the matter of Religion with fire and sword he made the flame so great that his Religion and his Prince too have both been almost quite turned out of the Countrey Pelli è medio sapientiam quoties vires agitur said Ennius and therefore the best of men and the most glorious of Princes were alwaies ready to give Toleration but never to make executions for matters disputable Eusebius in his second Book of the life of Constantine reports these words of the Emperour Parem cum fidelibus ii qui errant pacis quietis fruitionem gaudentes accipiant Ipsa siquidem communicationis societatis restitutio ad rectam etiam veritatis viam perducere potest Nemo cuiquam molestus sit quisque quod animo destinat hoc etiam faciat And indeed there is great reason for Princes to give Toleration to disagreeing persons whose Opinions by fair means cannot be altered For if the persons be confident they will serve God according to their perswasions and if they be publickly prohibited they will privately convene and then all thâ—se inconveniences and mischiefs which are Arguments against the permission of Conventicles are Arguments for the publick permissions of differing Religions because the denying of the publick worship will certainly produce private Conventicles against which all wise Princes and Commonwealths have upon great reasons made Edicts and severe Sanctions Quicquid enim agitur absente Rege in caput ejus plerumque redundat say the Politicks For the face of a man is as the face of a Lion and scatters all base machinations which breath not but in the dark It is a proverbial saying quôd nimia familiaritas servorum est conspiratio adversùs Dominum and they who for their security run into grots
and cellars and retirements think that they being upon the defensive those Princes and those Laws that drive them to it are their enemies and therefore they cannot be secure unless the power of the one and the obligation of the other be lessened and rescinded and then the being restrained and made miserable endears the discontented persons mutually and makes more hearty and dangerous Confederations King James of blessed memory in his Letters to the States of the Vnited Provinces dated 6. March 1613. thus wrote Magis autem è re fore si sopiantur authoritate publicâ ità ut prohibeatis Ministros vestros nè eas disputationes in suggestum aut ad plebem ferant ac districtè imperetis ut pacem colant se invicem tolerando in ista opinionum ac sententiarum discrepantia Eóque justiùs videmur vobis hoc ipsum suadere debere quòd neutram comperimus adeò deviam ut non possint cum fidei Christianae veritate cum animarum salute consistere c. The like counsel in the divisions of Germany at the first Reformation was thought reasonable by the Emperour Ferdinand and his excellent Son Maximilian For they had observed that violence did exasperate was unblessed unsuccessfull and unreasonable and therefore they made Decrees of Toleration and appointed tempers and expedients to be drawn up by discreet persons and George Cassander was design'd to this great work and did something towards it And Emanuel Philibert Duke of Savoy repenting of his war undertaken for Religion against the Pedemontans promised them Toleration and was as good as his word As much is done by the Nobility of Polonia So that the best Princes and the best Bishops gave Toleration and Impunities but it is known that the first Persecutions of disagreeing persons were by the Arians by the Circumcellians and Donatists and from them they of the Church took examples who in small numbers did sometime perswade it sometime practise it And among the Greeks it became a publick and authorized practice till the Question of Images grew hot and high for then the Worshippers of Images having taken their example from the Empress Irene who put her son's eyes out for making an Edict against Images began to be as cruel as they were deceived especially being encouraged by the Popes of Rome who then blew the coals to some purpose And that I may upon this occasion give account of this affair in the Church of Rome it is remarkable that till the time of Justinian the Emperour A.D. 525. the Catholicks and Novatians had Churches indifferently permitted even in Rome itself but the Bishops of Rome whose interest was much concerned in it spoke much against it and laboured the eradication of the Novatians and at last when they got power into their hands they served them accordingly but it is observed by Socrates that when the first Persecution was made against them at Rome by Pope Innocent I. at the same instant the Goths invaded Italy and became Lords of all it being just in God to bring a Persecution upon them for true belief who with an incompetent Authority and insufficient grounds do persecute an errour less material in persons agreeing with them in the profession of the same common Faith And I have heard it observed as a blessing upon S. Austin who was so mercifull to erring persons as the greatest part of his life in all senses even when he had twice changed his minde yet to tolerate them and never to endure they should be given over to the Secular power to be killed that the very night the Vandals set down before his City of Hippo to besiege it he died and went to God being as a reward of his mercifull Doctrine taken from the miseries to come And yet that very thing was also a particular issue of the Divine Providence upon that City who not long before had altered their profession into truth by force and now were falling into their power who afterward by a greater force turned them to be Arians But in the Church of Rome the Popes were the first Preachers of force and violence in matters of Opinion and that so zealously that Pope Vigilius suffered himself to be imprisoned and handled roughly by the Emperour Justinian rather then he would consent to the restitution and peace of certain disagreeing persons But as yet it came not so far as Death The first that preached that Doctrine was Dominick the Founder of the Begging Orders of Friers the Friers Preachers in memory of which the Inquisition is intrusted onely to the Friers of his Order And if there be any force in Dreams or truth in Legends as there is not much in either this very thing might be signified by his Mother's dream who the night before Dominick was born dreamed she was brought to bed of a huge Dog with a fire-brand in his mouth Sure enough however his Disciples expound the dream it was a better sign that he should prove a rabid furious Incendiary then any thing else whatever he might be in the other parts of his life in his Doctrine he was not much better as appears in his deportment toward the Albigenses against whom he so preached adeo quidem ut centum haereticorum millia ab octo millibus Catholicorum fusa interfecta fuisse perhibeantur saith one of him and of those who were taken 180 were burnt to death because they would not abjure their Doctrine This was the first example of putting erring persons to death that I find in the Roman Church For about 170 years before Berengarius fell into opinion concerning the blessed Sacrament which they called Heresie and recanted and relapsed and recanted again and fell again two or three times saith Gerson writing against Romant of the Rose and yet he died sicca morte his own natural death and with hope of Heaven and yet Hildebrand was once his Judge which shews that at that time Rome was not come to so great heights of bloudshed In England although the Pope had as great power here as any-where yet there were no executions for matter of Opinion known till the time of Henry the fourth who because he usurped the Crown was willing by all means to endear the Clergy by destroying their enemies that so he might be sure of them to all his purposes And indeed it may become them well enough who are wiser in their generations then the children of light it may possibly serve the policies of evil persons but never the pure and chast dâ—signs of Christianity which admits no bloud but Christ's and the imitating bloud of Martyrs but knows nothing how to serve her ends by persecuting any of her erring Children By this time I hope it will not be thought reasonable to say he that teaches mercy to erring persons teaches indifferency in Religion unless so many Fathers and so many Churches and the best of Emperours and all the world till they were abused by Tyranny
Popery and Faction did teach indifferency For I have shewn that Christianity does not punish corporally persons erring spiritually but indeed Popery does the Donatists and Circumcellians and Arrians and the Itaciani they of old did in the middle Ages the patrons of Images did and the Papists at this day doe and have done ever since they were taught it by their St. Dominick Seventhly And yet after all this I have something more to exempt my self from the clamour of this Objection For let all Errours be as much and as zealously suppressed as may be the Doctrine of the following Discourse contradicts not that but let it be done by such means as are proper instruments of their suppression by Preaching and Disputation so that neither of them breed disturbance by charity and sweetness by holiness of life assiduity of exhortation by the word of God and prayer For these ways are most natural most prudent most peaceable and effectual Onely let not men be hasty in calling every dislik'd Opinion by the name of Heresie and when they have resolved that they will call it so let them use the erring person like a brother not beat him like a dog or convince him with a gibbet or vex him out of his understanding and perswasions And now if men will still say I perswade to indifferency there is no help for me for I have given reasons against it I must bear it as well as I can I am not yet without remedy as they are for patience will help me and reason will not cure them let them take their course and I 'le take mine Only I will take leave to consider this and they would do well to do so too that unless Faith be kept within its own latitude and not call'd out to patrocinate every less necessary Opinion and the interest of every Sect or peevish person and if damnation be pronounced against Christians believing the Creed and living good lives because they are deceived or are said to be deceived in some Opinions less necessary there is no way in the world to satisfie unlearned persons in the choice of their Religion or to appease the unquietness of a scrupulous Conscience For suppose an honest Citizen whose imployment and parts will not enable him to judge the disputes and arguings of great Clerks sees Factions commenced and managed with much bitterness by persons who might on either hand be fit enough to guide him when if he follows either he is disquieted and pronounced damned by the other who also if he be the most unreasonable in his Opinion will perhaps be more furious in his sentence what shall this man do where shall he rest the soal of his foot Vpon the Doctrine of the Church where he lives Well but that he hears declaimed against perpetually and other Churches claim highly and pretend fairly for truth and condemn his Church If I tell him that he must live a good life and believe the Creed and not trouble himself with their disputes or interest himself in Sects and Factions I speak reason because no Law of God ties him to believe more then what is of essential necessity and whatsoever he shall come to know to be revealed by God Now if he believes his Creed he believes all that is necessary to all or of it self and if he do his moral endeavour beside he can do no more toward finding out all the rest and then he is secured But then if this will secure him why do men press farther and pretend every Opinion as necessary and that in so high a degree that if they all said true or any two indeed of them in 500 Sects which are in the world and for ought I know there may be 5000 it is 500 to one but that every man is damned for every Sect damns all but itself and that is damn'd of 499 and it is excellent fortune then if that escape And there is the same reason in every one of them that is it is extreme unreasonableness in all of them to pronounce damnation against such persons against whom clearly and dogmatically Holy Scripture hath not In odiosis quod minimum est sequimur in favoribus quod est maximum saith the Law and therefore we should say any thing or make any excuse that is in any degree reasonable rather then condemn all the world to Hell especially if we consider these two things that we ourselves are as apt to be deceived as any are and that they who are deceived when they used their moral industry that they might not be deceived if they perish for this they perish for what they could not help But however if the best security in the World be not in neglecting all Sects and subdivisions of men and fixing ourselves on points necessary and plain and on honest and pious endeavours according to our several capacities and opportunities for all the rest if I say all this be not through the mercies of God the best security to all unlearned persons and learned too where shall we fix where shall we either have peace or security If you bid me follow your Doctrine you must tell me why and perhaps when you have I am not able to judge or if I be as able as other people are yet when I have judged I may be deceived too and so may you or any man else you bid me follow so that I am not whit the nearer truth or peace And then if we look abroad and consider how there is scarce any Church but is highly charg'd by many adversaries in many things possibly we may see a reason to charge every one of them in some things and what shall we doe then The Church of Rome hath spots enough and all the world is inquisitive enough to find out more and to represent these to her greatest disadvantage The Greek Churches denies the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son If that be false Doctrine she is highly to blame if it be not then all the Western Churches are to blame for saying the contrary And there is no Church that is in prosperity but alters her Doctrine every Age either by bringing in new Doctrines or by contradicting her old which shews that none are satisfied with themselves or with their own Confessions And since all Churches believe themselves fallible that only excepted which all other Churches say is most of all deceived it were strange if in so many Articles which make up their several bodies of Confessions they had not mistaken every one of them in some thing or other The Lutheran Churches maintain Consubstantiation the Zuinglians are Sacramentaries the Calvinists are fierce in the matters of absolute Predetermination and all these reject Episcopacy which the Primitive Church would have made no doubt to have called Heresie The Socinians profess a portentous number of strange Opinions they deny the Holy Trinity and the Satisfaction of our Blessed Saviour The Anabaptists laugh at Paedo-baptism the Ethiopian Churches
that while the good man lived were never thought of for his daughters were Virgins and his Sons lived in holy coelibate all their lives and himself lived in chast Wedlock and yet his memory had rotted in perpetual infamy had not God in whose sight the memory of the Saints is precious preserved it by the testimony of Clemens Alexandrinus and from him of Eusebius and Nicephorus But in the Catalogue of Hereticks made by Philastrius he stands mark'd with a black character as guilty of many heresies By which one testimony we may guess what trust is to be given to those Catalogues Well This good man had ill luck to fall into unskilful hands at first but Irenaeus Justin Martyr Lactantius to name no more had better fortune for it being still extant in their writings that they were of the Millenary opinion Papius before and Nepos after were censured hardly and the opinion put into the catalogue of heresies and yet these men never suspected as guilty but like the children of the Captivity walkt in the midst of the flame and not so much as the smell of fire passed on them But the uncertainty of these things is very memorable in the story of Eustathius Bishop of Antioch contesting with Eusebius Pamphilus Eustathius accused Eusebius for going about to corrupt the Nicene Creed of which slander he then acquitted himself saith Socrates and yet he is not cleared by posterity for still he is suspected and his fame not clear However Eusebius then scaped well but to be quit with his Adversary he recriminates and accuses him to be a favourer of Sabellius rather than of the Nicene Canons an imperfect accusation God knows when the crime was a suspicion proveable only by actions capable of divers constructions and at the most made but some degrees of probability and the fact it self did not consist in indivisibili and therefore was to stand or fall to be improved or lessened according to the will of the Judges whom in this cause Eustathius by his ill fortune and a potent Adversary found harsh towards him in so much that he was for heresy deposed in the Synod of Antioch and though this was laid open in the eye of the world as being most ready at hand with the greatest ease charged upon every man and with greatest difficulty acquitted by any man yet there were other suspicions raised upon him privately or at least talkt of ex post facto and pretended as causes of his deprivation lest the sentence should seem too hard for the first offence And yet what they were no man could tell saith the story But it is observable what Socrates saith as in excuse of such proceedings 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is the manner among the Bishops when they accuse them that are deposed they call them wicked but they publish not the actions of their impiety It might possibly be that the Bishops did it in tenderness of their reputation but yet hardly for to punish a person publickly and highly is a certain declaring the person punished guilty of a high crime and then to conceal the fault upon pretence to preserve his reputation leaves every man at liberty to conjecture what he pleaseth who possibly will believe it worse than it is in as much as they think his judges so charitable as therefore to conceal the fault lest the publishing of it should be his greatest punishment and the scandal greater than his deprivation However this course if it were just in any was unsafe in all for it might undoe more than it could preserve and therefore is of more danger than it can be of charity It is therefore too probable that the matter was not very fair for in publick sentences the acts ought to be publick but that they rather pretend heresy to bring their ends about shews how easie it is to impute that crime and how forward they were to doe it And that they might and did then as easily call Heretick as afterward when Vigilius was condemned of heresie for saying there were Antipodes or as the Fryars of late did who suspected Greek and Hebrew of heresie and called their Professors Hereticks and had like to have put Terence and Demosthenes into the Index Expurgatorius sure enough they rail'd at them pro concione therefore because they understood them not and had reason to believe they would accidentally be enemies to their reputation among the people 18. By this instance which was a while after the Nicene Council where the acts of the Church were regular judicial and orderly we may guess at the sentences passed upon heresy at such times and in such cases when their process was more private and their acts more tumultuary their information less certain and therefore their mistakes more easie and frequent And it is remarkable in the case of the heresy of Montanus the scene of whose heresie lay within the first three hundred years though it was represented in the Catalogues afterwards and possibly the mistake concerning it is to be put upon the score of Epiphanius by whom Montanus and his Followers were put into the Catalogue of Hereticks for commanding abstinence from meats as if they were unclean and of themselves unlawful Now the truth was Montanus said no such thing but commanded frequent abstinence enjoyned dry diet and an ascetick Table not for conscience sake but for Discipline and yet because he did this with too much rigour and strictness of mandate the Primitive Church misliked it in him as being too near their errour who by a Judaical superstition abstained from meats as from uncleanness This by the way will much concern them who place too much sanctity in such Rites and Acts of Discipline for it is an eternal Rule and of never failing truth that such abstinencies if they be obtruded as Acts of original immediate duty and sanctity are unlawfull and superstitious if they be for Discipline they may be good but of no very great profit it is that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which S. Paul says profiteth but little and just in the same degree the Primitive Church esteemed them for they therefore reprehended Montanus for urging such abstinences with too much earnestness though but in the way of Discipline for that it was no more Tertullian who was himself a Montanist and knew best the opinions of his own Sect testifies and yet Epiphanius reporting the errours of Montanus commends that which Montanus truly and really taught and which the Primitive Church condemned in him and therefore represents that heresie to another sence and affixes that to Montanus which Epiphanius believed a heresie and yet which Montanus did not teach And this also among many other things lessens my opinion very much of the integrity or discretion of the old Catalogues of Hereticks and much abates my confidence towards them 19. And now that I have mentioned them casually in passing by I shall give a short account of them for
men are much mistaken some in their opinions concerning the truth of them as believing them to be all true some concerning their purpose as thinking them sufficient not only to condemn all those opinions there called heretical but to be a precedent to all Ages of the Church to be free and forward in calling Heretick But he that considers the Catalogues themselves as they are collected by Epiphanius Philastrius and S. Austin shall find that many are reckoned for Hereticks for opinions in matters disputable and undetermined and of no consequence and in these Catalogues of Hereticks there are men numbred for Hereticks which by every side respectively are acquitted so that there is no company of men in the world that admit these Catalogues as good Records or sufficient sentences of condemnation For the Churches of the Reformation I am certain they acquit Aerius for denying prayer for the dead and the Eustathians for denying invocation of Saints And I am partly of opinion that the Church of Rome is not willing to call the Collyridians Hereticks for offering a Cake to the Virgin Mary unless she also will run the hazard of the same sentence for offering Candles to her And that they will be glad with S. Austin l. 6. de haeres c. 86. to excuse the Tertullianists for picturing God in a visible corporal representment And yet these Sects are put in the black Book by Epiphanius and S. Austin and Isidore respectively I remember also that the Osseni are called Hereticks because they refused to worship towards the East and yet in that dissent I find not the malignity of a Heresie nor any thing against an Article of Faith or good manners and it being only in circumstance it were hard if they were otherwise pious men and true believers to send them to Hell for such a trifle The Parermeneutae refused to follow other mens dictates like sheep but would expound Scripture according to the best evidence themselves could find and yet were called Hereticks whether they expounded true or no. The Pauliciani for being offended at crosses the Proclians for saying in a regenerate man all his sins were not quite dead but only curbed and asswaged were called Hereticks and so condemned for ought I know for affirming that which all pious men feel in themselves to be too true And he that will consider how numerous the catalogues are and to what a volume they are come in their last collections to no less than five hundred and twenty for so many heresies and Hereticks are reckoned by Prateolus may think that if a re-trenchment were justly made of truths and all impertinencies and all opinions either still disputable or less considerable the number would much decrease and therefore that the Catalogues are much amiss and the name Heretick is made a Terriculamentum to affright people from their belief or to discountenance the persons of men and disrepute them that their Schooles may be empty and their Disciples few 20. So that I shall not need to instance how that some men were called Hereticks by Philastrius for rejecting the translation of the Lxx. and following the Bible of Aquila wherein the great faults mentioned by Philastrius are that he translates 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not Christum but unctum Dei and instead of Emanuel writes Deus nobiscum But this most concerns them of the Primitive Church with whom the translation of Aquila was in great reputation is enim veluti plus à quibusdam ..... intellexisse laudatur It was supposed he was a great Clerk and understood more than ordinary it may be he did But whether yea or no yet since the other Translators by the confession of Philastrius quaedam praetermisisse necessitate urgente cogerentur if some wise men or unwise did follow a Translatour who understood the Original well for so Aquila had learnt amongst the Jews It was hard to call men Hereticks for following his Translation especially since the other Bibles which were thought to have in them contradictories and it was confessed had omitted some things were excused by necessity and the others necessity of following Aquila when they had no better was not at all considered nor a less crime than heresy laid upon their score Such another was the heresy of the Quartodecimani for the Easterlings were all proclaimed Hereticks for keeping Easter after the manner of the East and as Socrates and Nicephorus report the Bishop of Rome was very forward to Excommunicate all the Bishops of the lesser Asia for observing the Feast according to the Tradition of their Ancestors though they did it modestly quietly and without faction and although they pretended and were as well able to prove their Tradition from S. John of so observing it as the Western Church could prove their Tradition derivative from S. Peter and S. Paul If such things as these make up the Catalogues of Hereticks as we see they did their accounts differ from the Precedents they ought to have followed that is the censures Apostolical and therefore are unsafe precedents for us and unless they took the liberty of using the word heresy in a lower sence than the world now doth since the Councils have been forward in pronouncing Anathema and took it only for a distinct sence and a differing perswasion in matters of opinion and minute Articles we cannot excuse the persons of the men but if they intended the crime of heresy against those opinions as they laid them down in their Catalogues that crime I say which is a work of the flesh which excludes from the Kingdom of Heaven all that I shall say against them is that the causeless curse shall return empty and no man is damned the sooner because his enemy cryes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and they that were the Judges and Accusers might erre as well as the persons accused and might need as charitable construction of their opinions and practices as the other And of this we are sure they had no warrant from any rule of Scripture or practice Apostolical for driving so furiously and hastily in such decretory sentences But I am willing rather to believe their sence of the word Heresie was more gentle than with us it is and for that they might have warrant from Scripture 21. But by the way I observe that although these Catalogues are a great instance to shew that they whose Age and spirits were far distant from the Apostles had also other judgments concerning Faith and heresy than the Apostles had and the Ages Apostolical yet these Catalogues although they are reports of heresies in the second and third Ages are not to be put upon the account of those Ages not to be reckoned as an instance of their judgment which although it was in some degrees more culpable than that of their Predecessors yet in respect of the following Ages it was innocent and modest But these Catalogues I speak of were set down according to the sence of the then present
secure himself that in all the mysteries of Religion taught in Scripture he shall certainly understand and explicitely believe that sence that God intended For to this purpose there are many considerations 4. First There are so many thousands of Copies that were writ by persons of several interests and perswasions such different understandings and tempers such distinct abilities and weaknesses that it is no wonder there is so great variety of readings both in the Old Testament and in the New In the Old Testament the Jews pretend that the Christians have corrupted many places on purpose to make symphony between both the Testaments On the other side the Christians have had so much reason to suspect the Jews that when Aquila had translated the Bible in their Schools and had been taught by them they rejected the Edition many of them and some of them called it heresy to follow it And Justin Martyr justified it to Triphon that the Jews had defalk'd many sayings from the Books of the old Prophets and amongst the rest he instances in that of the Psalm Dicite in nationibus quia Dominus regnavit à ligno The last words they have cut off and prevailed so far in it that to this day none of our Bibles have it but if they ought not to have it then Justin Martyrs Bible had more in it than it should have for there it was so that a fault there was either under or over But however there are infinite Readings in the New-Testament for in that I will instance some whole Verses in one that are not in another and there was in some Copies of Saint Marks Gospel in the last Chapter a whole verse a Chapter it was anciently called that is not found in our Bibles as S. Hierom. ad Hedibiam q. 3. notes The words he repeats Lib. 2. contr Polygamos Et illi satis faciebant dicentes saeculum istud iniquitatis incredulitatis substantia est quae non sinit per immundos spiritus veram Dei apprehendi virtutem idcirco jam nunc revela justitiam tuam These words are thought by some to savour of Manichaism and for ought I can find were therefore rejected out of many Greek Copies and at last out of the Latine Now suppose that a Manichee in disputation should urge this place having found it in his Bible if a Catholick should answer him by saying it is Apocryphal and not found in divers Greek Copies might not the Manichee ask how it came in if it was not the word of God and if it was how came it out and at last take the same liberty of rejecting any other Authority which shall be alledged against him if he can find any Copy that may favour him however that favour be procured and did not the Ebionites reject all the Epistles of Saint Paul upon pretence he was an enemy to the Law of Moses indeed it was boldly and most unreasonably done but if one tittle or one Chapter of St. Mark be called Apocryphal for being suspected of Manichaisme it is a plea that will too much justifie others in their taking and chusing what they list But I will not urge it so far but is not there as much reason for the fierce Lutherans to reject the Epistle of Saint James for favouring justification by works or the Epistle to the Hebrews upon pretence that the sixth and tenth Chapters do favour Novatianisme especially since it was by some famous Churches at first not accepted even by the Church of Rome her self The Parable of the woman taken in adultery which is now in Joh. 8. Eusebius says was not in any Gospel but the Gospel secundum Hebraeos and St. Hierom makes it doubtful and so does St. Chrysostome and Euthymius the first not vouchsafing to explicate it in his Homilies upon St. John the other affirming it not to be found in the exacter Copies I shall not need to urge that there are some words so near in sound that the Scribes might easily mistake There is one famous one of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which yet some Copies read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the sence is very unlikely though the words be near and there needs some little luxation to strain this latter reading to a good sence That famous precept of Saint Paul that the women must pray with a covering on their head 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because of the Angels hath brought into the Church an opinion that Angels are present in Churches and are Spectatours of our devotion and deportment Such an opinion if it should meet with peevish opposites on the one side and confident Hyperaspists on the other might possibly make a Sect and here were a clear ground for the affirmative and yet who knows but that it might have been a mistake of the Transcribers for if it were read as Gothofrid and some others would have it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or rather 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the sence be women in publick Assemblies must wear a vail by reason of the Companies of the young men there present it would be no ill exchange for the little change of some letters in a word to make so probable so clear a sence of the place But the instances in this kind are too many as appears in the variety of readings in several Copies proceeding from the negligence or ignorance of the Transcribers or the malicious endeavour of Hereticks or the inserting Marginal Notes into the Text or the nearness of several words Indeed there is so much evidence of this particular that it hath encouraged the servants of the Vulgar Translation for so some are now adays to prefer that Translation before the Original for although they have attempted that proposition with very ill success yet that they could think it possible to be proved is an Argument there is much variety and alterations in divers Texts for if there were not it were impudence to pretend a Translation and that none of the best should be better than the Original But so it is that this variety of reading is not of slight consideration for although it be demonstrably true that all things necessary to Faith and good manners are preserved from alteration and corruption because they are of things necessary and they could not be necessary unless they were delivered to us God in his goodness and his justice having obliged himself to preserve that which he hath bound us to observe and keep yet in other things which God hath not obliged himself so punctually to preserve in these things since variety of reading is crep◠in every reading takes away a degree of certainty from any proposition derivative from those places so read And if some Copies especially if they be publick and notable omit a verse or a tittle every argument from such a tittle or verse loses much of its strength and reputation and we find it in a great instance For when in probation of the
Ecclesiae magisterio abrogatis Now it were good that they which take a liberty to themselves should also allow the same to others So that for one thing or other all Traditions excepting those very few that are absolutely universal will lose all their obligation and become no competent medium to confine mens practices or limit their faiths or determine their perswasions Either for the difficulty of their being proved the incompetency of the testimony that transmits them or the indifferency of the thing transmitted all Traditions both ritual and doctrinal are disabled from determining our consciences either to a necessary believing or obeying 9. Sixthly To which I adde by way of confirmation that there are some things called Traditions and are offered to be proved to us by a Testimony which is either false or not extant Clemens of Alexandria pretended it a Tradition that the Apostles preached to them that died in infidelity even after their death and then raised them to life but he proved it only by the Testimony of the Book of Hermes he affirmed it to be a Tradition Apostolical that the Greeks were saved by their Philosophie but he had no other Authority for it but the Apocryphal Books of Peter and Paul Tertullian and S. Basil pretended it an Apostolical Tradition to sign in the aire with the sign of the Cross but this was only consigned to them in the Gospel of Nicodemus But to instance once for all in the Epistle of Marcellus to the Bishop of Antioch where he affirmes that it is the Canon of the Apostles praeter sententiam Romani Pontificis non posse Concilia celebrari And yet there is no such Canon extant nor ever was for ought appears in any Record we have and yet the Collection of the Canons is so intire that though it hath something more than what was Apostolical yet it hath nothing less And now that I am casually fallen upon an instance from the Canons of the Apostles I consider that there cannot in the world a greater instance be given how easie it is to be abused in the believing of Traditions For 1. to the first 50 which many did admit for Apostolical 35 more were added which most men now count spurious all men call dubious and some of them univerally condemned by peremptory sentence even by them who are greatest admirers of that Collection as 65.67 and 8â…˜ Canons For the first 50 it is evident that there are some things so mixt with them and no mark of difference left that the credit of all is much impaired insomuch that Isidor of Sevil says they were Apocryphal made by Hereticks and published under the title Apostolical but neither the Fathers nor the Church of Rome did give assent to them And yet they have prevailed so far amongst some that Damascen is of opinion they should be received equally with the Canonical writings of the Apostles One thing only I observe and we shall find it true in most writings whose Authority is urged in Questions of Theologie that the Authority of the Tradition is not it which moves the assent but the nature of the thing and because such a Canon is delivered they do not therefore believe the sanction or proposition so delivered but disbelieve the Tradition if they do not like the matter and so do not judge of the matter by the Tradition but of the Tradition by the matter And thus the Church of Rome rejects the 84. or 85. Canon of the Apostles not because it is delivered with less Authority than the last 35 are but because it reckons the Canon of Scripture otherwise than it is at Rome Thus also the fifth Canon amongst the first 50 because it approves the marriage of Priests and Deacons does not perswade them to approve of it too but it self becomes suspected for approving it So that either they accuse themselves of palpable contempt of the Apostolical Authority or else that the reputation of such Traditions is kept up to serve their own ends and therefore when they encounter them they are no more to be upheld which what else is it but to teach all the world to contemn such pretences and undervalue Traditions and to supply to others a reason why they should doe that which to them that give the occasion is most unreasonable 10. Seventhly The Testimony of the Ancient Church being the only means of proving Tradition and sometimes their dictates and doctrine being the Tradition pretended of necessity to be imitated it is considerable that men in their estimate of it take their rise from several Ages and differing Testimonies and are not agreed about the competency of their Testimony and the reasons that on each side make them differ are such as make the authority it self the less authentick and more repudiable Some will allow only of the three first Ages as being most pure most persecuted and therefore most holy least interested serving fewer designes having fewest factions and therefore more likely to speak the truth for Gods sake and its own as best complying with their great end of acquiring Heaven in recompence of losing their lives Others say that those Ages being persecuted minded the present Doctrines proportionable to their purposes and constitution of the Ages and make little or nothing of those Questions which at this day vex Christendome And both speak true The first Ages speak greatest truth but least pertinently The next Ages the Ages of the four general Councils spake something not much more pertinently to the present Questions but were not so likely to speak true by reason of their dispositions contrary to the capacity and circumstance of the first Ages and if they speak wisely as Doctors yet not certainly as witnesses of such propositions which the first Ages noted not and yet unless they had noted could not possibly be Traditions And therefore either of them will be less useless as to our present affairs For indeed the Questions which now are the publick trouble were not considered or thought upon for many hundred years and therefore prime Tradition there is none as to our purpose and it will be an insufficient medium to be used or pretended in the determination and to dispute concerning the truth or necessity of Traditions in the Questions of our times is as if Historians disputing about a Question in the English Story should fall on wrangling whether Livie or Plutarch were the best Writers And the earnest disputes about Traditions are to no better purpose For no Church at this day admits the one half of those things which certainly by the Fathers were called Traditions Apostolical and no Testimony of ancient Writers does consign the one half of the present Questions to be or not to be traditions So that they who admit only the doctrine and testimony of the first Ages cannot be determined in most of their doubts which now trouble us because their writings are of matters wholly differing from the present disputes and they which
the faults and failings of humanity It is a famous saying of St. Gregory That he had the four first Councils in esteem and veneration next to the four Evangelists I suppose it was because he did believe them to have proceeded according to rule and to have judged righteous judgment but why had not he the same opinion of other Councils too which were celebrated before his death for he lived after the fifth General not because they had not the same Authority for that which is warrant for one is warrant for all but because he was not so confident that they did their duty nor proceeded so without interest as the first four had done and the following Councils did never get that reputation which all the Catholick Church acknowledged due to the first four And in the next Order were the three following Generals for the Greeks and Latines did never jointly acknowledge but seven Generals to have been authentick in any sence because they were in no sence agreed that any more than seven had proceeded regularly and done their duty So that now the Question is not whether General Councils have a promise that the holy Ghost will assist them For every private man hath that promise that if he does his duty he shall be assisted sufficiently in order to that end to which he needs assistance and therefore much more shall General Councils in order to that end for which they convene and to which they need assistance that is in order to the conservation of the Faith for the doctrinal rules of good life and all that concerns the essential duty of a Christian but not in deciding Questions to satisfie contentions or curious or presumptuous spirits But now can the Bishops so convened be factious can they be abused with prejudice or transported with interests can they resist the holy Ghost can they extinguish the Spirit can they stop their ears and serve themselves upon the holy Spirit and the pretence of his assistances and cease to serve him upon themselves by captivating their understandings to his dictates and their wills to his precepts Is it necessary they should perform any condition is there any one duty for them to perform in these Assemblies a duty which they have power to do or not to do If so then they may fail of it and not do their duty And if the assistance of the holy Spirit be conditional then we have no more assurance that they are assisted than that they do their duty and do not sin 2. Now let us suppose what this duty is Certainly if the Gospel be hid it is hid to them that are lost and all that come to the knowledge of the truth must come to it by such means which are spiritual and holy dispositions in order to a holy and spiritual end They must be shod with the preparation of the Gospel of peace that is they must have peaceable and docible dispositions nothing with them that is violent and resolute to encounter those gentle and sweet assistances and the Rule they are to follow is the Rule which the holy Spirit hath consigned to the Catholick Church that is the holy Scripture either intirely or at least for the greater part of the Rule So that now if the Bishops be factious and prepossessed with perswasions depending upon interest it is certain they may judge amiss and if they recede from the Rule it is certain they do judge amiss And this I say upon their grounds who most advance the Authority of General Councils For if a General Council may err if a Pope confirm it not then most certainly if in any thing it recede from Scripture it does also err because that they are to expect the Popes confirmation they offer to prove from Scripture now if the Popes confirmation be required by authority of Scripture and that therefore the defailance of it does evacuate the Authority of the Council then also are the Councils Decrees invalid if they recede from any other part of Scripture So that Scripture is the Rule they are to follow and a man would have thought it had been needless to have proved it but that we are fallen into Ages in which no truth is certain no reason concluding nor is there any thing that can convince some men For Stapleton with extream boldness against the piety of Christendom against the publick sence of the ancient Church and the practice of all pious Assemblies of Bishops affirms the Decrees of a Council to be binding etiamsi non confirmetur ne probabilì testimonio Scripturarum nay though it be quite extra Scripturam but all wise and good men have ever said that sence which Saint Hilary expressed in these words Quae extra Evangelium sunt non defendam This was it which the good Emperour Constantine propounded to the Fathers met at Nice Libri Evangelici oracula Apostolorum veterum Prophetarum clarè nos instruunt quid sentiendum in Divinis And this is confessed by a sober man of the Roman Church it self the Cardinal of Cusa Oportet quòd omnia talia quae legere debent contineantur in Authoritatibus sacrarum Scripturarum Now then all the advantage I shall take from hence is this That if the Apostles commended them who examined their Sermons by their conformity to the Law and the Prophets and the men of Berea were accounted noble for searching the Scriptures whether those things which they taught were so or no I suppose it will not be denied but the Councils Decrees may also be tryed whether they be conform to Scripture yea or no and although no man can take cognisance and judge the Decrees of a Council pro Authoritate publicâ yet pro informatione privatâ they may the Authority of a Council is not greater than the Authority of the Apostles nor their dictates more sacred or authentick Now then put case a Council should recede from Scripture whether or no were we bound to believe its Decrees I only ask the Question For it were hard to be bound to believe what to our understanding seems contrary to that which we know to be the Word of God But if we may lawfully recede from the Councils Decrees in case they be contrariant to Scripture it is all that I require in this Question For if they be tyed to a Rule then they are to be examined and understood according to the Rule and then we are to give our selves that liberty of judgment which is requisite to distinguish us from beasts and to put us into a capacity of reasonable people following reasonable guides But however if it be certain that the Councils are to follow Scripture then if it be notorious that they do recede from Scripture we are sure we must obey God rather than men and then we are well enough For unless we are bound to shut our eyes and not to look upon the Sun if we may give our selves liberty to believe what seems most
no such thing as is pretended or if they did it is but little considerable because they did not believe themselves their practice was the greatest evidence in the world against the pretence of their words But I am much eased of a long disquisition in this particular for I love not to prove a Question by Arguments whose Authority is in itself as fallible and by circumstances made as uncertain as the Question by the saying of Aeneas Sylvius that before the Nicene Council every man lived to himself and small respect was had to the Church of Rome which practice could not well consist with the Doctrine of their Bishops Infallibility and by consequence supreme judgment and last resolution in matters of Faith but especially by the insinuation and consequent acknowledgment of Bellarmine that for 1000 years together the Fathers knew not of the Doctrine of the Pope's Infallibility for Nilus Gerson Almain the Divines of Paris Alphonsus de Castro and Pope Adrian VI. persons who lived 1400 years after Christ affirm that Infallibility is not seated in the Pope's person that he may erre and sometimes actually hath which is a clear demonstration that the Church knew no such Doctrine as this there had been no Decree nor Tradition nor general opinion of the Fathers or of any Age before them and therefore this Opinion which Bellarmine would fain blast if he could yet in his Conclusion he says it is not propriè haeretica A device and an expression of his own without sense or precedent But if the Fathers had spoken of it and believed it why may not a disagreeing person as well reject their Authority when it is in behalf of Rome as they of Rome without scruple cast them off when they speak against it For Bellarmine being pressed with the Authority of Nilus Bishop of Thessalonica and other Fathers says that the Pope acknowledges no Fathers but they are all his children and therefore they cannot depose against him and if that be true why shall we take their Testimonies for him for if Sons depose in their Father's behalf it is twenty to one but the adverse party will be cast and therefore at the best it is but suspectum Testimonium But indeed this discourse signifies nothing but a perpetuall uncertainty in such Topicks and that where a violent prejudice or a concerning interest is engaged men by not regarding what any man says proclaim to all the world that nothing is certain but Divine Authority 13. But I will not take advantage of what Bellarmine says nor what Stapleton or any one of them all say for that will be but to press upon personal perswasions or to urge a general Question with a particular defaillance and the Question is never the nearer to an end for if Bellarmine says any thing that is not to another man's purpose or perswasion that man will be tried by his own Argument not by another's And so would every man doe that loves his liberty as all wise men do and therefore retain it by open violence or private evasions But to return 14. An Authority from Irenaeus in this Question and on behalf of the Pope's Infallibility or the Authority of the See of Rome or of the necessity of communicating with them is very fallible for besides that there are almost a dozen answers to the words of the Allegation as is to be seen in those that trouble themselves in this Question with the Allegation and answering such Authorities yet if they should make for the affirmative of this Question it is protestatio contra factum For Irenaeus had no such great opinion of Pope Victor's Infallibility that he believed things in the same degree of necessity that the Pope did for therefore he chides him for Excommunicating the Asian Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all at a blow in the Question concerning Easter-day and in a Question of Faith he expresly disagreed from the doctrine of Rome for Irenaeus was of the Millenary opinion and believed it to be a Tradition Apostolicall Now if the Church of Rome was of that opinion then why is she not now where is the succession of her Doctrine But if she was not of that opinion then and Irenaeus was where was his belief of that Churche's Infallibility The same I urge concerning S. Cyprian who was the head of a Sect in opposition to the Church of Rome in the Question of Rebaptization and he and the abettors Firmilian and the other Bishops of Cappadocia and the voicinage spoke harsh words of Steven and such as become them not to speak to an infallible Doctor and the supreme Head of the Church I will urge none of them to the disadvantage of that See but onely note the Satyrs of Firmilian against him because it is of good use to shew that it is possible for them in their ill carriage to blast the reputation and efficacy of a great Authority For he says that that Church did pretend the Authority of the Apostles cùm in multis Sacramentis Divinae rei à principio discrepet ab Ecclesia Hierosolymitana defamet Petrum Paulum tanquam authores And a little after Justè dedignor says he apertam manifestam stultitiam Stephani per quam veritas Christianae petrae aboletur Which words say plainly that for all the goodly pretence of Apostolicall Authority the Church of Rome did then in many things of Religion disagree from Divine Institution and from the Church of Jerusalem which they had as great esteem of for Religion sake as of Rome for its Principality and that still in pretending to S. Peter and S. Paul they dishonoured those blessed Apostles and destroyed the honour of their pretence by their untoward prevarication Which words I confess pass my skill to reconcile them to an opinion of Infallibility and although they were spoken by an angry person yet they declare that in Africa they were not then perswaded as now they are at Rome Nam nec Petrus quem primum Dominus elegit vendicavit sibi aliquid insolenter aut arroganter assumpsit ut diceret se primatum tenere That was their belief then and how the contrary hath grown up to that height where now it is all the world is witness And now I shall not need to note concerning S. Hierome that he gave a complement to Damasus that he would not have given to Liberius Qui tecum non colligit spargit For it might be true enough of Damasus who was a good Bishop and a right believer but if Liberius's name had been put in stead of Damasus the case had been altered with the name for S. Hierome did believe and write it so that Liberius had subscribed to Arianism And if either he or any of the rest had believ'd the Pope could not be a Heretick nor his Faith fail but be so good and of so competent Authority as to be a Rule to Christendom why did they not appeal to
ibi decernitur in Testamento Novo debeat observari Worse yet for when there was a corruption crept into the Decree called Sancta Romana where in stead of these words Sedulii opus heroicis versibus descriptum all the old Copies till of late read haereticis versibus descriptum this very mistake made many wise men as Pierius says yea Pope Adrian the sixth no worse man believe that all Poetry was hereticall because forsooth Pope Gelasius whose Decree that was although he believed Sedulius to be a good Catholick yet as they thought concluded his Verses to be hereticall But these were ignorances it hath been worse amongst some others whose errours have been more malicious Pope Honorius was condemned by the sixth General Synod and his Epistles burnt and in the seventh Action of the eighth Synod the Acts of the Roman Council under Adrian the second are recited in which it is said that Honorius was justly anathematiz'd because he was convict of Heresie Bellarmine says it is probable that Pope Adrian and the Roman Council were deceived with false Copies of the sixth Synod and that Honorius was no Heretick To this I say that although the Roman Synod and the eighth General Synod and Pope Adrian all together are better witnesses for the thing then Bellarmine's conjecture is against it yet if we allow his conjecture we shall lose nothing in the whole for either the Pope is no infallible Doctor but may be a Heretick as Honorius was or else a Council is to us no infallible Determiner I say as to us for if Adrian and the whole Roman Council and the eighth General were all cozened with false Copies of the sixth Synod which was so little a while before them and whose Acts were transacted and kept in the Theatre and Records of the Catholick Church he is a bold man that will be confident that he hath true Copies now So that let which they please stand or fall let the Pope be a Heretick or the Councils be deceived and palpably abused for the other we will dispute it upon other instances and arguments when we shall know which part they will chuse in the mean time we shall get in the general what we lose in the particular This onely this device of saying the Copies of the Councils were false was the strategem of Albertus Pighius 900 years after the thing was done of which invention Pighius was presently admonished blamed and wished to recant Pope Nicolas explicated the Mystery of the Sacrament with so much ignorance and zeal that in condemning Berengarius he taught a worse impiety But what need I any more instances it is a confessed case by Baronius by Biel by Stella Almain Occham and Canus and generally by the best Scholars in the Church of Rome that a Pope may be a Heretick and that some of them actually were so and no less then three General Councils did believe the same thing viz. the sixth seventh and eighth as Bellarmine is pleased to acknowledge in his fourth Book De Pontifice Romano c. 11. resp ad Arg. 4. And the Canon Si Papa dist 40. affirms it in express terms that a Pope is judicable and punishable in that case But there is no wound but some Empirick or other will pretend to cure it and there is a cure for this too For though it be true that if a Pope were a Heretick the Church might depose him yet no Pope can be a Heretick not but that the man may but the Pope cannot for he is ipso facto no Pope for he is no Christian so Bellarmine and so when you think you have him fast he is gone and nothing of the Pope left But who sees not the extreme folly of this evasion For besides that out of fear and caution he grants more then he needs more then was sought for in the Question the Pope hath no more privilege then the Abbot of Cluny for he cannot be a Heretick nor be deposed by a Council for if he be manifestly a Heretick he is ipso facto no Abbot for he is no Christian and if the Pope be a Heretick privately occultly for that he may be accused and judged said the Glosse upon the Canon Si Papa dist 40. and the Abbot of Cluny and one of his meanest Monks can be no more therefore the case is all one But this is fitter to make sport with then to interrupt a serious discourse And therefore although the Canon Sancta Romana approves all the Decretalls of Popes yet that very Decretall hath not decreed it firm enough but that they are so warily receiv'd by them that when they list they are pleased to dissent from them And it is evident in the Extravagant of Sixtus IV. Com. De reliquiis who appointed a Feast of the immaculate Conception a special Office for the day and Indulgences enough to the observers of it and yet the Dominicans were so far from believing the Pope to be infallible and his Decree authentick that they declaim'd against it in their Pulpits so furiously and so long till they were prohibited under pain of Excommunication to say the Virgin Mary was conceived in Original sin Now what solennity can be more required for the Pope to make a Cathedral determination of an Article The Article was so concluded that a Feast was instituted for its celebration and pain of Excommunication threatned to them which should preach the contrary nothing more solemn nothing more confident and severe And yet after all this to shew that whatsoever those people would have us to believe they 'l believe what they list themselves this thing was not determined de fide saith Victorellus nay the Authour of the Gloss of the Canon-Law hath these express words De festo Conceptionis nihil dicitur quia celebrandum non est sicut in multis regionibus fit maximè in Anglia haec est ratio quia in peccatis concepta fuit sicut caeteri Sancti And the Commissaries of Sixtus V. and Gregory XIII did not expunge these words but left them upon Record not onely against a received and more approved opinion of the Jesuits and Franciscans but also in plain defiance of a Decree made by their visible Head of the Church who if ever any thing was decreed by a Pope with an intent to oblige all Christendome decreed this to that purpose 16. So that without taking particular notice of it that egregious sophistry and flattery of the late Writers of the Roman Church is in this instance besides divers others before mentioned clearly made invalid For here the Bishop of Rome not as a private Doctor but as Pope not by declaring his own opinion but with an intent to oblige the Church gave sentence in a Queston which the Dominicans will still account pro non determinata And every Decretall recorded in the Canon-Law if it be false in the matter is just such another instance And
Alphonsus à Castro says to the same purpose in the instance of Caelestine dissolving Marriages for Heresy Neque Caelestini error talis fuit qui soli negligentiae imputari debeat ità ut illum errâsse dicamus velut privatam personam non ut Papam quoniam hujusmodi Caelestini definitio habetur in antiquis Decretalibus in cap. Laudabilem titulo De conversione infidelium quam ego ipse vidi legi Lib. 1. adv haeres cap. 4. And therefore 't is a most intolerable folly to pretend that the Pope cannot erre in his Chair though he may erre in his Closet and may maintain a false opinion even to his death For besides that it is sottish to think that either he would not have the world of his own opinion as all men naturally would or that if he were set in his Chair he would determine contrary to himself in his Study and therefore to represent it as possible they are fain to flie to a Miracle for which they have no colour neither instructions nor insinuation nor warrant nor promise besides that it were impious and unreasonable to depose him for Heresy who may so easily even by setting himself in his Chair and reviewing his Theorems be cured it is also against a very great experience For besides the former Allegations it is most notorious that Pope Alexander III. in a Council at Rome of 300 Archbishops and Bishops A. D. 1179. condemned Peter Lombard of Heresy in a matter of great concernment no less then something about the Incarnation from which Sentence he was after 36 years abiding it absolved by Pope Innocent III. without repentance or dereliction of the Opinion Now if this Sentence was not a Cathedral Dictate as solemn and great as could be expected or as is said to be necessary to oblige all Christendome let the great Hyperaspists of the Roman Church be Judges who tell us that a particular Council with the Pope's confirmation is made Oecumenicall by adoption and is infallible and obliges all Christendome so Bellarmine And therefore he says that it is temerarium erroneum proximum haeresi to deny it But whether it be or not it is all one as to my purpose For it is certain that in a particular Council confirmed by the Pope if ever then and there the Pope sate himself in his Chair and it is as certain that he sate besides the cushion and determined ridiculously and falsely in this case But this is a device for which there is no Scripture no Tradition no one dogmaticall resolute saying of any Father Greek or Latine for above 1000 years after Christ and themselves when they list can acknowledge as much And therefore Bellarmine's saying I perceive is believed of them to be true That there are many things in the Decretall Epistles which make not Articles to be de fide And therefore Non est necessariò credendum determinatis per summum Pontificem says Almain And this serves their turns in every thing they do not like and therefore I am resolved it shall serve my turn also for something and that is that the matter of the Pope's Infallibility is so ridiculous and improbable that they do not believe it themselves Some of them clearly practised the contrary and although Pope Leo X. hath determined the Pope to be above a Council yet the Sorbon to this day scorn it at the very heart And I might urge upon them that scorn that Almain truly enough by way of Argument alledges It is a wonder that they who affirm the Pope cannot erre in judgement do not also affirm that he cannot sin they are like enough to say so says he if the vicious lives of the Popes did not make a daily confutation of such flattery Now for my own particular I am as confident and think it as certain that Popes are actually deceived in matters of Christian Doctrine as that they do prevaricate the laws of Christian piety And therefore Alphonsus à Castro calls them impudentes Papae assentatores that ascribe to him infallibility in judgment or interpretation of Scripture 17. But if themselves did believe it heartily what excuse is there in the world for the strange uncharitableness or supine negligence of the Popes that they do not set themselves in their Chair and write infallible Commentaries and determine all Controversies without errour and blast all Heresies with the word of their mouth declare what is and what is not de fide that his Disciples and Confidents may agree upon it reconcile the Franciscans and Dominicans and expound all Mysteries For it cannot be imagined but he that was endued with so supreme power in order to so great ends was also fitted with proportionable that is extraordinary personal abilities succeeding and derived upon the persons of all the Popes And then the Doctors of his Church need not trouble themselves with study nor writing explications of Scripture but might wholly attend to practicall Devotion and leave all their Scholasticall wranglings the distinguishing Opinions of their Orders and they might have a fine Church something like Fairy-land or Lucian's Kingdome in the Moon But if they say they cannot doe this when they list but when they are moved to it by the Spirit then we are never the nearer for so may the Bishop of Angoulesme write infallible Commentaries when the Holy Ghost moves him to it for I suppose his motions are not ineffectual but he will sufficiently assist us in performing of what he actually moves us to But among so many hundred Decrees which the Popes of Rome have made or confirmed and attested which is all one I would fain know in how many of them did the Holy Ghost assist them If they know it let them declare it that it may be certain which of their Decretals are de fide for as yet none of his own Church knows If they do not know then neither can we know it from them and then we are as uncertain as ever And besides the Holy Ghost may possibly move him and he by his ignorance of it may neglect so profitable a motion and then his promise of infallible assistance will be to very little purpose because it is with very much fallibility applicable to practice And therefore it is absolutely useless to any man or any Church because suppose it settled in Thesi that the Pope is infallible yet whether he will doe his duty and perform those conditions of being assisted which are required of him or whether he be a secret Simoniack for if he be he is ipso facto no Pope or whether he be a Bishop or Priest or a Christian being all uncertain every one of these depending upon the intention and power of the Baptizer or Ordainer which also are fallible because they depend upon the honesty and power of other men we cannot be infallibly certain of any Pope that he is infallible and therefore when our Questions are
that he was asked by Budus Bishop of Emessa whether he did approve of the Epistle of Athanasius to Epictetus Bishop of Corinth and that his answer was Si haec apud vos scripta non sint adultera Nam plura ex his ab hostibus Ecclesiae deprehenduntur esse depravata And this was done even while the Authours themselves were alive for so Dionysius of Corinth complain'd that his writings were corrupted by Hereticks and Pope Leo that his Epistle to Flavianus was perverted by the Greeks And in the Synod of Constantinople before quoted the sixth Synod Macarius and his Disciples were convicted quòd Sanctorum testimonia aut truncârint aut depravârint Thus the third Chapter of Saint Cyprian's book De unitate Ecclesiae in the Edition of Pamelius suffered great alteration these words Primatus Petro datur wholly inserted and these super Cathedram Petri fundata est Ecclesia and whereas it was before super unum aedificat Ecclesiam Christus that not being enough they have made it super illum unum Now these Additions are against the faith of all old Copies before Minutius and Pamelius and against Gratian even after himself had been chastised by the Roman Correctors the Commissaries of Gregory XIII as is to be seen where these words are alledged Decret c. 24. q. 1. can Loquitur Dominus ad Petrum So that we may say of Cyprian's works as Pamelius himself said concerning his writings and the writings of other of the Fathers Vnde colligimus saith he Cypriani scripta ut aliorum Veterum à librariis variè fuisse interpolata But Gratian himself could doe as fine a feat when he listed or else some-body did it for him and it was in this very Question their beloved Article of the Pope's Supremacy for De poenit dist 1. c. Potest fieri he quotes these words out of Saint Ambrose Non habent Petri haereditatem qui non habent Petri sedem fidem not sedem it is in Saint Ambrose but this errour was made authentick by being inserted into the Code of the Law of the Catholick Church And considering how little notice the Clergy had of antiquity but what was transmitted to them by Gratian it will be no great wonder that all this part of the world swallowed such a bole and the opinion that was wrapped in it But I need not instance in Gratian any farther but refer any one that desires to be satisfied concerning this Collection of his to Augustinus Archbishop of Tarracon in emendatione Gratiani where he shall find fopperies and corruptions good store noted by that learned man But that the Indices expurgatorii commanded by Authority and practised with publick licence professe to alter and correct the sayings of the Fathers and to reconcile them to the Catholick sense by putting in and leaving out is so great an Imposture so unchristian a proceeding that it hath made the faith of all books and all Authours justly to be suspected For considering their infinite diligence and great opportunity as having had most of the Copies in their own hands together with an unsatisfiable desire of prevailing in their right or in their wrong they have made an absolute destruction of this Topick and when the Fathers speak Latine or breathe in a Roman Diocese although the providence of God does infinitely over-rule them and that it is next to a miracle that in the Monuments of Antiquity there is no more found that can pretend for their advantage then there is which indeed is infinitely inconsiderable yet our Questions and uncertainties are infinitely multiplied in stead of a probable and reasonable determination For since the Latines alwaies complain'd of the Greeks for privately corrupting the ancient Records both of Councils and Fathers and now the Latines make open profession not of corrupting but of correcting their writings that 's the word and at the most it was but a humane Authority and that of persons not alwaies learned and very often deceived the whole matter is so unreasonable that it is not worth a farther disquisition But if any one desires to enquire farther he may be satisfied in Erasmus in Henry and Robert Stephens in their Prefaces before the Editions of the Fathers and their Observations upon them in Bellarm. de scrip Eccl. in D. Reynolds de lib. Apoc. in Scaliger and Robert Coke of Leeds in Yorkshire in his Book De censura Patrum SECT IX Of the incompetency of the Church in its diffusive capacity to be Judge of Controversies and the impertinency of that pretence of the Spirit 1. AND now after all these considerations of the several Topicks Tradition Councils Popes and ancient Doctors of the Church I suppose it will not be necessary to consider the Authority of the Church apart For the Church either speaks by Tradition or by a representative body in a Council by Popes or by the Fathers for the Church is not a Chimaera not a shadow but a company of men believing in Jesus Christ which men either speak by themselves immediately or by their Rulers or by their proxies and representatives Now I have considered it in all senses but in its diffusive capacity in which capacity she cannot be supposed to be a Judge of Controversies both because in that capacity she cannot teach us as also because if by a Judge we mean all the Church diffused in all its parts and members so there can be no controversie for if all men be of that opinion then there is no Question contested if they be not all of a mind how can the whole diffusive Catholick Church be pretended in defiance of any one Article where the diffusive Church being divided part goes this way and part another But if it be said The greatest part must carry it Besides that it is impossible for us to know which way the greatest part goes in many Questions it is not always true that the greater part is the best sometimes the contrary is most certain and it is often very probable but it is always possible And when paucity of followers was objected to Liberius he gave this in answer There was a time when but three Children of the Captivity resisted the King's Decree And Athanasius wrote on purpose against those that did judge of truth by multitudes and indeed it concerned him so to doe when he alone stood in the gap against the numerous armies of the Arians 2. But if there could in this case be any distinct consideration of the Church yet to know which is the true Church is so hard to be found out that the greatest Questions of Christendom are judged before you can get to your Judge and then there is no need of him For those Questions which are concerning the Judge of Questions must be determined before you can submit to his judgement and if you can yourselves determine those great Questions which consist much in universalities then also you may determine the
left to our liberty to judge that way that makes best demonstration of our piety and of our love to God and truth not that way that is always the best argument of an excellent understanding for this may be a blessing but the other onely is a duty 6. And now that we are pitch'd upon that way which is most natural and reasonable in determination of ourselves rather then of questions which are often indeterminable since right Reason proceeding upon the best grounds it can viz. of Divine revelation and humane Authority and probability is our Guide stando in humanis and supposing the assistance of God's Spirit which he never denies them that fail not of their duty in all such things in which he requires truth and certainty it remains that we consider how it comes to pass that men are so much deceived in the use of their Reason and choice of their Religion and that in this account we distinguish those accidents which make errour innocent from those which make it become a Heresie SECT XI Of some causes of Errour in the exercise of Reason which are inculpate in themselves 1. THen I consider that there are a great many inculpable causes of Errour which are arguments of humane imperfections not convictions of a sin And First The variety of humane understandings is so great that what is plain and apparent to one is difficult and obscure to another one will observe a consequent from a common Principle and another from thence will conclude the quite contrary When S. Peter saw the Vision of the sheet let down with all sorts of beasts in it and a voice saying Surge Petre macta manduca if he had not by a particular assistance been directed to the meaning of the Holy Ghost possibly he might have had other apprehensions of the meaning of that Vision for to myself it seems naturally to speak nothing but the abolition of the Mosaicall Rites and the restitution of us to that part of Christian liberty which consists in the promiscuous eating of meats and yet besides this there want not some understandings in the world to whom these words seem to give S. Peter a power to kill Hereticall Princes Methinks it is a strange understanding that makes such extractions but Bozius and Baronius did so But men may understand what they please especially when they are to expound Oracles It was an argument of some wit but of singularity of understanding that happened in the great contestation between the Missals of S. Ambrose and S. Gregory The lot was thrown and God made to be Judge so as he was tempted to a Miracle to answer a question which themselves might have ended without much trouble The two Missals were laid upon the Altar and the Church-door shut and sealed By the morrow-Mattins they found Saint Gregorie's Missal torn in pieces saith the story and thrown about the Church but S. Ambrose's opened and laid upon the Altar in a posture of being read If I had been to judge of the meaning of this Miracle I should have made no scruple to have said it had been the will of God that the Missal of Saint Ambrose which had been anciently used and publickly tried and approved of should still be read in the Church and that of Gregory let alone it being torn by an Angelicall hand as an Argument of its imperfection or of the inconvenience of innovation But yet they judg'd it otherwise for by the tearing and scattering about they thought it was meant it should be used over all the world and that of S. Ambrose read onely in the Church of Milain I am more satisfied that the former was the true meaning then I am of the truth of the story But we must suppose that And now there might have been eternall disputings about the meaning of the Miracle and nothing left to determine when two fancies are the litigants and the contestations about probabilities hinc indé And I doubt not this was one cause of so great variety of Opinions in the Primitive Church when they proved their several Opinions which were mysterious Questions of Christian Theologie by testimonies out of the obscurer Prophets out of the Psalms and Canticles as who please to observe their arguments of discourse and actions of Council shall perceive they very much used to doe Now although mens understandings be not equal and that it is fit the best understandings should prevail yet that will not satisfie the weaker understandings because all men will not think that another understanding is better then his own at least not in such a particular in which with fancy he hath pleased himself But commonly they that are least able are most bold and the more ignorant is the more confident therefore it is but reason if he would have another bear with him he also should bear with another and if he will not be prescribed to neither let him prescribe to others And there is the more reason in this because such modesty is commonly to be desired of the more imperfect for wise men know the ground of their perswasion and have their confidence proportionable to their evidence others have not but over-act their trifles And therefore I said it is but a reasonable demand that they that have the least reason should not be most imperious and for others it being reasonable enough for all their great advantages upon other men they will be soon perswaded to it For although wise men might be bolder in respect of the persons of others less discerning yet they know there are but few things so certain as to create much boldness and confidence of assertion If they do not they are not the men I take them for 2. Secondly When an action or Opinion is commenc'd with zeal and piety against a known vice o◠a vicious person commonly all the mistakes of its proceeding are made sacred by the holiness of the principle and so abuses the perswasions of good people that they make it as a Characteristick note to distinguish good persons from bad and then whatever errour is consecrated by this means is therefore made the more lasting because it is accounted holy and the persons are not easily accounted Hereticks because they erred upon a pious principle There is a memorable instance in one of the greatest Questions of Christendome viz. concerning Images For when Philippicus had espied the Images of the six first Synods upon the front of a Church he caused them to be pulled down now he did it in hatred of the sixth Synod for he being a Monothelite stood condemned by that Synod The Catholicks that were zealous for the sixth Synod caused the Images and representments to be put up again and then sprung the Question concerning the lawfulness of Images in Churches Philippicus and his party strived by suppressing Images to doe disparagement to the sixth Synod the Catholicks to preserve the honour of the sixth Synod would uphold Images And then the
Question came to be changed and they who were easie enough to be perswaded to pull down Images were over-awed by a prejudice against the Monothelites and the Monothelites strived to maintain the advantage they had got by a just and pious pretence against Images The Monothelites would have secured their errour by the advantage and consociation of a truth and the other would rather defend a dubious and disputable errour then lose and let goe a certain truth And thus the case stood and the successors of both parts were led invincibly For when the Heresie of the Monothelites disbanded which it did in a while after yet the opinion of the Iconoclasts and the Question of Images grew stronger Yet since the Iconoclasts at the first were Hereticks not for their breaking Images but for denying the two Wills of Christ his Divine and his Humane that they were called Iconoclasts was to distinguish their opinion in the Question concerning the Images but that then Iconoclasts so easily had the reputation of Hereticks was because of the other Opinion which was conjunct in their persons which Opinion men afterwards did not easily distinguish in them but took them for Hereticks in gross and whatsoever they held to be hereticall And thus upon this prejudice grew great advantages to the veneration of Images and the persons at first were much to be excused because they were misguided by that which might have abused the best men And if Epiphanius who was as zealous against Images in Churches as Philippicus or Leo Isaurus had but begun a publick contestation and engaged Emperours to have made Decrees against them Christendom would have had other apprehensions of it then they had when the Monothelites began it For few men will endure a truth from the mouth of the Devil and if the person be suspected so are his ways too And it is a great subtilty of the Devil so to temper truth and falshood in the same person that truth may lose much of its reputation by its mixture with errour and the errour may become more plausible by reason of its conjunction with truth And this we see by too much experience for we see many Truths are blasted in their reputation because persons whom we think we hate upon just grounds of Religion have taught them And it was plain enough in the case of Maldonat that said of an explication of a place of Scripture that it was most agreeable to Antiquity but because Calvin had so expounded it he therefore chose a new one This was malice But when a prejudice works tacitly undiscernibly and irresistibly of the person so wrought upon the man is to be pitied not condemned though possibly his Opinion deserves it highly And therefore it hath been usual to discredit Doctrines by the personal defaillances of them that preach them or with the dis-reputation of that Sect that maintains them in conjunction with other perverse doctrines Faustus the Manichee in S. Austin glories much that in their Religion God was worshipped purely and without Images S. Austin liked it well for so it was in his too but from hence Sanders concludes that to pull down Images in Churches was the Heresie of the Manichees The Jews endure no Images therefore Bellarmine makes it to be a piece of Judaism to oppose them He might as well have concluded against saying our prayers and Church-musick that it is Judaicall because the Jews used it And he would be loath to be served so himself for he that had a mind to use such arguments might with much better probability conclude against their Sacrament of extreme Unction because when the miraculous healing was ceased then they were not Catholicks but Hereticks that did transfer it to the use of dying persons says Irenaeus for so did the Valentinians And indeed this argument is something better then I thought for at first because it was in Irenaeus time reckoned amongst the Heresies But there are a sort of men that are even with them and hate some good things which the Church of Rome teaches because she who teaches so many errours hath been the publisher and is the practiser of those things I confess the thing is always unreasonable but sometimes it is invincible and innocent and then may serve to abate the fury of all such decretory sentences as condemn all the world but their own Disciples 3. Thirdly There are some Opinions that have gone hand in hand with a blessing and a prosperous profession and the good success of their defenders hath amused many good people because they thought they heard God's voice where they saw God's hand and therefore have rushed upon such Opinions with great piety and as great mistaking For where they once had entertain'd a fear of God and apprehension of his so sensible declaration such a fear produces scruple and a scrupulous conscience is always to be pitied because though it is seldome wise it is always pious And this very thing hath prevailed so far upon the understandings even of wise men that Bellarmine makes it a note of the true Church Which Opinion when it prevails is a ready way to make that in stead of Martyrs all men should prove Hereticks or Apostates in persecution for since men in misery are very suspicious out of strong desires to find out the cause that by removing it they may be relieved they apprehend that to be it that is first presented to their fears and then if ever Truth be afflicted she shall also be destroyed I will say nothing in defiance of this fancy although all the experience in the world says it is false and that of all men Christians should least believe it to be true to whom a perpetual Cross is their certain expectation and the Argument is like the Moon for which no garment can be fit it alters according to the success of humane affairs and in one Age will serve a Papist and in another a Protestant yet when such an Opinion does prevail upon timorous persons the malignity of their errour if any be consequent to this fancy and taken up upon the reputation of a prosperous Heresie is not to be considered simply and nakedly but abatement is to be made in a just proportion to that fear and to that apprehension 4. Fourthly Education is so great and so invincible a prejudice that he who masters the inconvenience of it is more to be commended then he can justly be blamed that complies with it For men do not always call them Principles which are the prime Fountains of Reason from whence such consequents naturally flow as are to guide the actions and discourses of men but they are Principles which they are first taught which they suckt in next to their milk and by a proportion to those first Principles they usually take their estimate of Propositions For whatsoever is taught to them at first they believe infinitely for they know nothing to the contrary they have had no
other Masters whose Theorems might abate the strength of their first perswasions and it is a great advantage in those cases to get possession and before their first principles can be dislodg'd they are made habitual and complexionall it is in their nature then to believe them and this is helped forward very much by the advantage of love and veneration which we have to the first parents of our perswasions And we see it in the Orders of Regulars in the Church of Rome That Opinion which was the Opinion of their Patron or Founder or of some eminent Personage of the Institute is enough to engage all the Order to be of that Opinion and it is strange that all the Dominicans should be of one Opinion in the matter of Predetermination and immaculate Conception and all the Franciscans of the quite contrary as if their understandings were formed in a different mold and furnished with various principles by their very Rule Now this prejudice works by many principles but how strongly they do possess the understanding is visible in that great instance of the affection and perfect perswasion the weaker sort of people have to that which they call the Religion of their Fore-fathers You may as well charm a Fever asleep with the noise of bells as make any pretence of Reason against that Religion which old men have intailed upon their heirs male so many generations till they can prescribe And the Apostles found this to be most true in the extremest difficulty they met with to contest against the Rites of Moses and the long Superstition of the Gentiles which they therefore thought fit to be retained because they had done so formerly Pergentes non quò eundum est sed quò itur and all the blessings of this life which God gave them they had in conjunction with their Religion and therefore they believed it was for their Religion and this perswasion was bound fast in them with ribs of iron the Apostles were forced to unloose the whole conjuncture of parts and principles in their understandings before they could make them malleable and receptive of any impresses But the observation and experience of all wise men can justifie this truth All that I shall say to the present purpose is this that consideration is to be had to the weakness of persons when they are prevailed upon by so innocent a prejudice and when there cannot be arguments strong enough to over-master an habitual perswasion bred with a man nourished up with him that always eat at his table and lay in his bosome he is not easily to be called Heretick for if he keeps the foundation of Faith other Articles are not so clearly demonstrated on either side but that a man may innocently be abused to the contrary And therefore in this case to handle him charitably is but to doe him justice And when an Opinion in minoribus articulis is entertained upon the title and stock of education it may be the better permitted to him since upon no better stock nor stronger arguments most men entertain their whole Religion even Christianity itself 5. Fifthly there are some persons of a differing perswasion who therefore are the rather to be tolerated because the indirect practices and impostures of their adversaries have confirmed them that those Opinions which they disavow are not from God as being upheld by means not of God's appointment For it is no unreasonable discourse to say that God will not be served with a lie for he does not need one and he hath means enough to support all those Truths which he hath commanded and hath supplied every honest cause with enough for its maintenance and to contest against its adversaries And but that they which use indirect arts will not be willing to lose any of their unjust advantages nor yet be charitable to those persons whom either to gain or to undoe they leave nothing unattempted the Church of Rome hath much reason not to be so decretory in her sentences against persons of a differing perswasion for if their cause were entirely the cause of God they have given wise people reason to suspect it because some of them have gone to the Devil to defend it And if it be remembred what tragedies were stirred up against Luther for saying the Devil had taught him an argument against the Mass it will be of as great advantage against them that they goe to the Devil for many arguments to support not onely the Mass but the other distinguishing Articles of their Church I instance in the notorious forging of Miracles and framing of false and ridiculous Legends For the former I need no other instances then what hapned in the great contestation about the immaculate Conception when there were Miracles brought on both sides to prove the contradictory parts and though it be more then probable that both sides play'd the jugglers yet the Dominicans had the ill luck to be discovered and the actors burn'd at Berne But this discovery hapned by providence for the Dominican Opinion hath more degrees of probability then the Franciscan is clearly more consonant both to Scripture and all Antiquity and this part of it is acknowledged by the greatest Patrons themselves as Salmeron Posa and Wadding yet because they played the knaves in a just Question and used false arts to maintain a true proposition God Almighty to shew that he will not be served by a lie was pleased rather to discover the Imposture in the right Opinion then in the false since nothing is more dishonourable to God then to offer a sin in sacrifice to him and nothing more incongruous in the nature of the thing then that truth and falshood should support each other or that true Doctrine should live at the charges of a lie And he that considers the arguments for each Opinion will easily conclude that if God would not have truth confirmed by a lie much less would he himself attest a lie with a true Miracle And by this ground it will easily follow that the Franciscan party although they had better luck then the Dominicans yet had not more honesty because their cause was worse and therefore their arguments no whit the better And although the argument drawn from Miracles is good to attest a holy Doctrine which by its own worth will support itself after way is a little made by Miracles yet of itself and by its own reputation it will not support any fabrick for in stead of proving a Doctrine to be true it makes that the Miracles themselves are suspected to be Illusions if they be pretended in behalf of a Doctrine which we think we have reason to account false And therefore the Jews did not believe Christ's Doctrine for his Miracles but disbelieved the truth of his Miracles because they did not like his Doctrine And if the holiness of his Doctrine and the Spirit of God by inspirations and infusions and by that which Saint Peter calls a surer word
made the argument too hard for them And the whole seventh Chapter of S. John's Gospel is a perpetuall instance of the efficacy of such trifling prejudices and the vanity and weakness of popular understandings Some whole Ages have been abused by a Definition which being once received as most commonly they are upon slight grounds they are taken for certainties in any Science respectively and for Principles and upon their reputation men use to frame Conclusions which must be false or uncertain according as the Definitions are And he that hath observed any thing of the weaknesses of men and the successions of groundless Doctrines from Age to Age and how seldome Definitions which are put into Systems or that derive from the Fathers or are approved among School-men are examined by persons of the same interests will bear me witness how many and great inconveniences press hard upon the perswasions of men who are abused and yet never consider who hurt them Others and they very many are led by authority or examples of Princes and great personages Numquis credit ex Principibus Some by the reputation of one learned man are carried into any perswasion whatsoever And in the middle and latter Ages of the Church this was the more considerable because the infinite ignorance of the Clerks and the men of the Long robe gave them over to be led by those few Guides which were marked to them by an eminency much more then their Ordinary which also did the more amuse them because most commonly they were fit for nothing but to admire what they understood not Their learning then was some skill in the Master of the Sentences in Aquinas or Scotus whom they admired next to the most intelligent order of Angels hence came Opinions that made Sects and division of names Thomists Scotists Albertists Nominals Reals and I know not what monsters of Names and whole families of the same Opinion the whole institute of an Order being engaged to believe according to the Opinion of some leading man of the same Order as if such an Opinion were imposed upon them in virtute sanctae obedientiae But this inconvenience is greater when the principle of the mistake runs higher when the Opinion is derived from a Primitive man and a Saint for then it often happens that what at first was but a plain innocent seduction comes to be made sacred by the veneration which is consequent to the person for having lived long agone and then because the person is also since canonized the errour is almost made eternall and the cure desperate These and the like prejudices which are as various as the miseries of humanity or the variety of humane understandings are not absolute excuses unless to some persons but truly if they be to any they are exemptions to all from being pressed with too peremptory a sentence against them especially if we consider what leave is given to all men by the Church of Rome to follow any one probable Doctor in an Opinion which is contested against by many more And as for the Doctors of the other side they being destitute of any pretences to an infallible medium to determine Questions must of necessity allow the same liberty to the people to be as prudent as they can in the choice of a fallible Guide and when they have chosen if they do follow him into errour the matter is not so inexpiable for being deceived in using the best Guides we had which Guides because themselves were abused did also against their wills deceive me So that this prejudice may the easier abuse us because it is almost like a duty to follow the dictates of a probable Doctor or if it be overacted or accidentally pass into an inconvenience it is therefore to be excused because the Principle was not ill unless we judge by our event not by the antecedent probability Of such men as these it was said by Saint Austin Caeteram turbam non intelligendi vivacitas sed credendi simplicitas tutissimam facit And Gregory Nazianzen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The common sort of people are safe in their not enquiring by their own industry and in the simplicity of their understanding relying upon the best Guides they can get 8. But this is of such a nature in which as we may inculpably be deceived so we may turn it into a vice or a design and then the consequent errours will alter the property and become Heresies There are some men that have mens persons in admiration because of advantage and some that have itching ears and heap up Teachers to themselves In these and the like cases the authority of a person and the prejudices of a great reputation is not the excuse but the fault and a Sin is so far from excusing an Errour that Errour becomes a Sin by reason of its relation to that Sin as to its parent and principle SECT XII Of the Innocency of Errour in Opinion in a pious person 1. AND therefore as there are so many innocent causes of Errour as there are weaknesses within and harmless and unavoidable prejudices from without so if ever errour be procured by a vice it hath no excuse but becomes such a crime of so much malignity as to have influence upon the effect and consequent and by communication makes it become criminal The Apostles noted two such causes Covetousness and Ambition the former in them of the Circumcision and the latter in Diotrephes and Simon Magus and there were some that were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they were of the Long robe too but they were the she-Disciples upon whose Consciences some false Apostles had influence by advantage of their wantonness and thus the three principles of all sin become also the principles of Heresie the lust of the flesh the lust of the eye and the pride of life And in pursuance of these arts the Devil hath not wanted fuell to set a-work Incendiaries in all Ages of the Church The Bishops were always honourable and most commonly had great Revenues and a Bishoprick would satisfie the two designs of Covetousness and Ambition and this hath been the golden apple very often contended for and very often the cause of great fires in the Church Thebulis quia rejectus ab Episcopatu Hierosolymitano turbare coepit Ecclesiam said Egesippus in Eusebius Tertullian turned Montanist in discontent for missing the Bishoprick of Carthage after Agrippinus and so did Montanus himself for the same discontent saith Nicephorus Novatus would have been Bishop of Rome Donatus of Carthage Arius of Alexandria Aërius of Sebastia but they all missed and therefore all of them vexed Christendom And this was so common a thing that oftentimes the threatning the Church with a Schism or a Heresie was a design to get a Bishoprick And Socrates reports of Asterius that he did frequent the Conventicles of the Arians Nam Episcopatum aliquem ambiebat And setting aside the infirmities of men and their innocent
's less malice and iniquity in sparing the guilty then in condemning the good because it is in the power of men to remit a guilty person to Divine judicature and for divers causes not to use severity but in no case it is lawfull neither hath God at all given to man a power to condemn such persons as cannot be proved other then pious and innocent And therefore it is better if it should so happen that we should spare the innocent person and one that is actually deceived then that upon the turn of the wheel the true believers should be destroyed 6. And this very reason he that had authority sufficient and absolute to make Laws was pleased to urge as a reasonable inducement for the establishing of that Law which he made for the indemnity of erring persons It was in the Parable of the Tares mingled with the good seed in agro dominico The good seed Christ himself being the interpreter are the Children of the Kingdom the Tares are the children of the wicked one upon this comes the precept Gather not the tares by themselves but let them both grow together till the harvest that is till the day of Judgement This Parable hath been tortured infinitely to make it confess its meaning but we shall soon dispatch it All the difficulty and variety of exposition is reducible to these two Questions What is meant by Gather not and what by Tares that is what kind of sword is forbidden and what kind of persons are to be tolerated The former is clear for the spiritual sword is not forbidden to be used to any sort of criminals for that would destroy the power of Excommunication The prohibition therefore lies against the use of the temporal sword in cutting off some persons Who they are is the next difficulty But by Tares or the children of the wicked one are meant either persons of ill lives wicked persons onely in re practica or else another kind of evil persons men criminal or faulty in re intellectuali One or other of these two must be meant a third I know not But the former cannot be meant because it would destroy all bodies politick which cannot consist without Laws nor Laws without a compulsory and a power of the sword therefore if criminalls were to be let alone till the day of Judgement bodies politick must stand or fall ad arbitrium impiorum and nothing good could be protected not Innocence itself nothing could be secured but violence and tyranny It follows then that since a kind of persons which are indeed faulty are to be tolerated it must be meant of persons faulty in another kind in which the Gospel had not in other places clearly established a power externally compulsory and therefore since in all actions practically criminall a power of the sword is permitted here where it is denied must be meant a crime of another kind and by consequence errours intellectual commonly call'd Heresie 7. And after all this the reason there given confirms this interpretation for therefore it is forbidden to cut off these Tares lest we also pull up the wheat with them which is the sum of these two last Arguments For because Heresie is of so nice consideration and difficult sentence in thinking to root up Heresies we may by our mistakes destroy true Doctrine which although it be possible to be done in all cases of practical question by mistake yet because externall actions are more discernible then inward speculations and Opinions innocent persons are not so easily mistaken for the guilty in actions criminal as in matters of inward perswasion And upon that very reason Saint Martin was zealous to have procured a revocation of a Commission granted to certain Tribunes to make enquiry in Spain for Sects and Opinions for under colour of rooting out the Priscillianists there was much mischief done and more likely to happen to the Orthodox For it happened then as oftentimes since Pallore potiùs veste quà m fide Haereticus dijudicari solebat aliquando per Tribunos Maximi They were no good inquisitors of Heretical pravity so Sulpitius witnesses But secondly the reason says that therefore these persons are so to be permitted as not to be persecuted lest when a revolution of humane affairs sets contrary Opinions in the throne or chair they who were persecuted before should now themselves become persecuters of others and so at one time or other before or after the Wheat be rooted up and the Truth be persecuted But as these reasons confirm the Law and this sense of it so abstracting from the Law it is of itself concluding by an argument ab incommodo and that founded upon the principles of Justice and right Reason as I formerly alledged 8. Fifthly We are not onely uncertain of finding out Truths in matters disputable but we are certain that the best and ablest Doctors of Christendom have been actually deceived in matters of great concernment which thing is evident in all those instances of persons from whose Doctrine all sorts of Christians respectively take liberty to dissent The errours of Papias Irenaeus Lactantius Justin Martyr in the Millenary Opinion of Saint Cyprian Firmilian the Asian and African Fathers in the Question of Re-baptization S. Austin in his decretory and uncharitable sentence against the unbaptized children of Christian parents the Roman or the Greek Doctors in the Question of the Procession of the Holy Ghost and in the matter of Images are examples beyond exception 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now if these great personages had been persecuted or destroyed for their Opinions who should have answered the invaluable loss the Church of God should have sustained in missing so excellent so exemplary and so great Lights But then if these persons erred and by consequence might have been destroyed what should have become of others whose understanding was lower and their security less their errours more and their danger greater At this rate all men should have passed through the fire for who can escape when S. Cyprian and S. Austin cannot Now to say these persons were not to be persecuted because although they had errours yet none condemned by the Church at that time or before is to say nothing to the purpose nor nothing that is true Not true because S. Cyprian's errour was condemned by Pope Stephen which in the present sense of the prevailing party in the Church of Rome is to be condemned by the Church Not to the purpose because it is nothing else but to say that the Church did tolerate their errours For since those Opinions were open and manifest to the world that the Church did not condemn them it was either because those Opinions were by the Church not thought to be errours or if they were yet she thought fit to tolerate the errour and the erring person And if she would doe so still it would in most cases be better then now it is And yet if the Church had condemned them
Hereticks to death till they grew wanton with prosperity But when the reputation of the Governours was concerned when the interests of men were endangered when they had something to lose when they had built their estimation upon the credit of disputable Questions when they began to be jealous of other men when they over-valued themselves and their own Opinions when some persons invaded Bishopricks upon pretence of new Opinions then they as they thrived in the favour of Emperours and in the successe of their Disputes solicited the temporal power to banish to fine to imprison and to kill their adversaries 5. So that the case stands thus In the best times amongst the best men when there were fewer temporal ends to be served when Religion and the pure and simple designs of Christianity were onely to be promoted in those times and amongst such men no persecution was actual nor perswaded nor allowed towards disagreeing persons But as men had ends of their own and not of Christ as they receded from their duty and Religion from its purity as Christianity began to be compounded with interests and blended with temporal designs so men were persecuted for their Opinions This is most apparent if we consider when Persecution first came in and if we observe how it was checked by the holiest and the wisest persons 6. The first great instance I shall note was in Priscillian and his followers who were condemned to death by the Tyrant Maximus Which instance although Saint Hierom observes as a punishment and judgement for the crime of Heresie yet is of no use in the present Question because Maximus put some Christians of all sorts to death promiscuously Catholick and Heretick without choice and therefore the Priscillianists might as well have called it a judgement upon the Catholicks as the Catholicks upon them 7. But when Vrsatus and Stacius two Bishops procured the Priscillianists death by the power they had at Court Saint Martin was so angry at them for their cruelty that he excommunicated them both And Saint Ambrose upon the same stock denied his communion to the Itaciani And the account that Sulpitius gives of the story is this Hoc modo says he homines luce indignissimi pessimo exemplo necati sunt The example was worse then the men If the men were hereticall the execution of them however was unchristian 8. But it was of more Authority that the Nicene Fathers supplicated the Emperour and prevailed for the banishment of Arius Of this we can give no other account but that by the history of the time we see baseness enough and personal misdemeanour and factiousnesse of spirit in Arius to have deserved worse then banishment though the obliquity of his Opinion were not put into the balance which we have reason to believe was not so much as considered because Constantine gave toleration to differing Opinions and Arius himself was restored upon such conditions to his Countrey and Office which would not stand with the ends of the Catholicks if they had been severe exactors of concurrence and union of perswasions 9. I am still within the scene of Ecclesiasticall persons and am considering what the opinion of the learnedst and the holiest Prelates was concerning this great Question If we will believe Saint Austin who was a credible person no good man did allow it Nullis tamen bonis in Catholica hoc placet si usque ad mortem in quenquam licèt haereticum saeviatur This was Saint Austin's final opinion For he had first been of the mind that it was not honest to doe any violence to mis-perswaded persons and when upon an accident happening in Hippo he had altered and retracted that part of the opinion yet then also he excepted Death and would by no means have any mere Opinion made capital But for ought appears Saint Austin had greater reason to have retracted that retractation then his first opinion for his saying of nullis bonis placet was as true as the thing was reasonable it should be so Witnesse those known Testimonies of Tertullian Cyprian Lactantius S. Hierom Severus Sulpitius Minutius Hilary Damascen Chrysostome Theophylact and Bernard and divers others whom the Reader may find quoted by the Archbishop of Spalato Lib. 8. de Rep. Eccl. c. 8. 10. Against this concurrent testimony my reading can furnish me with no adversary nor contrary instances but in Atticus of CP Theodosius of Synada in Stacius and Vrsatus before reckoned Onely indeed some of the later Popes of Rome began to be busie and unmercifull but it was then when themselves were secure and their interests great and their temporal concernments highly considerable 11. For it is most true and not amisse to observe it that no man who was under the Ferula did ever think it lawfull to have Opinions forced or Hereticks put to death and yet many men who themselves have escaped the danger of a pile and a faggot have changed their opinion just as the case was altered that is as themselves were unconcerned in the suffering Petilian Parmenian and Gaudentius by no means would allow it lawfull for themselves were in danger and were upon that side that is ill thought of and discountenanced but Gregory and †Leo Popes of Rome upon whose side the authority and advantages were thought it lawfull they should be punished and persecuted for themselves were unconcerned in the danger of suffering And therefore Saint Gregory commends the Exarch of Ravenna for forcing them who dissented from those men who called themselves the Church And there were some Divines in the lower Germany who upon great reasons spake against the tyranny of the Inquisition and restraining Prophesying who yet when they had shaken off the Spanish yoke began to persecute their brethren It was unjust in them in all men unreasonable and uncharitable and often increases the errour but never lessens the danger 12. But yet although the Church I mean in her distinct and Clerical capacity was against destroying or punishing difference in Opinion till the Popes of Rome did superseminate and perswade the contrary yet the Bishops did perswade the Emperours to make Laws against Hereticks and to punish disobedient persons with Fines with Imprisonment with Death and Banishment respectively This indeed calls us to a new account For the Churchmen might not proceed to bloud nor corporal inflictions but might they not deliver over to the Secular arm and perswade Temporal Princes to doe it For this I am to say that since it is notorious that the doctrine of the Clergy was against punishing Hereticks the Laws which were made by the Emperours against them might be for restraint of differing Religion in order to the preservation of the publick Peace which is too frequently violated by the division of Opinions But I am not certain whether that was alwaies the reason or whether or no some Bishops of the Court did
not also serve their own ends in giving their Princes such untoward counsel but we find the Laws made severally to several purposes in divers cases and with different severity Constantine the Emperour made a Sanction Vt parem cum fidelibus ii qui errant pacis quietis fruitionem gaudentes accipiant The Emperour Gratian decreed Vt quam quisque vellet religionem sequeretur conventus Ecclesiasticos semoto metu omnes agerent But he excepted the Manichees the Photinians and Eunomians Theodosius the elder made a law of death against the Anabaptists of his time and banished Eunomius and against other erring persons appointed a pecuniary mulct but he did no executions so severe as his sanctions to shew they were made in terrorem onely So were the Laws of Valentinian and Martian decreeing contra omnes qui prava docere tentant that they should be put to death so did Michael the Emperour but Justinian onely decreed banishment 13. But whatever whispers some Politicks might make to their Princes as the wisest and holiest did not think it lawfull for Churchmen alone to doe executions so neither did they transmit such persons to the Secular judicature And therefore when the Edict of Macedonius the President was so ambiguous that it seemed to threaten death to Hereticks unless they recanted S. Austin admonished him carefully to provide that no Heretick should be put to death alledging it not onely to be unchristian but illegal also and not warranted by Imperial constitutions for before his time no Laws were made for their being put to death but however he prevailed that Macedonius published another Edict more explicite and lesse seemingly severe But in his Epistle to Donatus the African Proconsul he is more confident and determinate Necessitate nobis impactâ indictâ ut potiùs occîdi ab eis eligamus quà m eos occidendos vestris judiciis ingeramus 14. But afterwards many got a trick of giving them over to the Secular power which at the best is no better then Hypocrisie removing envy from themselves and laying it upon others a refusing to doe that in externall act which they doe in counsel and approbation which is a transmitting the act to another and retaining a proportion of guilt unto themselves even their own and the others too I end this with the saying of Chrysostome Dogmata impia quae ab haereticis profecta sunt arguere anathematizare oportet hominibus autem parcendum pro salute eorum orandum SECT XV. How far the Church or Governours may act to the restraining false or differing Opinions BUT although Hereticall persons are not to be destroyed yet Heresie being a work of the flesh and all Hereticks criminal persons whose acts and Doctrine have influence upon Communities of men whether Ecclesiasticall or civil the Governours of the Republick or Church respectively are to doe their duties in restraining those mischiefs which may happen to their several charges for whose indemnity they are answerable And therefore according to the effect or malice of the Doctrine or the person so the cognizance of them belongs to several Judicatures If it be false Doctrine in any capacity and doth mischief in any sense or teaches ill life in any instance or encourages evil in any particular 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 these men must be silenced they must be convinced by sound Doctrine and put to silence by spiritual evidence and restrained by Authority Ecclesiasticall that is by spiritual Censures according as it seems necessary to him who is most concern'd in the regiment of the Church For all this we have precept and precedent Apostolicall and much reason For by thus doing the Governour of the Church uses all that Authority that is competent and all the means that is reasonable and that proceeding which is regular that he may discharge his cure and secure his flock And that he possibly may be deceived in judging a Doctrine to be hereticall and by consequence the person excommunicate suffers injury is no argument against the reasonableness of the proceeding For all the injury that is is visible and in appearance and so is his crime Judges must judge according to their best reason guided by Law of God as their Rule and by evidence and appearance as their best instrument and they can judge no better If the Judges be good and prudent the errour of proceeding will not be great nor ordinary and there can be no better establishment of humane judicature then is a fallible proceeding upon an infallible ground And if the judgement of Heresie be made by estimate and proportion of the Opinion to a good or a bad life respectively supposing an errour in the deduction there will be no malice in the conclusion and that he endeavours to secure piety according to the best of his understanding and yet did mistake in his proceeding is onely an argument that he did his duty after the manner of men possibly with the piety of a Saint though not with the understanding of an Angel And the little inconvenience that happens to the person injuriously judged is abundantly made up in the excellency of the Discipline the goodnesse of the example the care of the publick and all those great influences into the manners of men which derive from such an act so publickly consign'd But such publick judgement in matters of Opinion must be seldome and curious and never but to secure piety and a holy life for in matters speculative as all determinations are fallible so scarce any of them are to purpose nor ever able to make compensation of either side either for the publick fraction or the particular injustice if it should so happen in the censure 2. But then as the Church may proceed thus far yet no Christian man or Community of men may proceed farther For if they be deceived in their judgement and censure and yet have passed onely spiritual censures they are totally ineffectual and come to nothing there is no effect remaining upon the Soul and such censures are not to meddle with the body so much as indirectly But if any other judgement passe upon persons erring such judgements whose effects remain if the person be unjustly censured nothing will answer and make compensation for such injuries If a person be excommunicate unjustly it will doe him no hurt but if he be killed or dismembred unjustly that censure and infliction is not made ineffectual by his innocence he is certainly killed and dismembred So that as the Churche's Authority in such cases so restrained and made prudent cautelous and orderly is just and competent so the proceeding is reasonable it is provident for the publick and the inconveniences that may fall upon particulars so little as that the publick benefit makes ample compensation so long as the proceeding is but spiritual 3. This discourse is in the case of such Opinions which by the former rules are formal Heresies and upon practicall inconveniences But
for matters of question which have not in them an enmity to the publick tranquillity as the Republick hath nothing to doe upon the ground of all the former discourses so if the Church meddles with them where they do not derive into ill life either in the person or in the consequent or else are destructions of the foundation of Religion which is all one for that those fundamental Articles are of greatest necessity in order to a vertuous and godly life which is wholly built upon them and therefore are principally necessary if she meddles farther otherwise then by preaching and conferring and exhortation she becomes tyrannical in her government makes herself an immediate judge of Consciences and perswasions lords it over their Faith destroys unity and charity and as he that dogmatizes the Opinion becomes criminal if he troubles the Church with an immodest peevish and pertinacious proposall of his Article not simply necessary so the Church does not do her duty if she so condemns it pro tribunali as to enjoyn him and all her subjects to believe the contrary And as there may be pertinacy in Doctrine so there may be pertinacy in judging and both are faults The peace of the Church and the unity of her Doctrine is best conserved when it is judged by the proportion it hath to that rule of unity which the Apostles gave that is the Creed for Articles of mere belief and the precepts of Jesus Christ and the practicall rules of piety which are most plain and easie and without controversie set down in the Gospels and writings of the Apostles But to multiply Articles and adopt them into the family of the Faith and to require assent to such Articles which as Saint Paul's phrase is are of doubtfull disputation equal to that assent we give to matters of Faith is to build a tower upon the top of a Bulrush and the farther the effect of such proceedings does extend the worse they are the very making such a Law is unreasonable the inflicting spiritual censures upon them that cannot doe so much violence to their understanding as to obey it is unjust and ineffectuall but to punish the person with death or with corporal infliction indeed it is effectuall but it is therefore tyrannicall We have seen what the Church may doe towards restraining false or differing Opinions next I shall consider by way of Corollary what the Prince may doe as for his interest and onely in securing his people and serving the ends of true Religion SECT XVI Whether it be lawfull for a Prince to give Toleration to severall Religions 1. FOR upon these very grounds we may easily give account of that great Question Whether it be lawfull for a Prince to give Toleration to several Religions For first It is a great fault that men will call the several Sects of Christians by the names of several Religions The Religion of Jesus Christ is the form of sound Doctrine and wholsome words which is set down in Scripture indefinitely actually conveyed to us by plain places and separated as for the question of necessary or not necessary by the Symbol of the Apostles Those impertinencies which the wantonnesse and vanity of men hath commenced which their interests have promoted which serve not Truth so much as their own ends are far from being distinct Religions for matters of Opinion are no parts of the Worship of God nor in order to it but as they promote obedience to his Commandments and when they contribute towards it are in that proportion as they contribute parts and actions and minute particulars of that Religion to whose end they do or pretend to serve And such are all the Sects and all the pretences of Christians but pieces and minutes of Christianity if they do serve the great end as every man for his own Sect and interest believes for his share it does 2. Toleration hath a double sense or purpose For sometimes by it men understand a publick licence and exercise of a Sect sometimes it is onely an indemnity of the persons privately to convene and to opine as they see cause and as they mean to answer to God Both these are very much to the same purpose unlesse some persons whom we are bound to satisfie be scandalized and then the Prince is bound to doe as he is bound to satisfie To God it is all one For abstracting from the offence of persons which is to be considered just as our obligation is to content the persons it is all one whether we indulge to them to meet publickly or privately to doe actions of Religion concerning which we are not perswaded that they are truly holy To God it is just one to be in the dark and in the light the thing is the same onely the Circumstance of publick and private is different which cannot be concerned in any thing nor can it concern any thing but the matter of Scandal and relation to the minds and fantasies of certain persons 3. So that to tolerate is not to persecute And the Question whether the Prince may tolerate divers perswasions is no more then whether he may lawfully persecute any man for not being of his Opinion Now in this case he is just so to tolerate diversity of perswasions as he is to tolerate publick actions for no Opinion is judicable nor no person punishable but for a sin and if his Opinion by reason of its managing or its effect be a sin in itself or becomes a sin to the person then as he is to doe towards other sins so to that Opinion or man so opining But to believe so or not so when there is no more but mere believing is not in his power to enjoyn therefore not to punish And it is not onely lawfull to tolerate disagreeing Perswasions but the Authority of God onely is competent to take notice of it and infallible to determine it and fit to judge and therefore no humane Authority is sufficient to doe all those things which can justifie the inflicting temporal punishments upon such as doe not conform in their perswasions to a Rule or Authority which is not onely fallible but supposed by the disagreeing person to be actually deceived 4. But I consider that in the Toleration of a different Opinion Religion is not properly and immediately concerned so as in any degree to be endangered For it may be safe in diversity of perswasions and it is also a part of Christian Religion that the liberty of mens Consciences should be preserved in all things where God hath not set a limit and made a restraint that the Soul of man should be free and acknowledge no Master but Jesus Christ that matters spiritual should not be restrained by punishments corporal that the same meekness and charity should be preserved in the promotion of Christianity that gave it foundation and increment and firmness in its first publication that Conclusions should not be more dogmatical then the virtual resolution
of that temper and expedient but either he must lose the formality of a law and neither have power coercitive nor obligatory but ad arbitrium inferiorum or else it cannot antecedently to the particular case give leave to any sort of men to disagree or disobey 5. Secondly Suppose that a Law be made with great reason so as to satisfie divers persons pious and prudent that it complies with the necessity of Government and promotes the interest of God's service and publick order it may easily be imagined that these persons which are obedient sons of the Church may be as zealous for the publick Order and Discipline of the Church as others for their opinion against it and may be as much scandalized if disobedience be tolerated as others are if the Law be exacted and what shall be done in this case Both sorts of men cannot be complied withall because as these pretend to be offended at the Law and by consequence if they understand the consequents of their own Opinion at them that obey the Law so the others are justly offended at them that unjustly disobey it If therefore there be any on the right side as confident and zealous as they who are on the wrong side then the disagreeing persons are not to be complied with to avoid giving offence for if they be offence is given to better persons and so the mischief which such complying seeks to prevent is made greater and more unjust obedience is discouraged and disobedience is legally canonized for the result of a holy and a tender Conscience 6. Thirdly Such complying with the disagreeings of a sort of men is the total overthrow of all Discipline and it is better to make no Laws of publick Worship then to rescind them in the very constitution and there can be no end in making the Sanction but to make the Law ridiculous and the Authority contemptible For to say that complying with weak Consciences in the very framing of a Law of Discipline is the way to preserve unity were all one as to say to take away all Laws is the best way to prevent disobedience In such matters of indifferency the best way of cementing the fraction is to unite the parts in the Authority for then the question is but one viz. Whether the authority must be obeyed or not But if a permission be given of disputing the particulars the Questions become next to infinite A Mirrour when it is broken represents the object mutiplied and divided but if it be entire and through one centre transmits the species to the eye the Vision is one and natural Laws are the Mirrour in which men are to dress and compose their actions and therefore must not be broken with such clauses of exception which may without remedy be abused to the prejudice of Authority and peace and all humane Sanctions And I have known in some Churches that this pretence hath been nothing but a design to discredit the Law to dismantle the Authority that made it to raise their own credit and a trophee of their zeal to make it a characteristick note of a Sect and the cognizance of holy persons and yet the men that claimed exemption from the Laws upon pretence of having weak Consciences if in hearty expression you had told them so to their heads they would have spit in your face and were so far from confessing themselves weak that they thought themselves able to give Laws to Christendome to instruct the greatest Clerks and to catechize the Church herself And which is the worst of all they who were perpetually clamourous that the severity of the Laws should slacken as to their particular and in matter adiaphorous in which if the Church hath any Authority she hath power to make Laws to indulge a leave to them to doe as they list yet were the most imperious amongst men most decretory in their sentences and most impatient of any disagreeing from them though in the least minute and particular whereas by all the justice of the world they who perswade such a compliance in matters of fact and of so little question should not deny to tolerate persons that differ in Questions of great difficulty and contestation 7. Fourthly But yet since all things almost in the world have been made matters of dispute and the will of some men and the malice of others and the infinite industry and pertinacy of contesting and resolution to conquer hath abused some persons innocently into a perswasion that even the Laws themselves though never so prudently constituted are superstitious or impious such persons who are otherwise pious humble and religious are not to be destroyed for such matters which in themselves are not of concernment to Salvation and neither are so accidentally to such men and in such cases where they are innocently abused and they erre without purpose and design And therefore if there be a publick disposition in some persons to dislike Laws of a certain quality if it be fore-seen it is to be considered in lege dicenda and whatever inconvenience or particular offence is fore-seen is either to be directly avoided in the Law or else a compensation in the excellency of the Law and certain advantages made to out-weigh their pretensions But in lege jam dicta because there may be a necessiy some persons should have a liberty indulged them it is necessary that the Governours of the Church should be intrusted with a power to consider the particular case and indulge a liberty to the person and grant personal dispensations This I say is to be done at several times upon particular instance upon singular consideration and new emergencies But that a whole kinde of men such a kinde to which all men without possibility of being confuted may pretend should at once in the very frame of the Law be permitted to disobey is to nullifie the Law to destroy Discipline and to hallow disobedience it takes away the obliging part of the Law and makes that the thing enacted shall not be enjoyn'd but tolerated onely it destroys unity and uniformity which to preserve was the very end of such laws of Discipline it bends the Rule to the thing which is to be ruled so that the Law obeys the subject not the subject the Law it is to make a Law for particulars not upon general reason and congruity against the prudence and design of all Laws in the world and absolutely without the example of any Church in Christendome it prevents no scandal for some will be scandalized at the Authority itself some at the complying and remisness of Discipline and several men at matters and upon ends contradictory All which cannot some ought not to be complied withall 8. Sixthly The summe is this The end of the Laws of Discipline are in an immediate order to the conservation and ornament of the publick and therefore the Laws must not so tolerate as by conserving persons to destroy themselves and the publick benefit but if
where he hath intended them but so say that therefore he will doe it by an external act and ministery and that confin'd to a particular viz. this Rite and no other is no good Argument unless God could not doe it without such means or that he had said he would not And why cannot God as well doe his mercies to Infants now immediately as he did before the institution either of Circumcision or Baptism 18. However there is no danger that Infants should perish for want of this external Ministery much less for prevaricating Christ's precept of Nisi quis renatus fuerit c. For first the Water and the Spirit in this place signifie the same thing and by Water is meant the effect of the Spirit cleansing and purifying the Soul as appears in its parallel place of Christ baptizing with the Spirit and with Fire For although this was literally fulfilled in Pentecost yet morally there is more in it for it is the sign of the effect of the Holy Ghost and his productions upon the soul and it was an excellency of our Blessed Saviour's office that he baptizes all that come to him with the Holy Ghost and with Fire for so S. John preferring Christ's mission and office before his own tells the Jews not Christ's Disciples that Christ shall baptize them with Fire and the Holy Spirit that is all that come to him as John the Baptist did with water for so lies the Antithesis And you may as well conclude that Infants must also pass through the fire as through the water And that we may not think this a trick to elude the pressure of this place Peter says the same thing for when he had said that Baptism saves us he adds by way of explication not the washing of the flesh but the confidence of a good Conscience towards God plainly saying that it is not water or the purifying of the body but the cleansing of the Spirit that does that which is supposed to be the effect of Baptism And if our Saviour's exclusive negative be expounded by analogie to this of Peter as certainly the other parallel instance must and this may then it will be so far from proving the necessity of Infants Baptism that it can conclude for no man that he is obliged to the Rite and the Doctrine of the Baptism is onely to derive from the very words of Institution and not to be forced from words which were spoken before it was ordained But to let pass this advantage and to suppose it meant of external Baptism yet this no more infers a necessity of Infants Baptism then the other words of Christ infer a necessity to give them the holy Communion Nisi comederitis carnem Filii hominis biberitis sanguinem non introibitis in regnum coelorum and yet we do not think these words sufficient Argument to communicate them If men therefore will doe us justice either let them give both Sacraments to Infants as some Ages of the Church did or neither For the wit of man is not able to shew a disparity in the Sanction or in the energie of its expression And Simeon Thessalonicensis derides inertem Latinorum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as we express it the lazie trifling of the Latines who dream of a difference 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 O the unreasonableness and absurdity For why do you baptize them Meaning that because they are equally ignorant in Baptism as in the Eucharist that which hinders them in one is the same impediment in both And therefore they were honest that understood the obligation to be parallel and performed it accordingly and yet because we say they were deceived in one distance and yet the obligation all the world cannot reasonably say but is the same they are as honest and as reasonable that doe neither And since the ancient Church did with an equal opinion of necessity give them the Communion and yet men now adays do not why shall men be burthened with a prejudice and a name of obloquy for not giving the Infants one Sacrament more then they are disliked for not affording them the other If Anabaptist shall be a name of disgrace why shall not some other name be invented for them that deny to communicate Infants which shall be equally disgracefull or else both the Opinions signified by such names be accounted no disparagement but receive their estimate according to their truth 19. Of which truth since we are now taking account from pretences of Scripture it is considerable that the discourse of S. Peter which is pretended for the intitling Infants to the Promise of the Holy Ghost and by consequence to Baptism which is supposed to be its Instrument and conveiance is wholly a fancy and hath in it nothing of certainty or demonstration and not much probability For besides that the thing it self is unreasonable and the Holy Ghost works by the heightning and improving our natural faculties and therefore it is a Promise that so concerns them as they are reasonable creatures and may have a title to it in proportion to their nature but no possession or reception of it till their faculties come into act besides this I say the words mentioned in S. Peter's Sermon which are the onely record of the Promise are interpreted upon a weak mistake The promise belongs to you and to your children therefore Infants are actually receptive of it in that capacity That is the Argument But the reason of it is not yet discovered nor ever will for to you and your children is to you and your posterity to you and your children when they are of the same capacity in which you are effectually receptive of the promise and therefore Tertullian calls Infants designatos sanctitatis ac per hoc etiam salutis the candidates of holiness and salvation those that are designed to it But he that when-ever the word children is used in Scripture shall by children understand Infants must needs believe that in all Israel there were no men but all were Infants and if that had been true it had been the greater wonder they should overcome the Anakims and beat the King of Moab and march so far and discourse so well for they were all called the children of Israel 20. And for the Allegation of S. Paul that Infants are holy if their Parents be faithfull it signifies nothing but that they are holy by designation just as Jeremy and John Baptist were sanctified in their Mothers womb that is they were appointed and designed for holy Ministeries but had not received the Promise of the Father the gift of the Holy Ghost for all that sanctification and just so the children of Christian parents are sanctified that is designed to the service of Jesus Christ and the future participation of the Promises 21. And as the Promise appertains not for ought appears to Infants in that capacity and consistence but onely by the title of their being reasonable creatures and when they come to that
family for it is said of the Ruler at Capernaum that he believed and all his house Now you may also suppose that in his house were little babes that is likely enough and you may suppose that they did believe too before they could understand but that 's not so likely and then the argument from baptizing of Stephen's houshold may be allowed just as probable But this is unman-like to build upon such slight airy conjectures 25. But Tradition by all means must supply the place of Scripture and there is pretended a Tradition Apostolical that Infants were baptized But at this we are not much moved for we who rely upon the written Word of God as sufficient to establish all true Religion do not value the Allegation of Traditions And however the world goes none of the Reformed Churches can pretend this Argument against this Opinion because they who reject Tradition when 't is against them must not pretend it at all for them But if we should allow the Topick to be good yet how will it be verified For so far as it can yet appear it relies wholly upon the Testimony of Origen for from him Austin had it For as for the testimony pretended out of Justin Martyr it is to no purpose because the book from whence the words are cited is not Justin's who was before Origen and yet he cites Origen Irenaeus But who please may see it sufficiently condemned by Sixtus Senensis Biblioth Sanct. l. 4. verbo Justinus And as for the â—â—stimony of Origen we know nothing of it for every Heretick interessed person did interpolate all his Works so much that we cannot discern which are his which not Now a Tradition Apostolical if it be not consigned with a fuller testimony then of one person whom all after Ages have condemned of many errours will obtain so little reputation amongst those who know that things have upon greater Authority pretended to derive from the Apostles and yet falsely that it will be a great Argument that he is â—redulous weak that shall be determined by so weak probation in matters of so great concernment And the truth of the business is as there was no command of Scripture to oblige children to the susception of it so the necessity of Paedo-baptism was not determined in the Church till in the eighth Age after Christ but in the year 418. in the Milevitan Council a Provincial of Africa there was a Canon made for Paedo-baptism never till then I grant it was practised in Africa before that time they or some of them thought well of it though that be no Argument for us to think so yet none of them did ever before pretend it to be necessary none to have been a precept of the Gospel S. Austin was the first that ever preached it to be absolutely necessary and it was in his heat anger against Pelagius who had warmed chased him so in that question that it made him innovate in other Doctrines possibly of more concernment then this And although this was practised anciently in Africa yet that it was without an opinion of necessity and not often there nor at all in other places we have the testimony of the learned Paedo-baptist Ludovicus Vives who in his Annotations upon Saint Austin De Civit. Dei l. 1. c. 27. affirms neminem nisi adultum antiquitus solere baptizari 26. But besides that the Tradition cannot be proved to be Apostolical we have very good evidence from Antiquity that it was the opinion of the Primitive Church that Infants ought not to be baptized and this is clear in the sixth Canon of the Council of Nâ—ocaesarea The words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The sense is this A woman with child may be baptized when she please for her Baptism concerns not the child The reason of the connexion of the parts of that Canon is in the following words Because every one in that confession is to give a demonstration of his own choice and election Meaning plainly that if the Baptism of the mother did also pass upon the child it were not fit for a pregnant woman to receive Baptism because in that Sacrament there being a confession of Faith which confession supposes understanding and free choice it is not reasonable the child should be consigned with such a mysterie since it cannot doe any act of choice or understanding And to this purpose are the words of Balsamon speaking of this Decree and of Infants unborn not to be baptized he says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The unborn babe is not to be baptized because he neither is come to light nor can he make choice of the confession that is of the Articles to be confessed in Divine baptism To the same sense are the words of Zonaras 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Embryo or unborn babe does then need Baptism when he can chuse The Canon speaks reason and it intimates a practice which was absolutely universal in the Church of interrogating the Catechumens concerning the Articles of Creed Which is one Argument that either they did not admit Infants to Baptism or that they did prevaricate egregiously in asking questions of them who themselves knew were not capable of giving answer But the former was the more probable according to the testimony of Walafridus Stabo Notandum deinde primis temporibus illis solummodo Baptismi gratiam dari solitam qui corporis mentisâ—integritate jam ad hoc pervenerunt ut scire intelligere possent quid emolumenti in Baptismo consequendum quid confitendum atque credendum quid postremò renatis in Christo esset servandum It is to be noted that in those first times the grace of Baptism was wont to be given to those onely who by their integrity of mind and body were arrived to this that they could know and understand what profit was to be had by Baptism what was to be confessed and believ'd in Baptism and what is the duty of them who are born again in Christ. 27. But to supply their incapacity by the answer of a Godfather is but the same unreasonableness acted with a worse circumstance and there is no sensible account can be given of it For that which some imperfectly murmure concerning stipulations civil performed by Tutors in the name of their Pupils is an absolute vanity For what if by positive constitution of the Romans such solennites of Law are required in all stipulations and by indulgence are permitted in the case of a notable benefit accruing to Minors must God be tied and Christian Religion transact her mysteries by proportion and compliance with the Law of the Romans I know God might if he would have appointed Godfathers to give answer in behalf of the Children and to be Fide jussors for them but we cannot find any Authority or ground that he hath and if he had then it is to be supposed he would have given them commission to
ancient then falshood that God would not for so many Ages forsake his Church and leave her in an errour that whatsoever is new is not onely suspicious but false which are suppositions pious and plausible enough And if the Church of Rome had communicated Infants so long as she hath prayed to Saints or baptized Infants the communicating would have been believed with as much confidence as the other Articles are and the dissentients with as much impatience rejected But this consideration is to be enlarged upon all those particulars which as they are apt to abuse the persons of the men and amuse their understandings so they are instruments of their excuse and by making their errours to be invincible and their Opinions though false yet not criminall make it also to be an effect of reason and charity to permit the men a liberty of their Conscience and let them answer to God for themselves and their own Opinions Such as are the beauty and splendour of their Church their pompous Service the stateliness and solennity of the Hierarchy their name of Catholick which they suppose their own due and to concern no other Sect of Christians the antiquity of many of their Doctrines the continuall Succession of their Bishops their immediate derivation from the Apostles their Title to succeed S. Peter the supposall and pretence of his personal prerogatives the advantages which the conjunction of the Imperial Seat with their Episcopal hath brought to that See the flattering expressions of minor Bishops which by being old Records have obtained credibility the multitude and variety of people which are of their perswasion apparent consent with Antiquity in many Ceremonials which other Churches have rejected and a pretended and sometimes an apparent consent with some elder Ages in many matters Doctrinal the advantage which is derived to them by entertaining some personal Opinions of the Fathers which they with infinite clamours see to be cried up to be a Doctrine of the Church of that time the great consent of one part with another in that which most of them affirm to be de fide the great differences which are commenced amongst their Adversaries abusing the liberty of Prophesying unto a very great licentiousness their happiness of being instruments in converting divers Nations the advantages of Monarchicall Government the benefit of which as well as the inconveniences which though they feel they consider not they daily do enjoy the piety and the austerity of their Religious Orders of men and women the single life of their Priests and Bishops the riches of their Church the severity of their Fasts and their exteriour observances the great reputation of their first Bishops for Faith and sanctity the known holiness of some of those persons whose Institutes the Religious persons pretend to imitate their Miracles false or true substantial or imaginary the casualties and accidents that have happened to their Adversaries which being chances of humanity are attributed to several causes according as the fancies of men and their interests are pleased or satisfied the temporal felicity of their Professors the oblique arts and indirect proceedings of some of those who departed from them and amongsâ— many other things the names of Heretick and Schismatick which they with infinite pertinacy fasten upon all that disagree from them These things and divers others may very easily perswade persons of much reason and more piety to retain that which they know to have been the Religion of their Fore fathers which had actual possession and seisure of mens understandings before the opposite professions had a name and so much the rather because Religion hath more advantages upon the fancy and affections then it hath upon Philosophie and severe discourses and therefore is the more easily perswaded upon such grounds as these which are more apt to amuse then to satisfie the understanding 3. Secondly If we consider the Doctrines themselves we shall find them to be superstructures ill built and worse managed but yet they keep the foundation they build upon God in Jesus Christ they profess the Apostles Creed they retain Faith and repentance as the supporters of all our hopes of Heaven and believe many more Truths then can be proved to be of simple and original necessity to Salvation And therefore all the wisest personages of the adverse party allowed to them possibility of salvation whilst their errours are not faults of their will but weaknesses and deceptions of the understanding So that there is nothing in the foundation of Faith that can reasonably hinder them to be permitted The foundation of Faith stands secure enough for all their vain and unhandsome superstructures But then on the other side if we take account of their Doctrines as they relate to good life or are consistent or inconsistent with civil Government we shall have other considerations 4. Thirdly For I consider that many of their Doctrines do accidentally teach or lead to ill life and it will appear to any man that considers the result of these Propositions Attrition which is a low and imperfect degree of sorrow for sin or as others say a sorrow for sin commenced upon any reason of a religious hope or fear or desire or any thing else is a sufficient disposition for a man in the Sacrament of Penance to receive absolution and be justified before God by taking away the guilt of all his sins and the obligation to eternall pains So that already the fear of Hell is quite removed upon conditions so easie that many men take more pains to get a groat then by this Doctrine we are obliged to for the curing and acquitting all the greatest sins of a whole life of the most vicious person in the world And but that they affright their people with a fear of Purgatory or with the severity of Penances in case they will not venture for Purgatory for by their Doctrine they may chuse or refuse either there would be nothing in their Doctrine or Discipline to impede and slacken their proclivity to sin But then they have as easie a cure for that too with a little more charge sometimes but most commonly with less trouble For there are so many Confraternities so many priviledged Churches Altars Monasteries Coemeteries Offices Festivals and so free a concession of Indulgences appendant to all these and a thousand fine devices to take away the fear of Purgatory to commute or expiate Penances that in no Sect of men do they with more ease and cheapness reconcile a wicked life with the hopes of Heaven then in the Roman Communion 5. And indeed if men would consider things upon their true grounds the Church of Rome should be more reproved upon Doctrines that infer ill life then upon such as are contrariant to Faith For false superstructures do not always destroy Faith but many of the Doctrines they teach if they were prosecuted to the utmost issue would destroy good life And therefore my quarrell with the Church of Rome is greater
and stronger upon such points which are not usually considered then it is upon the ordinary disputes which have to no very great purpose so much disturbed Christendom and I am more scandalized at her for teaching the sufficiency of Attrition in the Sacrament for indulging Penances so frequently for remitting all Discipline for making so great a part of Religion to consist in externalls and Ceremonials for putting more force and energy and exacting with more severity the commandments of men then the precepts of Justice and internal Religion lastly besides many other things for promising Heaven to persons after a wicked life upon their impertinent cries and Ceremonials transacted by the Priests and the dying person I confesse I wish the zeal of Christendom were a little more active against these and the like Doctrines and that men would write and live more earnestly against them then as yet they have done 6. But then what influence this just zeal is to have upon the persons of the Professors is another consideration For as the Pharisees did preach well lived ill and therefore were to be heard not imitated so if these men live well though they teach ill they are to be imitated not heard their Doctrines by all means Christian and humane are to be discountenanced but their persons tolerated eatenus their Profession and Decrees to be rejected and condemned but the persons to be permitted because by their good lives they confute their Doctrines that is they give evidence that they think no evil to be consequent to such Opinions and if they did that they live good lives is argument sufficient that they would themselves cast the first stone against their own Opinions if they thought them guilty of such misdemeanours 7. Fourthly But if we consider their Doctrines in relation to Government and publick societies of men then if they prove faulty they are so much the more intolerable by how much the consequents are of greater danger and malice Such Doctrines as these The Pope may dispense with all oaths taken to God or man he may absolve subjects from their allegeance to their natural Prince Faith is not to be kept with Hereticks Hereticall Princes may be slain by their subjects These Propositions are so deprest and do so immediately communicate with matter and the interests of men that they are of the same consideration with matters of fact and are to be handled accordingly To other Doctrines ill life may be consequent but the connexion of the antecedent and the consequent is not peradventure perceived or acknowledged by him that believes the Opinion with no greater confidence then he disavows the effect and issue of it but in these the ill effect is the direct profession purpose of the Opinion and therefore the man and the man's Opinion is to be dealt withall just as the matter of fact is to be judged for it is an immediate a perceived a direct event and the very purpose of the Opinion Now these Opinions are a direct overthrow to all humane society and mutuall commerce a destruction of Government and of the Laws and duty and subordination which we owe to Princes and therefore those men of the Church of Rome that do hold them and preach them cannot pretend to the excuses of innocent Opinions and hearty perswasion to the weakness of humanity and the difficulty of things for God hath not left those Truths which are necessary for conservation of the publick societies of men so intricate and obscure but that every one that is honest and desirous to understand his duty will certainly know that no Christian truth destroys a man's being sociable and a member of the Body politick cooperating to the conservation of the whole as well as of itself However if it might happen that men should sincerely erre in such plain matters of fact for there are fools enough in the world yet if he hold his peace no man is to persecute or punish him for then it is mere opinion which comes not under politicall cognizance that is that cognizance which onely can punish corporally but if he preaches it he is actually a Traitour or Seditious or authour of Perjury or a destroyer of humane society respectively to the nature of the Doctrine and the preaching such Doctrines cannot claim the privilege and immunity of a mere Opinion because it is as much matter of fact as any the actions of his disciples and confidents and therefore in such cases is not to be permitted but judged according to the nature of the effect it hath or may have upon the actions of men 8. Fifthly But lastly in matters merely speculative the case is wholly altered because the Body politick which onely may lawfully use the Sword is not a competent judge of such matters which have not direct influence upon the Body politick or upon the lives and manners of men as they are parts of a Community Not but that Princes or Judges temporal may have as much ability as others but by reason of the incompetency of the Authority And Gallio spoke wisely when he discoursed thus to the Jews If it were a matter of wrong or wicked lewdness O ye Jews reason would that I should hear you But if it be a question of words and names and of your Law look ye to it for I will be no judge of such matters The man spoke excellent reason for the cognizance of these things did appertain to men of the other Robe But the Ecclesiastical power which onely is competent to take notice of such questions is not of capacity to use the temporal sword or corporal inflictions The mere Doctrines and Opinions of men are things spiritual and therefore not cognoscible by a temporal Authority and the Ecclesiastical Authority which is to take cognizance is itself so spiritual that it cannot inflict any punishment corporal 9. And it is not enough to say that when the Magistrate restrains the preaching such Opinions if any man preaches them he may be punished and then it is not for his Opinion but his disobedience that he is punished for the temporal power ought not to restrain Prophesyings where the publick peace and interest is not certainly concerned And therefore it is not sufficient to excuse him whose Law in that case being by an incompetent power made a scruple where there was no sin 10. And under this consideration come very many Articles of the Church of Rome which are wholly speculative which do not derive upon practice which begin in the understanding and rest there and have no influence upon life and Government but very accidentally and by a great many removes and therefore are to be considered onely so far as to guide men in their perswasions but have no effect upon the persons of men their bodies or their temporal condition I instance in two Prayer for the dead and the Doctrine of Transubstantiation these two to be in stead of all the rest 11. For the first
them that is the worst that is to be done to such a man in Saint Paul's judgement Yet count him not as an enemy but admonish him as a brother SECT XXI Of the Duty of particular Churches in allowing Communion 1. FRom these Premisses we are easily instructed concerning the lawfulness or duty respectively of Christian Communion which is differently to be considered in respect of particular Churches to each other and of particular men to particular Churches For as for particular Churches they are bound to allow Communion to all those that profess the same Faith upon which the Apostles did give Communion For whatsoever preserves us as members of the Church gives us title to the Communion of Saints and whatsoever Faith or belief that is to which God hath promised Heaven that Faith makes us members of the Catholick Church Since therefore the judicial Acts of the Church are then most prudent and religious when they nearest imitate the example and piety of God to make the Way to Heaven streighter then God made it or to deny to communicate with those with whom God will vouchsafe to be united and to refuse our charity to those who have the same Faith because they have not all our Opinions and believe not every thing necessary which we overvalue is impious and schismaticall it infers tyranny on one part and perswades and tempts to uncharitableness and animosities on both it dissolves Societies and is an enemy to peace it busies men in impertinent wranglings and by names of men and titles of factions it consigns the interessed parties to act their differences to the height and makes them neglect those advantages which piety and a good life bring to the reputation of Christian Religion and societies 2. And therefore Vincentius Lirinensis and indeed the whole Church accounted the Donatists Hereticks upon this very ground because they did imperiously deny their Communion to all that were not of their perswasion whereas the Authours of that Opinion for which they first did separate and make a Sect because they did not break the Churche's peace nor magisterially prescribed to others were in that disagreeing and errour accounted Catholicks Divisio enim disunio facit vos haereticos pax unitas faciunt Catholicos said Saint Augustin And to this sense is that of Saint Paul If I had all faith and had not charity I am nothing He who upon confidence of his true belief denies a charitable Communion to his brother loses the reward of both And if Pope Victor had been as charitable to the Asiaticks as Pope Anicetus and Saint Polycarp were to each other in the same disagreeing concerning Easter Victor had not been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so bitterly reproved and condemned as he was for the uncharitable managing of his disagreeing by Polycrates and Irenaeus Concordia enim quae est charitatis effectus est unio voluntatum non opinionum True Faith which leads to Charity leads on to that which unites wills and affections not Opinions 3. Upon these or the like considerations the Emperour Zeno published his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in which he made the Nicene Creed to be the medium of Catholick Communion and although he lived after the Council of Chalcedon yet he made not the Decrees of that Council an instrument of its restraint and limit as preferring the peace of Christendom and the union of charity far before a forced or pretended unity of perswasion which never was nor ever will be real and substantial and although it were very convenient if it could be had yet it is therefore not necessary because it is impossible And if men please whatever advantages to the publick would be consequent to it may be supplied by a charitable compliance and mutuall permission of Opinion and the offices of a brotherly affection prescribed us by the Laws of Christianity And we have seen it that all Sects of Christians when they have an end to be served upon a third have permitted that liberty to a second which we now contend for and which they formerly denied but now grant that by joyning hands they might be the stronger to destroy the third The Arians and Meletians joyned against the Catholicks the Catholicks and Novatians joyned against the Arians Now if men would doe that for charity which they doe for interest it were handsomer and more ingenuous For that they do permit each others disagreeings for their interests sake convinceth them of the lawfulness of the thing or else the unlawfulness of their own proceedings And therefore it were better they would serve the ends of charity then of faction for then that good end would hallow the proceeding and make it both more prudent and more pious while it serves the design of religious purposes SECT XXII That particular men may communicate with Churches of different Perswasions and how far they may doe it 1. AS for the duty of particular men in the Question of communicating with Churches of different perswasions it is to be regulated according to the Laws of those Churches For if they require no impiety or any thing unlawfull as the condition of their Communion then they communicate with them as they are servants of Christ as disciples of his Doctrine and subjects to his laws and the particular distinguishing Doctrine of their Sect hath no influence or communication with him who from another Sect is willing to communicate with all the servants of their common Lord. For since no Church of one name is infallible a wise man may have either the misfortune or a reason to believe of every one in particular that she errs in some Article or other either he cannot communicate with any or else he may communicate with all that do not make a sin or the profession of an errour to be the condition of their Communion And therefore as every particular Church is bound to tolerate disagreeing persons in the senses and for the reasons above explicated so every particular person is bound to tolerate her that is not to refuse her Communion when he may have it upon innocent conditions For what is it to me if the Greek Church denies Procession of the third Person from the second so she will give me the right hand of fellowship though I affirm it therefore because I profess the Religion of Jesus Christ and retain all matters of Faith and necessity But this thing will scarce be reduced to practice for few Churches that have framed bodies of Confession and Articles will endure any person that is not of the same Confession which is a plain demonstration that such bodies of Confession Articles doe much hurt by becoming instruments of separating and dividing Communions and making unnecessary or uncertain propositions a certain means of Schism and disunion But then men would doe well to consider whether or no such proceedings do not derive the guilt of Schism upon them who least think it and whether of the two is the
this of Confirmation was never permitted to mere Presbyters Innocentius III a great Canonist and of great authority gives a full evidence in this particular Per frontis Chrismationem manûs Impositio designatur quia per eam Spirituâ— Sanctus per augmentum datur robur Vnde cùm caeteras unctiones simplex Sacerdos vel Presbyter valeat exhibere hanc non nisi summus Sacerdos vel Presbyter valeat exhibere idest Episcopus conferre By anointing of the forehead the Imposition of hands is design'd because by that the Holy Ghost is given for increase and strength therefore when a single Priest may give the other Unctions yet this cannot be done but by the chief Priest that is the Bishop And therefore to the Question What shall be done if a Bishop may not be had the same Innocentius answers It is safer and without danger wholly to omit it than to have it rashly and without authority ministred by any other Cùm umbra quaedam ostendatur in operâ— veritas autem non subeat in essectu for it iâ— a mere shadow without truth or real effect when any one else does it but the person whom God hath appointed to this ministration And no approved man of the Church did ever say the contrary till Richard Primate of Armagh commenced a new Opinion from whence Thomas of Walden says that Wiclef borrowed his Doctrine to trouble the Church in this particular What the Doctrine of the ancient Church was in the purest times I have already I hope sufficiently declared what it was afterwards when the Ceremony of Chrism was as much remarked as the Rite to which it ministred we find fully declared by Rabanus Maurus Signatur Baptizatus cum Chrismate per Sacerdotem in Capitis summitate per Pontificem verò in Fronte ut priori Vnctione significetur Spiritùs Sancti super ipsum descensio ad habitationem Deo consecrandum in secunda quoque ut ejus Spiritûs Sancti septiformis gratia cum omni plenitudine sanctitatis scientiae virtutis venire in hominem declaretur Tunc enim ipse Spiritus Sanctus post mundata benedicta corpora atque animas liberè à Patre descendit ut unà cum sua visitatione sanctificaret illustraret nunc in hominem ad hoc venit ut Signaculum fidei quod in fronte suscepit faciat cum donis coelestibus repletum suâ gratiâ confortatum intrepidè audacter coram Regibus Potestatibus hujus seculi portare ac nomen Christi liberâ voce praedicare In Baptism the Baptized was anointed on the top of the Head in Confirmation on the Forehead by that was signified that the Holy Ghost was preparing a habitation for himself by this was declared the descent of the Holy Spirit with his seven-fold Gifts with all fulness of knowledge and spiritual understanding These things were signified by the appendant Ceremony but the Rites were ever distinguished and did not only signifie and declare but effect these Graces by the ministry of Prayer and Imposition of Hands The Ceremony the Church instituted and us'd as she pleas'd and gave in what circumstances they would chuse and new propositions entred and customs chang'd and deputations were made and the Bishops in whom by Christ was plac'd the fulness of Ecclesiastical power concredited to the Priests and Deacons so much as their occasions and necessities permitted and because in those ages and places where the external Ceremony was regarded it may be more than the inward Mystery or the Rite of Divine appointment they were apt to believe that the Chrism or exterior Unction delegated to the Priests Ministery after the Episcopal consecration of it might supply the want of Episcopal Confirmation it came to pass that new opinions were enterâ—ain'd and the Regulars the Friers and the Jesuits who were always too little friends to the Episcopal power from which they would fain have been wholly exempted publickly taught in England especially that Chrism ministred by them with leave from the Pope did do all that which ordinarily was to be done in Episcopal Confirmation For as Tertullian complain'd in his time Quibus fuit propositum aliter docendi eoâ— necessitas coegit aliter disponendi instrumenta Doctrinae They who had purposes of teaching new Doctrines were constrain'd otherwise to dispose of the Instruments and Rituals appertaining to their Doctrines These men to serve ends destroyed the Article and overthrew the ancient Discipline and Unity of the Primitive Church But they were justly censur'd by the Theological Faculty at Paris and the Censure well defended by Hallier one of the Doctors of the Sorbon whither I refer the Reader that is curious in little things But for the main It was ever call'd Confirmatio Episcopalis impositio manuum Episcoporum which our English word well expresses and perfectly retains the use we know it by the common name of Bishopping of Children I shall no farther insist upon it only I shall observe that there is a vain distinction brought into the Schools and Glosses of the Canon Law of a Minister ordinary and extraordinary all allowing that the Bishop is appointed the ordinary Minister of Confirmation but they would fain innovate and pretend that in some cases others may be Ministers extraordinary This device is of infinite danger to the destruction of the whole Sacred Order of the Ministery and disparks the inclosures and lays all in common and makes men supreme controllers of the Orders of God and relies upon a false Principle for in true Divinity and by the Oeconomy of the Spirit of God there can be no Minister of any Divine Ordinance but he that is of Divine appointment there can be none but the ordinary Minister I do not say that God is tied to this way he cannot be tied but by himself and therefore Christ gave a special Commission to Ananias to baptize and to confirm S. Paul and he gave the Spirit to Cornelius even before he was baptized and he ordained S. Paul to be an Apostle without the ministery of man But this I say That though God can make Ministers extraordinary yet Man cannot and they that go about to do so usurp the Power of Christ and snatch from his hand what he never intended to part with The Apostles admitted others into a part of their care and of their power but when they intended to imploy them in any ministery they gave them so much of their Order as would enable them but a person of a lower Order could never be deputed Minister of actions appropriate to the higher which is the case of Confirmation by the Practice and Tradition of the Apostles and by the Universal Practice and Doctrine of the Primitive Catholick Church by which Bishops only the Successors of the Apostles were alone the Ministers of Confirmation and therefore if any man else usurp it let them answer it they do hurt indeed to themselves but no benefit to others to whom
you no further now but desire you to consider of these things with as much caution as they were written with charity Till I hear from you I shall pray to God to open your heart and your understanding that you may return from whence you are fallen and repent and do your first works Which that you may do is the hearty desire of Your very affectionate Friend and Servant JER TAYLOR THE SECOND LETTER Written to a Person newly Converted to the CHURCH of ENGLAND Madam I Bless God I am safely arrived where I desired to be after my unwilling departure from the place of your abode and danger And now because I can have no other expression of my tenderness I account that I have a treble Obligation to signifie it by my care of your biggest and eternal interest And because it hath pleased God to make me an Instrument of making you to understand in some fair measure the excellencies of a true and holy Religion and that I have pointed out such follies and errors in the Roman Church at which your understanding being forward and pregnant did of it self start as at imperfect ill-looking Propositions give me leave to do that now which is the purpose of my Charity that is teach you to turn this to the advantage of a holy life that you may not only be changed but converted For the Church of England whither you are now come is not in condition to boast her self in the reputation of changing the opinion of a single person though never so excellent She hath no temporal ends to serve which must stand upon fame and noises all that she can design is to serve God to advance the honour of the Lord and the good of Souls and to rejoyce in the Cross of Christ. First therefore I desire you to remember that as now you are taught to pray both publickly and privately in a Language understood so it is intended your affections should be forward in proportion to the advantages which your prayer hath in the understanding part For though you have been often told and have heard that Ignorance is the mother of devotion you will find that the proposition is unnatural and against common sense and experience because it is impossible to desire that of which we know nothing unless the desire it self be fantastical and illusive it is necessary that in the same proportion in which we understand any good thing in the same we shall also desire it and the more particular and minute your notices are the more passionate and material also your affections will be towards it and if they be good things for which we are taught to pray the more you know them the more reason you have to love them It is monstrous to think that devotion that is passionate desires of religious things and the earnest prosecutions of them should be produced by any thing of ignorance or less perfect notices in any sence Since therefore you are taught to pray so that your understanding is the Precentor or the Master of the Quire and you know what you say your desires are made humane religious express material for these are the advantages of Prayers and Liturgies well understood be pleased also to remember that now if you be not also passionate and devout for the things you mention you will want the Spirit of prayer and be more inexcusable than before In many of your Prayers before especially the publick you heard a voice but saw and perceived nothing of the sence and what you understood of it was like the man in the Gospel that was half blind he saw men walking like Trees and so you possibly might perceive the meaning of it in general You knew when they came to the Epistle when to the Gospel when the Introit when the Paâ— when any of the other more general periods were but you could have nothing of the Spirit of prayer that is nothing of the devotion and the holy affections to the particular excellencies which could or ought there to have been represented But now you are taught how you may be really devout it is made facil and easie and there can want nothing but your consent and observation 2. Whereas now you are taken off from all humane confidences from relying wholly and almost ultimately upon the Priests power and external act from reckoning prayers by numbers from forms and out-sides you are not to think that the Priests power is less that the Sacraments are not effective that your prayers may not be repeated frequently But you are to remember that all outward things and Ceremonies all Sacraments and Institutions work their effect in the vertue of Christ by some moral Instrument The Priests in the Church of England can absolve you as much as the Roman Priests could fairly pretend but then we teach that you must first be a penitent and a returning person and our absolution does but manifest the work of God and comfort and instruct your Conscience direct and manage it You shall be absolved here but not unless you live an holy life So that in this you will find no change but to the advantage of a strict life we will not flatter you and cozen your dear Soul by pretended ministeries but we so order our discourses and directions that all our ministrations may be really effective And when you receive the holy Sacrament of the Eucharist or the Lord's Supper it does more good here than they do there because if they consecrate rightly yet they do not communicate you fully and if they offer the whole representative Sacrifice yet they do not give you the whole Sacrament only we enjoyn that you come with so much holiness that the grace of God in your heart may be the principal and the Sacrament in our hands may be the ministring and assisting part We do not promise great effects to easie trifling dispositions because we would not deceive but really procure to you great effects and therefore you are now to come to our offices with the same expectations as before of pardon of grace of sanctification but you must do something more of the work your self that we may not do less in effect than you have in your expectation We will not to advance the reputation of our power deceive you into a less blessing 3. Be careful that you do not flatter your self that in our Communion you may have more ease and liberty of life For though I know your pious Soul desires passionately to please God and to live religiously yet I ought to be careful to prevent a temptation lest it at any time should discompose your severity Therefore as to confession to a Priest which how it is usually practised among the Roman party your self can very well account and you have complain'd sadly that it is made an ordinary act easie and transient sometime matter of temptation oftentimes impertinent but suppose it free from such scandal to which some mens folly did
made in us by it 28 b. With Baptism Confirmation was usually administred 29 b. Berengarius The Pope forced him to recant his errour about Transubstantiation in the Capernaitical sense 191 § 3. and 299. Bind What it means in the promise of Christ 736 45 46 47. and 486. Bishop The benefits that England has received in several ages from the Bishops Order Ep. dedic to Episcop asserted They were the Apostles successors 48 § 4. In what sense they were so 47 § 3. Saint James called an Apostle because he was a Bishop 48 § 4. The Angel mentioned in the Epistles to the Seven Churches in the Apocalypse means the Bishop 57 § 9. That Bishops were successors in their office to the Apostles was the sense of Antiquity 59 § 10. The office of a Bishop was not inconsistent with that of an Evangelist 69 § 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tit. 1.5 signifies Bishop and not mere Presbyter 71 § 15. The authority and text of S. Hierom against the Prelacy of Bishops considered 77 § 21. Those Presbyters mentioned Act. 20.28 in those words in quos Spir. Sanctus vos posuit Episcopos were Bishops and not mere Presbyters 80 § 21. Concerning the testimony of S. Hierome taken out of his Commentary in Ep. ad Tit. usually urged against the sole authority of Bishops 77 § 21. per tot and § 44. and pag. 144. In what sense it is true that Bishops were not greater then Presbyters 83 § 21. Bishops in Scripture are styled Presbyters 85 § 23. Mere Presbyters in Scripture are never styled Bishops 86 § 23. A Presbyter did once assist at the ordaining of a Bishop 98 § 31. Pope Pelagius not lawfully ordained Bishop according to the Canon 98 § 31. Why a Bishop cannot be made per saltum 101 § 31. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had the Ordination of a Bishop but not the Jurisdiction 102 § 32. Novatus was ordained by a Bishop without the assistance of other Clergy 104 § 32. A Bishop may ordain without the concurrence of a Presbyter in the Ceremony 105 § 32. Concerning Ordination in the Reformed Churches performed without Bishops 105 § 32. He could suspend or depose alone without the presence of a Presbyter 116 117 § 36. The latitude or extent of the Bishop's power 120 § 36. It encroaches not upon the royal power ibid. What persons are under the Bishop's jurisdiction 123 § 36. In the Primitive Church Presbyters might not officiate without the licence of the Bishop 127 § 37. The Bishop for his acts of judicature was responsible to none but God 145 146 § 44. The Presbyters assistence to the Bishop was never necessary and when practised was voluntary on the Bishop's behalf 147 § 44. In all Churches where a Bishop's seat was there was not always a College of Presbyters onely in the greater Churches 146 § 44. One Bishop alone without the concurrence of more Bishops could not depose a Presbyter 147 § 44. A Church in the opinion of Antiquity could not subsist without Bishops 148 § 45. The African Christians of Byzac chose to suffer martyrdome rather then hazard the succession of Bishops 149 § 45. In the first Council of Constantinople he is declared an heretick though he believe aright that separates from his Bishop 151 § 48. The great honour that belongs to Bishops 153 § 48. It was not unlawful for Bishops to take secular employments 157 § 49. Christian Emperours allowed appeals in secular affairs from secular tribunals to that of the Bishop 160 § 49. They used in the Primitive Church to be Embassadours for their Princes 161 § 49. The Bishop might do any office of piety though of secular burthen 161 § 49. By the Law of God one Bishop is not superiour to another and they all derive their power equally from Christ 309. When Bellarmine was to answer the authority of Fathers brought against the Pope's universal Episcopacy he allows not the Fathers to have a vote against the Pope 310 c. 1. § 10. Saint Cyprian affirms that Pope Stephen had not a superiority of power over Bishops that were of forrein Dioceses 310. Saint Gregory Bishop of Rome reproveth the Patriarch of Constantinople for calling himself universal Bishop 310. If a secular Prince give a safe conduct the Romanists teach it binds not the Bishop who is under him 341. Socrates his censure of their judicial proceedings in the Primitive Church 994 n. 17. Body Berengarius maintained in Rome That by the power of God one body could not be in two places at one time 222 § 9. How a body is in place 226 § 11. What a body is 236. One body cannot at the same time be in two places 236 § 11. and 241. A glorified body is subject to the conditions of locality as others are in S. Augustine's opinion 237 § 11. Aquinas affirmeth that the body of Christ is in the Elements not after the manner of a body but a substance This notion considered 238 § 11. That consequence That if two bodies may be in one place then one body may be in two places considered 243 § 11. When our Lord entred into an assembly of the Apostles the doors being shut it does not infer that there were two bodies in one place 245 § 11. Two bodies cannot be in one place 245 § 11. The Romanists absurdities in explicating the nature of the conversion of the Elements into the Body of Christ 247 § 11. C. Canons THat the Canons of the Apostles so called are authentick 89 § 24. Carnality What it is in Scripture 724 n. 53. Of the use of the word Carnal in Scripture 774 n. 16. Catechizing The excellent use of Catechizing Children 30. b. Exorcism in the Primitive Church signified nothing but Catechizing 30. b. Certainty It may be where is no evidence 686 n. 72. Charity The great Charity of the Protestant Church in England 460. The uncharitableness of that of Rome ibid. Charity gives being to all vertues 650 n. 56. Children How God punisheth the fathers upon the Children 725. God never imputes the father's sin to the child so as to inflict eternal punishment but temporal onely 725 n. 56. This he does onely in very great crimes 725 n. 59. and not often 726 n. 60. and before the Gospel was published not since 726 n. 62. Rules of deportment for those Children who fear a curse descending upon them from their sinful parents 738 n. 93. The state of the unbaptized 897. Chorepiscopi They had Episcopal Ordination but not Jurisdiction 102 § 32. The institution of them what ends it served 142 § 43. Christ. The Romanists teach that Christ being our Judge is not fit to be our Advocate 329 c. 2. § 9. The Article of Christ's descent into hell omitted in some Creeds 440. We are by him redeemed from the state of spiritual infirmity 779 n. 27. Christian. The sum of Christian Religion 445. Upon what motives most men imbrace that Religion 460. Chrysostome His notion of a sinner 760
n. 22. His testimony for Infant-baptism 760 n. 21 22. Church Neither it alone nor the Presbyters in it had power to excommunicate before they had a Bishop set over them 82 § 21. Mere Presbyters had not in the Church any jurisdiction in causes criminal otherwise then by substitution ibid. No Church-presidency ever given to the Laiety 114 § 36. Whether secular power can give prohibitions against the power of the Church 122. § 36. A Church in the opinion of Antiquity could not subsist without Bishops 148 § 45. The Church did always forbid Clergy-men to seek after secular imployments 157 § 49. and to intermeddle with them for base ends 158 § 49. The Church prohibiting secular imployment to Clergy-men does it gradu impedimenti 159 § 49. The Canons of the Church do as much forbid houshold-cares as secular imployment 160 § 49. Lay-Elders never had authority in the Church 165 § 51. What the Church signifieth 382 383. Wicked men are not true members of it 383. In what sense Saint Paul calls the Church the pillar and ground of truth 386 387. What truth that is of which the Church is the pillar 387. Whether the representative Church be infallible 389. The word Church is never used in Scripture for the Clergy alone 389. Of the meaning of that of our Lord Tell the Church 389. Of the notes of the Church 402. Scripture is more credible then the Church 407. Some rites which the Apostles injoyned the Christian Church does not now practise 430. The Primitive Church affirmed but few things to be necessary to salvation 436. The Roman is not the Mother of all Churches 449. The authority of the Church of Rome they teach is greater then that of the Scripture 450. When in the question between the Church and the Scripture they distinguish between authority quoad nos in se it salves not the difficulty 451. Eckius's pitiful Argument to prove the authority of the Church to be above the Scripture 451. The Church is such a Judge of Controversies that they must all be decided before you can find him 1012. Success and worldly prosperity no note of the true Church 1018. Clemens Alexandrinus His authority against Transubstantiation 258 § 12. In Vossius his opinion he understood not original sin 759 n. 20. Clergy The word Church never used in Scripture for the Clergy alone 389. Clinicks Objections against the repentance of Clinicks 678 n. 57. and 677 n. 56. and 679 n. 64. Heathens newly baptized if they die immediately need no other repentance ibid. The objection concerning the Thief on the Cross answered 681 n. 65. Testimonies of the Ancients against the repentance of Clinicks 682 n. 66. The way of treating sinners who repent not till their death-bed 695 n. 25. Considerations to be opposed against the despair of Clinicks 696 n. 29. What hopes penitent Clinicks have according to the opinion of the Fathers of the Church 696 697 n. 30. The manner how the ancient Church treated penitent Clinicks 699 n. 5. The particular acts and parts of repentance that are fittest for a dying man 700 n. 32. The practice of the Primitive Fathers about penitent Clinicks 804. The repentance of Clinicks 853 n. 96. Colossians Chap. 2.18 explained 781 n. 31. Commandment Of the difference between S. Augustine and S. Hierome in the proposition about the possibility of keeping God's Commandments 579 n. 30. Communicate To doe it in act or desire are not terms opposite but subordinate 190 § 3. Commutations When they were first set up 292. Amends may be made for some sins by a commutation of duties 648 68. Comparative Instances in Texts of Scripture wherein comparative and restrained negatives are set down in an absolute form 229 § 10. Concupiscence It is not a mortal sin till it proceeds farther 776 n. 20. It is an evil but not a sin 734 n. 84. It is not wholly an effect of Adam's sin 752 n. 11. Natural inclinations are but sins of infirmity 789 n. 50. Where it is not consented to it is no sin 752 n. 11. and 765 n. 30. and 767 n. 39. and 898 907 909 911 912 876. The natural inclination to evil that is in every man is not sin 766 n. 32. It is not original sin 911. The inconstancy of S. Augustine about it 913. Confession According to the Roman doctrine Confession does not restrain sin and quiets not the Conscience 315 § 2. c. 2. A right confesfession according to the Roman Doctrine is not possible 316 § 3. The seal of Confession they will not suffer to be broken if it be to save the life of the Prince or the whole State 343 c. 3. § 2. The Roman doctrine about the seal of Confession is one instance of their teaching for doctrines the commandments of men 473. Nectarius abolished the custome of having sins published in the Church 474 488 492. That the seal of confession is broken among them upon divers great occasions 475. Whether to confess all our great sins to a Priest be necessary to salvation 477. Of the harmony of Confession made by the Reformed 899. Nothing of auricular confession to a Priest in Scripture 479. There is no Ecclesiastical Tradition for auricular confession 491. Auricular confession made an instrument to carry on unlawful plots 488 489. Father Arnold Confessor to Lewis XIII of France did cause the King in private confession to take such an oath as did in a manner depose him 489. Auricular confession leaves behind it an eternal scruple upon the Conscience 489. Auricular confession is an instance of the Romanists teaching for doctrines the commandments of men 477. Confession is a necessary act of repentance 830 n. 34. It is due to God 831. Why we are to confess sins to God who knoweth them before 832 n. 37. What properly is meant by it ibid. Auricular confession whence it descended 833 41. Confession to a Priest is no part of contrition ibid. The benefit of confessing to a Priest 834. Rules concerning the practice of confession 854 n. 100. Shame should not hinder confession 855 n. 104. A rule to be observed by the Minister that receiveth confession 856 n. 105. Of confessing to a Priest or Minister 857 n. 109. Confession in preparation to the Sacrament 857 n. 110. Confirmation It was not to expire with the age of the Apostles 53 § 8. Photius was the first that gave the power of Confirmation to Presbyters 109 § 33. The words Signator consignat in those Texts of the Fathers that are usually alledged against Confirmation by Bishops alone signifie Baptismal unction 110 § 33. The great benefit and need of the rite of Confirmation in the Church Ep. ded to that Treatise pag. 2. The Latine Church would have sold the title of Confirmation to the Greek but they would not buy it Ep. ded pag. 5. The Papists hold Confirmation to be a Sacrament and yet not necessary 3. b. That it is a Divine Ordinance 3 4. b. Of the necessity of
16 17 18. explained 782 n. 32. and Chap. 5.24 He that is in Christ hath crucified the flesh with the affections explained 794 n. 58. and Chap. 5.17 The spirit lusteth against the flesh explained 810 n. 40. Gelasius Bishop of Rome was the authour of the Book de duabus naturis contra Eutychetem 265 § 12. His words about Transubstantiation considered Genesis Chap. 6. v. 5. Every imagination of the thoughts of man's heart onely evil explained 720 n. 47. and Chap. 8. v. 21. The imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth explained 721 n. 48. H. Ghost The Divinity of the Holy Ghost was not decreed at Nice 424. The procession of the Holy Ghost may be proved by Scripture without Tradition 427 428. What is the sin against the Holy Ghost 810 n. 43. Final impenitence proved not to be the sin against the Holy Ghost 811 n. 42. That the sin against the Holy Ghost is pardonable 812 n. 48. In what sense it is affirmed in Scripture that the sin against the Holy Ghost shall not be pardoned in this world nor in the world to come 812 n. 52 53. Glory Concerning the degrees of eternal glory 968 n. 5. God Of his power to doe things impossible 233 § 11. Ubiquity an incommunicable attribute of God's 237 § 12. and 241. To picture God the Father or the Trinity is against the Primitive practice 307. The Romanists teach that the Pope hath power to dispense with all the laws of God 342. No man is tempted of God 737 n. 90. Gospel The difference between it and the Law 574. Of the possibility of keeping the Evangelical Law 576. What is required in the Gospel 588 n. 9. It is nothing else but faith and repentance 599 n. 1 2. The righteousness of the Law and Gospel how they differ 673 n. 46. Grace Pope Adrian taught that a man out of the state of Grace may merit for another in the state of Grace 320 321. The Romanists attribute the conveying of Grace to things of their own inventing 337 § 11. They teach that the Sacraments do not onely convey Grace but supply the defect of it 337. To be in the state of Grace is of very large signification 643 n. 31. The just measures and latitude of a man's being in the state of Grace 643 n. 32. How it works 679. n. 52. ad 56. What it signifieth to be in the state of Grace 643 n. 31. There is a transcendent habit of Grace and what it is 685. n. 68. How the necessity of Grace is consistent with the doctrine of Free-will 754 n. 15. By the strengths of mere Nature men cannot get to heaven 885. Greek Photius was the first authour of the Schism between the Greek and Latine Church 109 § 33. The Greek Church receive not the Article of Transubstantiation Ep. Ded. to Real Pres. 175. The Greek Church disowns Purgatory 297. The opinion of the Greek Church concerning Purgatory 510. Gregory Gregory Bishop of Rome reproved the Patriarch of Constantinople for calling himself Universal Bishop 310. Guilt It cannot properly be traduced from one person to another 902 915. Against that notion That guilt cleaveth to the nature though not to the person 910. H. Habits A Single act of sin without a habit gives a denomination 641 n. 25. Sins are damnable that cannot be habitual 641 n. 24. A sinful habit hath a guilt distinct from that of the act 659 n. 1. Sinful habits require a distinct manner of repentance 669 n. 31. Seven objections against that Assertion answered 675 n. 51. Of infused habits 676. The method of mortifying vicious habits 690 691 n. 9 10. How and in what cases a single act may be accounted habitual 648 n. 50. Of sinful habits and their threefold capacity 659 n. 4. 'T is not true to affirm That every reluctancy to an act of vertue that proceeds from the habit of the contrary vice if it be overcome increases the reward 661 n. 6. ad 9. A vicious habit adds many degrees of aversation from God 669 n. 9. Evil habits do not only imply a facility but a kind of necessity 662 n. 11. A vicious habit makes our repentances the more difficult 663 n. 14. A vicious habit makes us swallow a great sin as easily as the least 664 n. 15. It keeps us always out of God's favour 665 n. 18. A sinful habit denominates the man guilty though he exert no actions 666 n. 23. Smaller sins if habitual discompose our state of Grace 667 n. 24. Habitual concupiscence needs pardon as much as natural 667 n. 26. Saint Augustine endeavours to prove that a sinful habit has a special sinfulness distinct from that of evil actions and Pelagius did gainsay it 667 n. 26. Every habit of vice is naturally expelled by a habit of vertue 669 n. 34. Though to extirpate a vicious habit by a contrary habit is not meritorious of pardon yet it is necessary in order to the obtaining pardon 670 n. 36. To oppose a habit against a habit is a more proper and effectual remedy then to oppose an act of sorrow or repentance against an act of sin 670 n. 38. In re morali there is no such thing as infused habits 676 n. 53. Hands Of laying on of hands in absolution 838 n. 54. Imposition of hands was twice solemnly had in repentance 840 841 n. 57. Heathen Their practice in their hymns and prayers to their gods pag. 3 n. 11. They could not worship an Image terminativè 338. The Heathens did condemn the worship of Images 546. Heaven In a natural state we cannot hope for Heaven 737 n. 85. Epistle to the Hebrews Chap. 6. v. 1 2. Of the foundation of laying on of hands explained 10 11 b. That the Apostle there in speaking of the laying on of hands means Confirmation and not either Absolution or Ordination 10 11 b. Chap. 9.28 expl 712 n. 15. Chap. 7.27 expl 712. n. 17. Chap. 5.23 explained 712. Chap. 6.4 5 6. explained ibid. Chap. 10.26 explained 809 n. 36. Hell The Article of Christ's descent into Hell was not in the ancient copies of the Creed 943 n. 8. Heresie How Aërius could be an Heretick seeing his errour was against no fundamental doctrine 150 § 48. The notion of Heresie was anciently more comprehensive then now it is ibid. In the first Council of Constantinople he is declared an heretick that believes right but separates from his Bishop 151 § 48. The Heresie of the Acephali what it was ibid. A Son or Wife they absolve from duty if the Father or Husband be heretical 345. The Pope takes upon him to depose Kings not heretical 345. The Fathers style some hereticks that are not 376. An heretical Pope is no Pope 401. What Popes have been heretical ibid. and 402. The validity of Baptism by hereticks is not to be proved by Tradition without Scripture 426 427. Divers hereticks did worship the picture of our Lord and were reproved for it 545. Pope John XXII
sin 673 n. 47. M. Malefactors BEing condemned by the customs of Spain they are allowed respite till their Confessor supposeth them competently prepared 678 n 56. Man The weakness and frailty of humane nature 734 n. 82. in his body soul and spirit 735 n. 83. and 486. Mark Chap. 12.34 explained 780 n. 26. Chap. 12.32 explained 809. Justin Martyr His testimony against Transubstantiation 258 § 12. and 522 523. His testimony against Purgatory 513 514. Mass. A Cardinal in his last Will took order to have fifty thousand Masses said for his soul 320. Indulgences make not the multitude of Masses less necessary 320 c. 2. § 4. Pope John VIII gave leave to the Moravians to have Mass in the Sclavonian tongue 534. Saint Matthew Chap. 26.11 Me ye have not always explained 222 § 9. Chap. 28.20 I am with you always to the end of the world explained ibid. Chap. 18.17 Dic Ecclesiae explained 389. Chap. 15.9 teaching for doctrines the commandments of men 471 472 477. Chap. 5.19 one of the least of these Commandments 615 616 n. 18. Chap. 5.19 explained ibid n. 18. Chap. 5. v. 22. explained 622 n. 34. Chap. 12.32 explained 810. Chap. 15.48 explained 582 n. 40 43. Chap. 5.22 shall be guilty of judgement 621 n. 34. Mercy God's Mercy and Justice reconciled about his exacting the Law 580. Merit Pope Adrian taught that one out of the state of Grace may merit for another in the state of Grace 320 321. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The difference between them 596 n. 1. Millenaries Their opinion how much it spread and prevailed in the ancient Church 976 n. 3. Miracles The miraculous Apparitions that are brought to prove Transubstantiation proved to be false by their own doctrine 229 § 10. Of those now-adays wrought by the Romanists 452. The Dominicans and Franciscans brought Miracles on both sides in proof both for and against the immaculate Conception 1019. Of false Miracles and Legends 1020. Miracles not a sufficient argument to prove a doctrine ibid. Canus his opinion of the Legenda Lombardica ibid. The Pope in the Lateran Council made a decree against false Miracles 1020. Montanus His Heresie mistaken by Epiphanius 955 n. 18. Moral The difference between the Moral Regenerate and Prophane man in committing sin 782 n. 33. and 820 n. 1. Mortal Sin Between the least mortal sin and greatest venial sin no man can distinguish 610 n. 2. Mortification It is a precept not a counsel 672 n. 44. The method of mortifying vicious habits 691 n. 10 11. The benefits of it 690. n. 6. Mysterie The real presence of Christ in the Eucharist like other mysteries is not to be searched into as to the manner of it too curiously 182 § 1. N. Nature OF the use of that word in the controversie of Transubstantiation 251 § 12. By the strength of it alone men cannot get to heaven 885. The state of nature 770 n. 1 2. c. 8. § 1. What the phrase by nature means 723 n. 48. By it alone we cannot be saved 737 n. 86. The use of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 767 n. 35. Necessity Of that distinction Necessitas praecepti and medii 8. b. There is in us no natural necessity of sinning 754 n. 15. Nicolaitans The authour of that Heresie vindicated from false imputations 953 n. 17. Novatians Their doctrine opposed 802 n. 8. A great objection of theirs proposed 806 n. 24. and answered 807 n. 26. O. Obedience ARguments to prove that perfect obedience to God's Law is impossible 576 577 n. 15. ad 19. Obstinacy Two kinds of it the one sinful the other not so 951 n. 10. Opinion A man is not to be charged with the odious consequents of his opinion 1024. Sometimes on both sides of the Opinion it is pretended that the Proposition promotes the honour of God ibid. How hard it is not to be deceived in weighing some Opinions of Religion 1026. Ordination Pope Pelagius not lawfully ordained Bishop according to the Canon 98 § 31. A Presbyter did once assist at the ordaining a Bishop ibid. Ordo and gradus were at first used promiscuously 98 § 31. How strangely some of the Church of Rome do define Orders 99 § 31. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had Episcopal Ordinaâ—ion but not Jurisdiction 102 § 32. Presbyters could not ordain 102 § 32. The Council of Sardis would not own them as Presbyters who were ordained by none but Presbyters 103 § 32. Novatus was ordained by a Bishop without the assistance of other Clergy 104 § 32. A Bishop may ordain without the concurrence of a Presbyter in the Ceremony 105 § 32. Concerning Ordination in the Reformed Churches without Bishops 105 § 32. Saint Cyprian did ordain and perform acts of jurisdiction without his Presbyters 145 146 § 44. A Pope accused in the Lateran Council for not being in Orders 325 c. 2. § 7. The Romanists give distinct Ordination to their Exorcists 336. Origen His authority against Transubstantiation 258 § 12. Original sin In what sense it is damnable 570. How that doctrine is contrary to the Pelagian 571. Some Romanists in this doctrine have receded as much from the definitions of their Church as this Authour from the English and without offence 571. Original sin is manifest in the many effects of it 869. The true doctrine of Original sin 869 870 896. The errours in that Article 871. There are sixteen several and famous opinions in the Article of Original sin 877. Against that Proposition Original sin makes us liable to damnation yet none are damned for it 878 n. 5. 879 n. 6 7. The ill consequence of the mistakes in this doctrine 883 884. If Infants are not under the guilt of original sin why are they baptized That objection answered 884. The difficulties that Saint Augustine and others found in explicating the traduction of original sin 896. The Authour's doctrine about Original sin It is proved that it contradicts not the Ninth Article of the Church of England 898 899. Concupiscence is not it 911. Whether we derive from Adam original and natural ignorance 713 n. 22. Adam's sin made us not heirs of damnation ibid. nor makes us necessarily vicious 717 n. 37. Adam's sin did not corrupt our nature by a natural efficiency 717 n. 39. nor because we were in the loins of Adam 717 n. 40. nor because of the will and decree of God 717 n. 41. Objections out of Scripture against this doctrine answered 720 n. 46. Vid. Sin The Authour affirmeth not that there is no such thing as original sin 747 748 n. 1. He is not singular in his doctrine 762 n. 24 26. The want of original righteousness is no sin 752 n. 10. In what sense the ancient Fathers taught the doctrine of Original sin 761 n. 22. With what variety the doctrine of Original sin was anciently taught 761 n. 23. How much they are divided amongst themselves who say that Original sin is in us formally a sin 762 n. 25. Original sin
other Mysteries is not to be searched into too curiously as to the manner of it 182 § 1. Reason The power of it in matters of Religion 230 231 § 11. It is the best Judge of Controversies 1014. Reason and authority are not things inconsistent 1015. The variety of mens understandings in apprehending the consequent of things as in the instances of Surge Petre macta comede and the trial between the two Missals of Saint Ambrose and Saint Gregory 1016. Reformed Concerning Ordination in the Reformed Churches performed without Bishops 105 § 32. Of the harmony of Confessions set out by the Reformed Churches 899. Regenerate The falseness of that proposition That natural corruption in the Regenerate still remains and is in them a sin 876. The state of unregenerate men 773. Between the regenerate and the wicked person there is a middle state 774 n. 29. An unregenerate man may be convinced of and clearly instructed in his duty and approve the Law 780. An unregenerate man may with his will delight in goodness and delight in it earnestly 781. The contention between the Flesh and the Conscience no sign of Regeneration but onely the contention between the Flesh and the Spirit 781. The difference between the Regenerate Profane and Moral man in their sinning 782 n. 33. Whence come so frequent sins in regenerate persons 783. How sin can be consistent with the regenerate estate 783 n. 35. Unwillingness to sin no sign of Regeneration 784 n. 36. An unregenerate person may not onely desire to doe things morally good but even spirituall also 784 n. 37. The difference between a regenerate and unregenerate man 786 787. An unregenerate man may leave many sins not onely for temporal interest but out of reverence of the Divine Law 785 n. 39. An unregenerate man may doe many good things for Heaven and yet never come there 786 n. 40. An unregenerate man may have received the Spirit of God and yet be in a state of distance from God 786 n. 41. It is not the propriety of the regenerate man to feel a contention within him concerning the doing good or evil 788 n. 43. The regenerate man hath not onely received the Spirit of God but is wholly led by him 788. n. 44. Arguments to prove that St. Paul Rom. 7. speaks not of the Regenerate man 773 n. 10. Religion If it be seated onely in the understanding not accepted to Salvation 780. The character and properties of perfect Religion 583 584 n. 44. ad 48. Remission of Sin What is the power of remitting and retaining sin 836 n. 47. Repentance The Roman doctrine about Repentance 312 c. 2. § 1. They teach that Repentance is not necessary till the article of death 312. Their Church enjoyns not the internal but the external ritual Repentance 313. What Contrition is 314. The Church of Rome makes Contrition unnecessary 314. According to the Roman doctrine Confession does not restrain sin and satisfies not the Conscience 315 c. 2. § 2. The Roman Doctors prevaricate in the whole Doctrine of Repentance 321. What the Penitentiary Priest was and by whom taken away 473 474 492 493. The Controversie between Monsieur Arnauld Petavius about Repentance 568. The Covenant of Repentance when it began 574 575. How Repentance and Perfection Evangelical are consistent Chap. 1. ss 3. per tot n. 47. That Proposition rejected That every sinner must in his Repentance pass under the terrours of the Law 587. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 how they differ 596 597. All that was insupportable in Moses's Law was onely the want of this 580 n. 33. Of the notion of Repentance when joyned with Faith 599 n. 1. It is a whole change of state and life 597. The parts of it 599 n. 9. and 820 n. 2. The difference between the Repentance preached to the Jews and the Gentiles 601 n. 5 6 7. It may be called Conversion 602 n. 10. Repentance onely makes sins venial 622 n. 34. What Repentance single acts of sin require 646 n. 43. A general Repentance when sufficient 647 n. 47. Some acts of sin require more then a moral revocation or opposing a contrary act of vertue in Repentance 648 n. 50. That Proposition proved That no man is bound to repent of his sin instantly after the committing it 654. The danger of deferring Repentance 654 655. Deferring Repentance differs but by accident from final impenitence ibid. How the severities of Repentance were retrenched in several Ages 804 n. 14 15 16. The severity of the Primitive Church in denying Absolution to greater Criminals upon their Repentance was not their Doctrine but their Discipline 805 n. 21. Repentance of sinful Habits to be performed in a distinct manner 669 n. 31. Seven Objections against that Proposition answered 675. Objections against the Repentance of Clinicks 678 n. 57. and 677 n. 56. and 679 n. 64. Heathens newly baptized if they die immediately need no other repentance ibid. The Objection concerning the Thief on the Cross answered 681 n. 65. Testimonies of the Ancients against death-bed repentance 682 n. 66. The manner of repentance in habitual sinners who begin Repentance betimes 687 n. 1. The manner of repentance by which habitual sins must be cured in them who return not till old age 691 n. 12. The way of treating sinners who repent not till their death-bed 695 n. 25. Considerations shewing how dangerous it is to delay Repentance 853 n. 98. and 695 n. 25. Considerations to be opposed against the despair of penitent Clinicks 696 n. 29. What hopes penitent Clinicks have taken out of the Writings of the Fathers of the Church 696 697 n. 30. The manner how the Ancient Church treated penitent Clinicks 699 n. 5. The particular acts and parts of Repentance that are fittest for a dying man 700 n. 32. The penitent in the opinion of the Jewish Doctors preferred above the just and innocent 801. The practice of the Primitive Fathers about penitent Clinicks 804. The practice of the ancient Fathers excluding from repentance murtherers adulterers and idolaters 804 805. Penitential sorrow is rather in the understanding then the affections 823 n. 12. Penitential sorrow is not to be estimated by the measures of sense 823 n. 15. and 824 n. 17. A double solemn imposition of hands in Repentance 840 n. 57. As our Repentance is so is our pardon 846. A man must not judge of his Repentance by his tears nor by any one manner of expression 850 n. 99. He that suspects his Repentance should use the suspicion as a means to improve his Repentance 850. Meditations that will dispose the heart to Repentance 851 n. 88. No man can be said truly to have grieved for sin which at any time after remembers it with pleasure 851 n. 92. The Repentance of Clinicks 853 n. 96. Sorrow for sin is but a sign or instrument of Repentance 853 n. 99. That Repentance preached to the Jews was in different methods from that preached to the
circumscriptionis figurae expertis Dei simulachrum effingere queat Extremae itaque dementiae atque impietatis fuerit Divinum numen fingere figurare This is the principle to confute the Doctor why but the Doctor thinks that in the world there cannot be clearer wordâ— for the reproof of picturing God and the Holy Trinity For to do so is madness and extreme impiety so says Damascen But stay says E. W. these words of Damascen are as who should say He that goes about to express by any Image the perfect similitude of Gods intrinsecal perfections or his Nature which is immense without body or figure would be both impious and act the part of a Mad-man But how shall any man know that these words of Damascen are as much as to say this meaning of E. W. and where is this principle as he calls it of Damascen by which the Doctor is so every where silenc'd Certainly E. W. is a merry Gentleman and thinks all mankind are fools This is the ridiculous Commentary of E. W. but Damascen was too learned and grave a person to talk such wild stuff And Cardinal Cajetan gives a better account of the doctrine of Damascen The Authority of Damascen in the very letter of it condemns those Images viz. of God of folly and impiety And there is the same reason now concerning the Deity which was in the old law And it is certain that in the old law the Images of God were forbidden To the like purpose is that of the famous Germanus who though too favourable to pictures in Churches for veneration yet he is a great enemy to all pictures of God Neque â—nim invisibilis Deitatis imaginem similitudinem vel schema vel figuram aliquam formamus c. as who please may see in his Epistle to Thomas Bishop of Claudiopolis But let us consider when God forbad the children of Israel to make any likeness of him did he only forbid them to express by any Image the perfect similitude of his intrinsecal perfections Had the children of Israel leave to picture God in the form of a man walking in Paradise Or to paint the Holy Trinity like three men talking to Abraham Was it lawful for them to make an Image or picture or to use E. W. his expression to exhibit to their eyes those visible or circumscribed lineaments which any man had seen And when they had exhibited these forms to the eyes might they then have fallen down and worshipped those forms which themselves exhibited to their own and others eyes I omit to enquire how they can prove that God appear'd in Paradise in the form of a man which they can never do unless they will use the Friers argument Faciamus hominem ad similitudinem nostram c. and so make fair way for the Heresie of the Anthropomorphites But I pass on a little further Did the Israelites when they made a molten calf and said These are thy Gods O Israel did they imagine that by that Image they represented the true form essence or nature of God Or did the Heathens ever pretend to make any Image of the intrinsecal perfections of any of their Majores or Minores Dii or any of their Daemons and dead Heroes And because they neither did nor could do that may it therefore be concluded that they made no Images of their Gods Certain it is the Heathens have as much reason to say they did not picture their Gods meaning their nature and essence but by symbolical forms and shapes represented those good things which they suppos'd them to have done Thus the Egyptians pictur'd Joseph with a Bushel upon his head and called him their God Serapis but they made no Image of his essence but symbolically represented the benefit he did the Nation by preserving them in the seven years famine Thus Ceres is painted with a Hook and a Sheaf of corn Pomona with a Basket of Apples Hercules with a Club and Jupiter himself with a handful of symbolical Thunderbolts This is that which the Popish Doctors call picturing God not in his Essence but in history or in symbolical shapes For of these three ways of picturing God Bellarmine says the two last are lawful And therefore the Heathens not doing the first but the second and the third only are just so to be excused as the Church of Rome is But then neither these nor those must pretend that they do not picture God For whatever the intention be still an Image of God is made or else why do they worship God by that which if it be no image of God must by their own doctrine be an Idol And therefore Bellarmines distinction is very foolish and is only crafty to deceive for besides the impertinency of it in answering the charge only by declaring his intention as being charged with picturing God he tells he did it indeed but he meant not to paint his nature but his story or his symbolical significations which I say is impertinent it not being inquir'd with what purpose it is done but whether or no and an evil thing may be done with a good intention Besides this I say that Bellarmines distinction comes just to this issue God may be painted or represented by an image not to express a perfect similitude of his form or nature but to express it imperfectly or rather not to express it but ad explicandam naturam to explain it not to describe him truly but historically though that be a strange history that does not express truly and as it is But here it is plainly acknowledged that besides the history the very Nature of God may be explicated by pictures or images provided they be only metaphorical and mystical as if the only reason of the lawfulness of painting God is because it is done imperfectly and unlike him or as if the metaphor made the Image lawful just as if to do Alexander honour you should picture him like a Bear tearing and trampling every thing or to exalt Caesar you should hang upon a table the pictures of a Fox and a Cock and a Lion and write under it This is Cajus Julius Caesar. But I am ashamed of these prodigious follies But at last why should it be esteemed madness and impiety to picture the nature of God which is invisible and not also be as great a madness to picture any shape of him which no man ever saw But he that is invested with a thick cloud and encircled with an inaccessible glory and never drew aside the Curtains to be seen under any representment will not suffer himself to be expos'd to vulgar eyes by phantastical shapes and ridiculous forms But it may be the Church of Rome does not use any such impious practice much less own so mad a doctrine for one of my adversaries says that the picturing the forms or appearances of God is all that some in their Church allow that is some do and some do
not So that it may be only a private opinion of some Doctors and then I am to blame to charge Popery with it To this I answer that Bellarmine indeed says Non esse tam certum in Ecclesia an sint faciendae imagines Dei sive Trinitatis quam Christi Sanctorum It is not so certain viz. as to be an article of faith But yet besides that Bellarmine allows it and cites Cajetan Catharinus Payva Sanders and Thomas Waldensis for it this is a practice and doctrine brought in by an unproved custom of the Church Constat quod haec consuetudo depingendi Angelos Deum modo sub specie Columbae modo sub Figura Trinitatis sit ubique inter Catholicos recepta The picturing Angels and God sometimes under the shape of a Dove and sometimes under the figure of the Trinity is every where received among the Catholicks said a great Man amongst them And to what purpose they do this we are told by Cajetan speaking of Images of God the Father Son and Holy Ghost saying Haec non solum pinguntur ut ostendantur sicut Cherubim olim in Templo sed ut adorentur They are painted that they may be worshipped ut frequens usus Ecclesiae testatur This is witnessed by the frequent use of the Church So that this is received every where among the Catholicks and these Images are worshipped and of this there is an Ecclesiastical custom and I add In their Mass-book lately printed these pictures are not infrequently seen So that now it is necessary to shew that this besides the impiety of it is against the doctrine and practice of the Primitive Church and is an innovation in religion a propriety of the Roman doctrine and of infinite danger and unsufferable impiety To some of these purposes the Disswasive alledged Tertullian Eusebius and S. Hierom but A. L. says these Fathers have nothing to this purpose This is now to be tried These men were only nam'd in the Disswasive Their words are these which follow 1. For Tertullian A man would think it could not be necessary to prove that Tertullian thought it unlawful to picture God the Father when he thought the whole art of painting and making Images to be unlawful as I have already proved But however let us see He is very curious that nothing should be us'd by Christians or in the service of God which is us'd on or by or towards Idols and because they did paint and picture their Idols cast or carve them therefore nothing of that kind ought to be in rebus Dei as Tertullian's phrase is But the summ of his discourse is this The Heathens use to picture their false Gods that indeed befits them but therefore is unfit for God and therefore we are to flee not only from Idolatry but from Idols in which affair a word does change the case and that which before it was said to appertain to Idols was lawful by that very word was made Unlawful and therefore much more by a shape or figure and therefore flee from the shape of them for it is an Unworthy thing that the Image of the living God should be made the Image of an Idol or a dead thing For the Idols of the Heathens are silver and gold and have eyes without sight and noses without smell and hands without feeling So far Tertullian argues And what can more plainly give his sence and meaning in this Article If the very Image of an Idol be Unlawful much more is it unlawful to make an Image or Idol of the living God or represent him by the Image of a dead man But this argument is further and more plainly set down by Athanasius whose book against the Gentiles is spent in reproving the Images of God real or imaginary insomuch that he affirms that the Gentiles dishonour even their false Gods by making Images of them and that they might better have pass'd for Gods if they had not represented them by visible Images And therefore That the religion of making Images of their Gods is not piety but impious For to know God we need no outward thing the way of truth will direct us to him And if any man ask which is that way viz. to know God I shall say it is the soul of a man and that understanding which is planted in us for by that alone God can be seen and Vnderstood The same Father does discourse many excellent things to this purpose as that a man is the only Image of God Jesus Christ is the perfect Image of his Glory and he only represents his essence and man is made in the likeness of God and therefore he also in a less perfect manner represents God Besides these if any many desires to see God let him look in the book of the creature and all the world is the Image and lively representment of Gods power and his wisdom his goodness and his bounty But to represent God in a carved stone or a painted Table does depauperate our understanding of God and dishonours him below the Painters art for it represents him lovely only by that art and therefore less than him that painted it But that which Athanasius adds is very material and gives great reason of the Command why God should severely forbid any Image of himself Calamitati enim tyrannidi servienâ—es homines Vnicum illud est nulli Communicabile Dei nomen lignis lapidibusque imposâ—runt Some in sorrow for their dead children made their Images and fancied that presence some desiring to please their tyrannous Princes put up their statues and at distance by a phantastical presence flattered them with honours And in process of time these were made Gods and the incommunicable name was given to wood and stones Not that the Heathens thought that Image to be very God but that they were imaginarily present in them and so had their Name Hujusmodi igitur initiis idolorum inventio Scriptura â—este apud homines coepit Thus idolatry began saith the Scripture and thus it was promoted and the event was they made pitiful conceptions of God they confined his presence to a statue they worshipped him with the lowest way â—maginable they descended from all spirituality and the noble ways of Understanding and made wood and stone to be as it were a body to the Father of Spirits they gave the incommunicable name not only to dead men and Angels and Daemons but to the Images of them and though it is great folly to picture Angelical Spirits and dead Heroes whom they never saw yet by these steps when they had come to picture God himself this was the height of the Gentile impiety and is but too plain a representation of the impiety practised by too many in the Roman Church But as we proceed further the case will be yet clearer Concerning the testimony of Eusebius I wonder that any writer of Roman controversies should be ignorant and being
to be sorrowful are natural effects of their proper apprehensions and therefore are not properly capable of a law Though it be possible for a man who is of a sanguine complexion in perfect health and constitution not to act his lust yet it will be found next to impossible not to love it not to desire it and who will find it possible that every man and in all cases of his temptation should overcome his fear But if this fear be instanced in a matter of religion it will be apt to multiply eternal scruples and they are equivocal effects of a good meaning but are proper and univocal enemies to piety and a wise religion 22. I need not take notice of the infinite variety of thoughts and sentences that divide all mankind concerning their manner of pleasing and obeying God and the appendant zeal by which they are furiously driven on to promote their errors or opinions as they think for God and he that shall tell these men they do amiss would be wondred at for they think themselves secure of a good reward even when they do horrible things But the danger here is very great when the instrument of serving God is nothing but opinion and passion abus'd by interest especially since this passion of it self is very much to be suspected it being temerity or rashness for some zeal is no better and its very formality is inadvertency and inconsideration 23. But the case is very often so that even the greatest consideration is apt to be mistaken and how shall men be innocent when besides the signal precepts of the Gospel there are propounded to us some general measures and as I may call them extraregular lines by which our actions are to be directed such as are the analogy of faith fame reputation publick honesty not giving offence being exemplary all which and divers others being indefinite measures of good and evil are pursued as men please and as they will understand them And because concerning these God alone can judge righteously he alone can tell when we have observed them we cannot and therefore it is certain we very often do mistake 24. Hence it is that they who mean holiness and purity are forc'd to make to themselves rules and measures by way of Idea or instrument endeavouring to chuse that side that is the surest which indeed is but a guessing at the way we should walk in and yet by this way also men do often run into a snare and lay trouble and intricacy upon their consciences unnecessary burthens which presently they grow weary of and in striving to shake them off they gall the neck and introduce tediousness of spirit or despair 25. For we see when Religion grows high the dangers do increase not only by the proper dangers of that state and the more violent assaults made against Saints than against meaner persons of no religious interest but because it will be impossible for any man to know certainly what intension of spirit is the minimum religionis the necessary condition under or less than which God will not accept the action and yet sometimes two duties justle one another and while we are zealous in one we less attend the other and therefore cannot easily be certain of our measures and because sometimes two duties of a very different matter are to be reconcil'd and waited upon who can tell what will be the event of it since mans nature is so limited and little that it cannot at once attend upon two objects 26. Is it possible that a man should so attend his prayers that his mind should be always present and never wander does not every man complain of this and yet no man can help it And if of this alone we had cause to complain yet even for this we were not innocent in others and he that is an offender in one is guilty of all and yet it is true that in many things we all offend And all this is true when a man is well and when he is wise but he may be foolish and he will be sick and there is a new scene of dangers new duties and new infirmities and new questions and the old uncertainty of things and the same certainty of doing our duty weakly and imperfectly and pitiably Quid tam dextro pede concipis ut te Conatus non poeniteat votique peracti 27. Since therefore every sin is forbidden and yet it can enter from so many angles I may conclude in the words of Sedulius Lex spiritualis est quia spiritualiae mandat ardua praecipit opera spiritus prohibens peccata ideò non potest impleri Gods law is spiritual and we are carnal and disproportionate to it while we are in the state of conjunction and therefore it cannot be kept Deus jugum legis homini imponit homo ferre non valet said the Fathers of the Synod of Frankeford God hath imposed a yoke but man cannot bear it For that I may summ up all 28. In affirmative Precepts the measure is To love God with all our faculties and degrees In negative Precepts the measure is Not to lust or desire Now if any man can say that he can so love God in the proper and full measures as never to step aside towards the creatures with whom he daily converses and is of the same kindred with them and that he can so abstain from the creature as never to covet what he is forbidden then indeed he justifies God in imposing a possible law and condemns himself that he does not what he ought But in all he infers the absolute necessity of Repentance 29. But because we are sure God is just and cannot be otherwise all the Doctors of the Church have endeavoured to tie these things together and reconcile our state of infirmity with the justification of God Many lay the whole fault upon Man not on the impossible imposition But that being the Question cannot be concluded on either hand with a bare Affirmative or Negative and besides it was condemn'd by the African Councils to say that a man might if he pleas'd live without sin Posse hominem sine peccato decurrere vitam Si velit ut potuit nullo delinquere primus Libertate suâ Nempe haec damnata fuêre Conciliis mundique manu said Prosper For if it were only the fault of men then a man might if he pleased keep the whole law and then might be justified by the law and should not need a Saviour S. Augustine indeed thought it no great error and some African Bishops did expresly affirm that some from their conversion did to the day of their death live without sin This was worse than that of Pelagius save only that these took in the Grace of God which in that sence which the Church teaches the Pelagians did not But this also was affirmed by S. Austin upon which account it must follow that the Commandments are therefore possible because it is
only our fault that they are not kept But how to reconcile this opinion and saying of S. Austin and some other Africans with the African Councils with S. Hierome Orosius Lactantius and with S. Austin himself and generally the whole ancient Church against the Pelagians I cannot understand but it is sufficiently confuted by all the foregoing considerations 30. S. Hierome says that the observation of the Commandments is possible to the whole Church but not to every single person but then the difficulty remains For the whole Church being a collection of single persons is not the subject of a law Nothing is universal but Names and Words a thing cannot be universal it is a contradiction to say it is To say the Church can keep it is to say that every man can keep it To say that every man of the Church cannot keep it is to say that the whole Church cannot keep it As he that says Mankind is reasonable says that every man is but he that says every man is not just says that all mankind is not just But if it contains in it another sence it is a dangerous affirmative which I shall represent in his own words Ita fit ut quod in alio aut primum aut totum est in alio ex parte versetur tamen non sit in crimine qui non habet omnia nec condemnetur ex eo quod non habet sed justificetur ex eo quod possidet I will not be so severe as S. Austin who in his nineteenth Sermon de tempore calls it blasphemy It is indeed a hard saying if he means that a man can be justified by some vertues though he retains some vices For he that sins in one is guilty of all But yet some persons shall be crowned who never converted souls and some that never redeem'd captives and millions that never sold all and gave to the poor and there are many graces of which some lives have no opportunities The state of Marriage hath some graces proper to it self and the Calling of a Merchant and the Office of a Judge and the imployment of an Advocate hath some things of vertue which others do not exercise and they also have their proper graces and in this sence it is true what S. Hierome says that he that hath not all may be justified by what he hath and not sentenced for what he hath not it not being imputed to him that he hath not that of which he hath no use Now although this be true yet it is not sufficient to explicate the Question For the Commandments are not only impossible in this sence but even in that where the scene of his duty does lie and where his graces ought to have been exercised every man is a sinner every man hath fail'd in his proper duty and calling So that now to say the Commandments are possible to the whole Church and not to every single person is to divide the duty of a Christian and to give to every one a portion of duty which must leave in every one a portion of impiety and to say that this is keeping the Commandments or a sufficient means of justification is that which S. Austin call'd blasphemy 31. But S. Hierome hath another answer Hoc nos dicimus posse hominem non peccare si velit pro tempore pro loco pro imbecillitate corporeâ quamdiu intentus est animus quamdiu corda nullo vitio laxatur in Citharâ God hath not impos'd an impossible law For there is no Commandment but a man that considers that endeavours that understands that watches that labours may do in time and place and so long as he adverts and is dipassionate so long as his instrument is in tune Which answer is like that saying of the Schools That there is no difficulty in things but every thing is easie to be understood but that we find difficulty is because of the weakness of the understanding that is things are easie to be understood if we were wise enough to understand them But because our understanding is weak therefore things are hard for to be intelligible is a relative term and it is not sence to say that a thing is in it self easie to be understood but hard to the understanding for it is as if it were said It is easie but that it is hard and that 's the thing which in this question is complain'd of on all hands For an Oak is easie to be pull'd up by the roots if a man had strength enough to do it but if this be impos'd upon a weak man or a child they have reason to complain and a Bushel or two of Wheat is no great thing to carry but it is too great for me I cannot do it So by this account of S. Hierome the Commandments are not impossible for there is not any one of them but any man can do at some time while he considers and is in perfect disposition But then we are to remember that the Commandments are always imposed and we are not always in that condition of good things to be wise and watchful well dispos'd and well resolv'd standing upon our guard and doing what we can at other times and therefore it is that the Commandments are impossible So that still the difficulty remains and the inquiry must go on How we are to understand the Divine Justice in exacting an impossible law or if he does not exact it how we understand the way of the Divine Wisdom in imposing that law which he cannot justly exact 32. To the first I answer that God doth not exact of us what is not possible to be done The highest severity of the Gospel is to love God with all our soul that is to love him as much as we can love him and that is certain we can do Every man can do as much as he can and God requires no more and even those things which we can do though he calls upon us to do the most yet he punishes us not if we do it heartily and sincerely though with less passion and exactness Now as Gods justice was secur'd in the imposition of the law of Moses because whatever severity was held over them to restrain their loosenesses yet God exacted it only by the measures of a man and healed all their breaches by the medicine of Repentance So now in the Gospel he hath done it much more 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God hath taken the vail off and profess'd it openly he hath included this mercy in the very constitution of the Covenant For the Gospel is the Covenant of Repentance we shall not have leave to sin but we shall have leave to repent if we have sinned so that God hath imposed a law of perfection but he exacts it according to the possibilities of imperfect persons Omnia mandata Dei facta deputantur quando quicquid non fit ignoscitur and then we have kept the Commandments when we
particular authority of these men whose Commentaries they are and therefore must be considered with them 12. The summe is this Since the Fathers who are the best witnesses of Traditions yet were infinitely deceived in their account since sometimes they guest at them and conjectured by way of Rule and Discourse and not of their knowledge not by evidence of the thing since many are called Traditions which were not so many are uncertain whether they were or no yet confidently pretended and this uncertainty which at first was great enough is increased by infinite causes and accidents in the succession of 1600 years since the Church hath been either so careless or so abused that she could not or would not preserve Traditions with carefulness and truth since it was ordinary for the old Writers to set out their own fancies and the Rites of their Church which had been Ancient under the specious Title of Apostolical Traditions since some Traditions rely but upon single Testimony at first and yet descending upon others come to be attested by many whose Testimony though conjunct yet in value is but single because it relies upon the first single Relator and so can have no greater authority or certainty than they derive from the single person since the first Ages who were most competent to consign Tradition yet did consign such Traditions as be of a nature wholly discrepant from the present Questions and speak nothing at all or very imperfectly to our purposes and the following ages are no fit witnesses of that which was not transmitted to them because they could not know it at all but by such transmission and prior consignation since what at first was a Tradition came afterwards to be written and so ceased its being a Tradition yet the credit of Traditions commenced upon the certainty and reputation of those truths first delivered by word afterward consigned by writing since what was certainly Tradition Apostolical as many Rituals were are rejected by the Church in several ages and are gone out into a desuetude and lastly since beside the no necessity of Traditions there being abundantly enough in Scripture there are many things called Traditions by the Fathers which they themselves either proved by no Authors or by Apocryphal and spurious and Heretical the matter of Tradition will in very much be so uncertain so false so suspicious so contradictory so improbable so unproved that if a Question be contested and be offered to be proved only by Tradition it will be very hard to impose such a proposition to the belief of all men with an imperiousness or resolved determination but it will be necessary men should preserve the liberty of believing and prophecying and not part with it upon a worse merchandise and exchange than Esau made for his birthright SECT VI. Of the uncertainty and insufficiency of Councils Ecclesiastical to the same purpose 1. BUT since we are all this while in uncertainty it is necessary that we should address our selves somewhere where we may rest the soal of our foot And Nature Scripture and Experience teach the World in matters of Question to submit to some final sentence For it is not reason that controversies should continue till the erring person shall be willing to condemn himself and the Spirit of God hath directed us by that great precedent at Jerusalem to address our selves to the Church that in a plenary Council and Assembly she may Synodically determine Controversies So that if a General Council have determined a Question or expounded Scripture we may no more disbelieve the Decree than the Spirit of God himself who speaks in them And indeed if all Assemblies of Bishops were like that first and all Bishops were of the same spirit of which the Apostles were I should obey their Decree with the same Religion as I do them whose Preface was Visum est Spiritui Sancto nobis and I doubt not but our blessed Saviour intended that the Assemblies of the Church should be Judges of the Controversies and guides of our perswasions in matters of difficulty But he also intended they should proceed according to his will which he had revealed and those precedents which he had made authentick by the immediate assistance of his holy Spirit He hath done his part but we do not do ours And if any private person in the simplicity and purity of his soul desires to find out a truth of which he is in search and inquisition if he prays for wisdom we have a promise he shall be heard and answered liberally and therefore much more when the representatives of the Catholick Church do meet because every person there hath in individuo a title to the promise and another title as he is a governour and a guide of souls and all of them together have another title in their united capacity especially if in that union they pray and proceed with simplicity and purity so that there is no disputing against the pretence and promises and authority of General Councils For if any one man can hope to be guided by Gods Spirit in the search the pious and impartial and unprejudicate search of truth then much more may a General Council If no private man can hope for it then truth is not necessary to be found nor we are not obliged to search for it or else we are saved by chance But if private men can by vertue of a promise upon certain conditions be assured of finding out sufficient truth much more shall a General Council So that I consider thus There are many promises pretended to belong to General Assemblies in the Church but I know not any ground nor any pretence that they shall be absolutely assisted without any condition on their own parts and whether they will or no Faith is a vertue as well as Charity and therefore consists in liberty and choice and hath nothing in it of necessity There is no Question but that they are obliged to proceed according to some rule for they expect no assistance by way of Enthusiasme if they should I know no warrant for that neither did any General Council ever offer a Decree which they did not think sufficiently proved by Scripture Reason or Tradition as appears in the Acts of the Councils now then if they be tied to conditions it is their duty to observe them but whether it be certain that they will observe them that they will do all their duty that they will not sin even in this particular in the neglect of their duty that 's the consideration So that if any man questions the Title and Authority of General Councils and whether or no great promises appertain to them I suppose him to be much mistaken but he also that thinks all of them have proceeded according to rule and reason and that none of them were deceived because possibly they might have been truly directed is a stranger to the History of the Church and to the perpetual instances and experiments of