was consecrated by the Imposition of Hands of Barlow Coverdale and Korey three of Queen Maries Bishops and two suffragan Bishops more as appears by the act of Consecration for that our succession was not totally interrupted or if it had I hold that succession of Bishops is no inseparable mark of a true Church for if so then where was the Church before Christ for he was not of Aarons succession Succession no inseparable mark of a true Church but after the order of Mesehisedeck and Peter was designed of Christ having none to go before him so that succession is no absolute mark of a true Church And whereas the Doctor objects that we are beholding to the Romish Bishops if our succession was not interrupted I have already proved that we had Sacramentall Orders at least if not governing Bishops before ever Eleutherius sent any Priests into England Ante 24.32 2 4 chap. our English writers say these two which were sent to Rome by Lucius were Bishops however they were in Holy Orders though I rather incline to think that none excercised any Episcopall Jurisdictions till by the Prince Christianity was publickly professed and being in Orders did consecrate others and there were others which had given to them the imposition of Hands from whom and not meerly from Rome we claim a succession of Pastors yet I might admit we had it from Rome and though all of the Romish Institution were extinct yet we continue a succession for that still we are pars ecclesiae though Hereticks But that 's but their begging of the question we appeal to the Scriptures primitive Councells and Fathers to Judge who are of us two the Scismaticks or Hereticks and I submit to the Judicious reader to censure or condemn us in the points here controverted whether Rome or we be in the Errour Thus briefly I have answered the Doctors condemning of us for want of Succession and have in some sort proved that the Church of Rome cannot properly be said a true Church in respect of her Succession Ante 9. Rome uncertain in her succession chap. 2 of which more in the next chapters for that she is uncertain in it and many of the Bishops of Rome usurpers in it so I will now proceed to examine the rest of his marks by which he hath distinguished her Truth and Catholickship and shall prove that she may not ascribe to her self the Title of the Catholick Church for and by reason of any of them CHAP. V. That the Church of Rome hath been and any particular Church may be Invisible THe first marks by which the Doctor hath laboured to prove Rome the true Church to wit Universality and Antiquity are already answered in that I have Proved others equall and some ancienter then the Church of Rome it now followes to look a little further after her whilst she may be found for shortly she shall be Invisible The Church Visible is a Company professing the Doctrine of the Law and the Gospell Visibility using the Sacraments according to Christs Institution in which company are many unregenerate as Hypothules as by the Parable of the seed and tares is manifest The Church Invisible is a company of those onely which are elect to Eternall life of whom it is said No man shall pluck my sheep out of my hands Joh. 10.28 is Universal or comprehensive of all the Elect which both now have heretofore living had one Faith The Church visible is Universall in respect of the dispersed Companies of those that professe one faith in Christ which must continue till the end of the world And the Visible Church is particular in respect of place and habitation and of diversity of Rites and Ceremonies as England Rome c. which particular Churches may becoming Invisible and particularly Rome hath been Invisible in respect of her Assemblies and is invisible in relation to the true Faith and Doctrine for though at present she hath companies of men which assemble to worship God and serve him in the Sacrament yet shee therein followes not Christs institution she is now invisible in respect of Faith and Doctrine and in respect of Men she cannot boast of this mark of Visibility but Tares grow as well as Wheat and as Rome hath been invisible in these respects so may any other particular Church be Invisible Elijah complained that he was left alone A particular Church may be Invisible and that the Prophets were slain that complaint of his saith the Doctor doth not prove that the true Church may be Invisible for saith he that complaint was uttered with relation to the Kingdome of Israel onely wherein Elijah then was and not with reference to the Kingdome of Judah where Elijah was not persecuted by Ahab and where the Church of God doth flourish This his Argument in my opinion proves what is objected against the Church of Rome It is true it is an Argument that the Church shall not be Universally Invisible but if by the true Church he mean the Church of Rome and I think he would not otherwise be understood it is no Argument but that it may be Invisible it is true at one instant of time the Church shall not be universally invisible God having promised his Spirit to be with the Apostles in their teaching of Nations to the worlds end but yet in any particular place it hath been and may be Invisible as he confesses himself he saith it was invisible in relation to the Kingdome of Israel and in Judah they knew not whether to resort when the Temple it self was defiled neither was there Place nor Sacrifice nor High Priest the Priest was wicked the Temple was defiled 2 King 19.2 and when the Doctor is charged with its being invisible in Judea he pleads it invisible in Ethiopia the Eunuch having received the Faith by Philip and so by these landskips he makes intervalls of darknesse proving that in particular places it was Invisible and if so then may not Rome being a particular Church boast of absolute truth by reason of this mark of Visibility we doe not go about to prove the Church universally invisible at one instant of time whilst we say that any particular Church as Rome may be Invisible but that no one particular Church but at some time may be Invisible Time was when both Rome and we agreed in the same Principles of Religion conform to the Rules of Scriptures Councels and Fathers but of later years Rome being grown above Apostolicall Orders abusing the indulgence of Christian Princes and other Churches towards her She hath turned the grace of God into wantonnesse converting Premacy into Supremacy and that Supremacy into Infallibility and so having acquired that uncontrolable Prerogative by the dull consent of some lame Princes and blind servile slavish People she became the onely evangellicall cradle accounting the Scriptures dead Letters and to receive articulate sense from her dictates and so for her own
the case stands with the Eastern Churches they I am perswaded would not bogle to condescend hereunto but by no means let her ever hope to have a supremacy of Iurisdiction she may force it but never by argument evince it and so according to its first beginning prosecute to rear up her tower of Universality with the cement of bloud which whilst she prosecutes she forges her Keys into a two-edged sword and when she has done she like a Heathen Roman destroys her self by cutting off some of her fellow-members robbing them of what belongs to their office and makes them uselesse pieces of the mysticall body Christ Jesus of which all the Churches upon earth are fellow-members and though many yet make but one body being all baptized into one body by one Spirit 1 Cor. 12.12 Let us therefore follow the truth in love and in all things grow up unto him which is the Head that is Christ by whom all the body being compleat and knit together by every joynt for the forniture thereof according to the effectuall power which is in the measure of every part receiveth encrease of the body unto the edification of it self in love Ephes 4. The Doctor confesses that Christ is the Head originally but the Pope is the Head derivatively for sayes he with as much reason may we deny a King to be Head of his Kingdome because the Scripture saith God is King over all the earth as deny the Pope to be Head of the Church because Christ is so To which I answer Christ is the Head of the Catholike Church that is comprehensive of all the Elect Pope not Universall Head Saints Angells and men of which the particular Churches on earth are but members and the people the Saints of God assembled together to worship God and call upon him in his Sacraments make a Church Christ being their Head and as they are a people not convened to that purpose their severall Princes and Magistracy is to rule over them which I judge to be the principall reason of the Law of Sanctuaries Now for the Pope to claim an universall headship over them is either to rob Christ of his office or to deny Caesar his due for as Head of the whole Catholike Church he candot be and to be Head of the Universall Church upon earth is not consistent with the plantations of the other Apostles nor was any such universall headship delegated to any one of the Apostles Christ sent out his Apostles to all Nations and they ordained spirituall heads and Governors over their severall plantations none being to intrude upon anothers foundation and ever since Christ there have been superintendents over the severall Churches yet those superintendents were equal amongst themselves none lording it over another but only within their distinct territories did equally exercise the authori y of their headship and every one within his own Province being representative in point of order of Christ the mysticall Head without ascribing a single universality to any one of them although by this means there be many headships over the severall plantations yet it doth no more destroy the representative headship of Christ here on earth then the Spanish French c. acknowledging obedience to their distinct Princes are against Monarchy because the Turk claims to be Soveraign Lord of the Universe Wherefore if the Church of Rome wil needs have the Catholike Church to be understood only of a Universall Church upon earth and some one Bishop to be the governing head thereof I must tell her that she can lay no just claim hereto because if Peter had any power above the other Apostles it doth not appear to succeed to the Bishop of Rome for that it is not proved Peter to have been Bishop there and if he was Bishop there yet there wants a cleare and perfect deraigning of succession from him some affirming Linus some Clemens some Anacletus to succeed him and some Bishops of Rome claiming as Successors to Paul some to Peter or if they could perfect their Succession yet it is not evident that Peters power did succeed to them in respect it was Apostolically in him and either died in him or survived to Iohn besides they cannot agree in the manner how this power of supremacy should be in them for if they have it as universall Bishops Gregory declares it and the Doctor confesses it to be Antichristian for that hereby they deny others to be Bishops and so rob them of their divine order and Ecclesiastique Jurisdiction granted by consent of Councells to Metropolitans to govern within their provinciall precincts without appealing to Rome and if they will have it in respect of Rome see how they make Rome the Rock not Peter and go against the Symbole of our faith The Apostles who composed the Creed as the Doctor confesses 148. and professing faith in the Catholike Church did publish that Creed at Jerusalem before ever the faith was preached at Rome and when her Church was invisible or not in rerum natura and did not therefore intend Rome for the Catholique Church Wherefore for these reasons I hope I may without incurring a censure of presumption with confidence affirm that Rome is not the Catholique Church nor the Pope the universall Head of the Catholike Church either in respect of any Jurisdiction derived from Peter or by the consent of Councells lawfully deraigning any title thereto CHAP. III. That the name Church is proper to England as well as to Rome THe Doctor is pleased in his fifth and thirteenth chapters to take notice of severall definitions of a Church which are distinctions of severall Sectaries that are in England and elswhere but never glanced upon that which is maintained and professed in the Church of England which belike he omitted on purpose to make people believe that we had no Church at all properly distinguished by her self apart from those Sectaries and therefore he fled to Rome to find one if he have forgotten I will put him in mind of it The Church of God is a company of men chosen by him to call upon his name and therefore did the Apostles term it Ecclesia alluding to the custome of Arkens to call together the people to hear the promulgation of any Law or any publike Oration and not Synagogue that is an inordinately met assembly without a lawfull calling together wherefore we say that Ecclesia in the most proper and genuine signification is Vniversitas fidelium credentium invocantium nomen Christi By which interpretation if we be in the faith of Jesus and have our solemn assemblies to worship and call upon his name we may properly be called a Church and a member of the Catholique Church which as I said before is comprehensive of all the Elect of God which have been are or shall be The Doctor cannot deny but that we maintain the Apostles Creed and I may say so doth not Rome The Church of Rome abuses the Apostles
her Church be like the Temple of Venus in which there was a Lanthorn made of the stone A Beston whose nature as Isidore lib. 15. de Genuus saith is such that being once set on fire no wind nor rain can extinguish it which made the Heathen people Idolize it but she must not think so to delude us we know her Virgin Lamp is sunk in its sockets and that fuliginous liâ—â—k composed of adulterate combustibles which she hath set up in its room is but a thing of exhalation the heavenly Sun from whom she formerly borrowed light having withdrawn his shining beams from her terrestriall Orb and so she 's left in both internall and external darknesse her understanding being darkned in that whilst the truth is removed froÌ„ her she thinks others see it with her and that she neither hath been nor can be invisible the contrary whereof is plain by what I have already proved Romes Church hath been Invisible and by this that followes As the Church of Rome hath been and may be Invisible in respect of persecution so hath she been by reason of the vacation of her Head The Doctor in his 22 Chapter fol. 360. sayes the Church of Rome is the Catholick Church because her Bishop is the Head thereof and hath been so accounted through all Ages That he hath not been so reputed through all Ages appears by the testimony of the first Councels and if Rome be the Chatholick Church in respect that the Pope is the Head then it followes that the Catholick Church hath been Invisible because of the vacation of that Head for cessante causâ cessat effectus The light of the body is the Eye which is placed in the head and if the body be without the eye the whole body is in darknesse If then this Mark of Visibility be such an incident and inseparable token of her truth I would fain know where the Universall Head of the Church was whilst Rome had no Bishop for either they must confesse that the Univensall Church must be in darknesse for want of a Head and so they make Gods promise of none effect if the Church be universally hid or else they must confesse that Romes Church is but a particular Member of the Church and that then like the Church of the Israelites or the Church of Ephesus she is subject to be made invisible for a time and that she hath been invisible may appear by these enfuing proofs Two yeers together after Pope Nicholas the fourth no Pope was chosen and when after much dissention amongst the Cardinâ—ls Celestine was chosen Boniface the 8th murdering him was made Bishop in his stead where was the visible Head whilst Benedict the tenth and Nicholas the second both stand Popes at once The Clergy who then had the Election of the Popes not daring to proceed to a new Election to crosse Benedict who was very much beloved of the Citizens of Rome withdrew themselves to Sene and there elected Gerrardus Bishop of Florence by the name of Nicholus 2d who was the onely favouâ—â—ite of Hildebrand whom Hildebrand caused to be made Pope that he as then not ripe for the Seat might under him rule all for Pope Nicholas was but a dull fellow though proud and ambitious of Honour and be sure when he saw his own time to out him that he might succeed in the Chair and so it happened accordingly for Hildebrand succeeded Nicholas 2d two fit to go together the one bringing in at the Councel of Lateran the new Doctrine of Transubstantiation the other maintaining the then never heard of sin of the Popes power to depose Kings Where was the triple Crown when at once there was 3 Popes as Innocent 7th Gregory 12th and at the Councell of Pise Alexander 5th chosen I might adde more of this nature but I will reserve the rest of my arrows to shoot at his other Markes and shut up this point and conclude that the Church of Rome in respect of Persecution and vacancy of her Bishops cannot be the onely Chatholick Church and distinguished to be so by any certain Infallible rule of a constant Visibility CHAP. VI. That the Church of Rome cannot be reputed and taken for a true Church in respect of her Unity in Doctrine or Sanctity of Life onely CHrists Coat was seamlesse and the Souldiers cast Lots for it that Coat was to teach the Apostles unity and concord The Ministers of the old Temple were clad in White thereby to betoken their Innocency Let us look upon Romes present Church and see if her Pastors be not worse then the Souldiers in rending in pieces the one and like Baals Priests not having any right to the other And who please to examine their private practices how they agree with their publique Professions will find such a disproportion and dissonancy that it will be hard to judg whether his Holiness's Decrees as compendiums and true abstracts of the Cannons of Councels or his Pontificall Robe as the Conusance of Peters successour then with them lesse of agreeablenesse and representation the one privately thwarting the publick edicts of General Councels and the other publickly unsuitable and dissonant to a Minister of the Gospell so that a man cannot at any time judge by his outside what his inside should be nor prove by his inner closet that ever he was in the publick Halls so that I may return the Doctors saying against Beza Luther and others more properly and fitly to the Pope Vide uiram tunica filii tui sit vel non The Church of Rome would fain have us to believe that she is free from the blood of this and that Prince basely by her practices and instruments assassinated and barbarously despoiled of their Crownes and Scepters and if any question arise about such businesse she is ready to disavow all privity to the act though the scene was studied in her Cardinals Conclave and acted abroad by her own emissaries as who please to peruse the Anatomy of Popish Tyranny will find presidents enough of this nature but it makes not much to my present purpose I will forbear to trouble the Reader with them I will proceed to shew her discords and variances in point of Doctrine She professes to maintain the Councels of Nice Constantinople Ephesus Chalcedon and Carthage and the Councell of Constant hath appointed an Oath to be taken by the Pope at his installing to that purpose But how little he performes that Oath or observes the Rules of those Councels let what I have said in the 2d Chapter serve to witnesse The Church of Rome in this respect I mean the Pope enchathedrated who judicially declaring any thing as Pope is confessed by all to represent the Church may be compared to a Water-man who looks one way and rowes another She may have some land marks tokens to steer by but she quickly layes those observations and wanders into unknown latitudes one Pope this way another that the
set an ungodly man to be ruler over them Against whom should they out of the dictates of humane reason exalt themselves for that they fleshlily conceive that otherwise the Church of Christ will be utterly destroyed it argues their infidelity of Christs promise to his Church which shal never be universally invisible and he having enjoyned unto them obedience they must submit unto that rule and rely upon Gods providence to his Church who can contrary to humane reason make the blood of the Martyrs the seed of the Church Wherefore Saint Paul and Saint Peter have left these commendations to the Saints of the several Churches To suffer is the fruit of the Spirit Gal. 5. and blessed are ye if ye suffer for well doing and Saint Peter 1. Pet. 3.14 Blessed are ye if ye suffer for righteousness sake Wherefore saith he 1 Pet. 4.19 Let them that suffer according to the will of God commit their souls to him as unto a faithful Creator and you hereby saith Saint Paul 2 Cor. 2. make proof of your being in Christ if ye be obedient in all things knowing this That if yee suffer ye shall reign 2 Tim. 2.12 This was the practise and precepts of the Apostles and that the Pope is bound hereunto I shall make it evident by the examples both of the old and new Testaments and likewise by the ancient and moderne practises of all Christian states The Jesuites Bishops not above Kings those stiff maintainers of the Popes prerogative have endeavoured to beguile the world with their subtil sophistry that they might by any means set up his holiness above all powers on earth and therefore they would perswade that Church-men are as far above Kings as the soul is above the body and that Kings should be subject to them in respect their power is from the people the Bishops power is from God and if Churchmen obey Princes it is out of discretion for order sake not out of necessity of obedience To which I answer That the people desired a King t is true and they had one given them but his power is from above and he was by appointment of God anointed 1 Sam. 9. and after that the people had submitted themselves to the King they could not cast him off Samuel told them by way of premonition that he should rule over them commanding their sons servants fields sheep c. and you shall cry out in that day as thinking your selves oppressed but the Lord will not hear you 1 Sam. 8. For his power once vested it is from above by which he holds it he is Vnctus Dei and the Bishop of Rome may in this respect as well as he be said to derive his power from men for that he is chosen by his Cardinals and formerly was nominated by the Emperors as I have shewed you in the fourth Chapter so that the Kings deriving their power from the people as in reference to their particular exercising of the Kingly power doth not prove their power from the people their power is from God though the people desire this or that prince to be over them and therefore as their power is from God it is at feast equal with the Bishop in side to the derivation of the power and if it were no more but so the Bishop cannot be above Kingship for par in parâ—m non habet potestatem Now that I may further illustrate the truth of this point I will borrow that Objection and prove by that Reason of Kings having their power from the people that the Pope hath no power to dethrone them That Monarchy and Civil Magistracie have their rise from consent of People is a truth most clear and manifest It is true that Kingship was anciently upon the earth Nimrod the son of Cush the son of Ham the son of Noah was King of Babel Gen. 10. and the Egyptians had a Pharaoh over them six hundred yeers before Saul Whereupon some have from hence conceived Kings to be Jure Divino which Assertion of theirs admits of this distinction they may be said Jure Divino as in reference to their power because By God Kings reign they are the Generals which go in and out before the people and it being the Lord of hosts which gives victory in the day of battel their power is from God But they are Jure Humano in reference to their Institution the People onely having a power of choice whether such a particular man shall be set over them so rule them and to go in and out before them Nor is it any thing but reason Kings derive their power from the people that the People had this power from the beginning For as the King was to have command over their persons sons and servants so it was nothing but right that the people should approve and allow or disallow of the particular man that should have that particular power over them Hence was it that Saul though anointed of Samuel by special appointment of God yet by that consignement he was not absolute King but was preordained to be Governour over the inheritance For that anointing of Samuel did not give him power to exercise his kingly Office till Samuel assembled the people in Mizpeh 1 Sam. 10. and by consent of the Tribes was the lot cast which fell upon the Tribe of Benjamin and vers 24. All the people shouted and said God save the King So likewise David was anointed by Samuel 1 Sam. 16. yet after Saul's death he was not King till the men of Judah came and anointed him over Judah 2 Sam. 2. And though David sware unto Bathsheba that Solomon her son should succeed him yet it was the people came and confirmed it saying God save king Solomon 1 King 1. And Rehoboam his son succeeded him but it is plain he was not king by descent but by the peoples making him so for says the text 1 King 12.1 All Israel were come to Shechem to make him king It was not by inherent right that the sons commonly succeeded the fathers in the Regal Throne as may appear by that and the example of Joash who being son and heir of Ahaziah 2 King 11. yet was he made king by the people they crowned him and clapped their hands saying God save the king And as these Kings so the Romane Emperours and indeed all other kings derive their power of governing from the people not from any Birth-right not as Heirs succeeding in right of Blood but onely receiving their power from the choice and consent of the people which people would commonly make choice of such heirs and crown them kings with Solomon accounting their land blessed when their king was the son of nobles Eccles 10.17 For sith they were resolved to have kingly Government over them which Kingly Government is by some naked nations not clothed with wholesome Laws and Priviledges but prostitute to the daily various imperious dictates of humane will without known Rules to govern
CATHOLIKE HISTORY Collected and gathered out of Scripture Councels Ancient Fathers and modern Authentick Writers both Ecclesiastical and Civil for the satisfaction of such as doubt and the confirmation of such as believe the Reformed Church of ENGLAND Occasioned by a Book written by Dr. Thomas Vane INTITULED The Lost sheep returned home By Edward Chisenhale Esquire Chrysost in Matth. Hom. 30. Christianus si malus evaserit pejor fit quam suisset Gentilis 2 Pet. 2.21 For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness then after they have known it to turn from the holy commandment given unto them London Printed by J.C. for Nath-Brooks at the signe of the Angel in Cornhil 1653. To the Right Reverend The LEGAL CLERGY OF The Reformed Protestant Church OF ENGLAND The Author Wishes many dayes of consolation here and eternal joy in the Holy Ghost THe Israelites lamented after the Lord when the Ark was removed and it pittyed the children of Sion to see her stones in the dust and how can any sing a song of the Lord in a strange Land For my own part many have been the troubles of my spirit Right Reverend for the desolations and miseries that have of late befallen our English Church and amongst the rest this has not been the least affliction of my soul to see her like Sennacherib murdered of her own sons to see her laid desolate whilst her enemies cry There there so would we have it When Ierusalem was destroyed she became an habitation unto strangers and our English Sion being now laid waste a Babylonish Tower of Rome would fain be built by the Enemy upon our holy Hill But that which most afflicted me was to see the sons of our Sion's Tower being compleatly furnished out of her spiritual Magazine and being harnessed and carrying bowes to resist the Darts of Satan should like the children of Ephraim turn their backs in the day of battel amongst whom I finde Doctor Vane the Author of a Book intituled The lost sheep returned home to be the Ring leader and chief of the Apostate-Tribe who had no fooner escaped out of our English sheep-fold but straightway he discovers the Muset thorow which he stole thinking thereby to decoy the rest of the flock into the Wilderness Now I seeing this injury done unto our English Vineyard though it was not proper to me to make up the fence did presume to lay these thorns in the breach whereby I might divert the Flock from straying after novelties and seeking after strange Pastours and in the interim blind the Wolves that they should not discover the breach that is made in our Pale Some I know will condemn me for presuming to treat upon this subject being a Theam too high for my reach and too sacred for my calling and with Socrates will condemn Lysia's Oration as not being suitable for him that was to pronounce it If there be any such amongst us I desire them to take notice That when the Temple was to be rebuilt all the people of Israel without exception contributed towards the work Ezra 11.5 6. The Priests and Levites and all the children of Israel c. and appointed the Levites to set forward the work Chap. 3.8 For my part I do not desire to transgress the bounds of a well-wishing Israelite I do not with Uzzah think to support the Ark with my own hand but humbly present to your judicious sense the sweet smelling flowers which grow in others Gardens and withal give your Reverendships a view of the wilde Thistles that bear no Figgs leaving it to your choyse to weed out the one and root up the other to whom the work more properly belongs For my part had I not perceived that the hearts of many of the Romish Faction were hardened through the deceitfulness of that Book insomuch that many began to triumph over the wounds therein given to our English Church as if the Protestant Religion were neckt in the sparring blowes And had I not been upbraided daily with the clamorous insultings of divers Papists that our Church wanting grounds of Replyes was the cause of her silence I had neither given them this occasion to censure me of presumption or busied my self either for their information or the Church of England's justification the one more properly belonging to anothers charge the other needless in respect the quarrel they have renewed is but with their own shadow all that ever they now pretend being heretofore fully answered the force of Divinity and weight of Reason adjudging the Garland to our English Church Nevertheless those answers being in several pieces and many not having the several Books and the Doctor having couched many subject matters in one Volume I thought it requisite that a Reply were composed in answer to his objections not the importance of his subject matter but the ease and convenience of the people to have him answered in one piece calling upon some to this work And I consulting with my self and imagining after so long a time of its not being answered that the more judicious amongst you might perhaps think it below them to make a reply to that which had already by others been most fully and plainly refuted answered did assume the boldness to re-capitulate this ensuing Treatise which together with my self I prostrate at your feet Amphion plaid ever best when he heard poor Ithoneus blow upon his Oaten Pipe and I could wish these rude Collections of mine might but serve as a Plain-song whereon your Reverendships might descant I did not intend that these loose pieces thrown into the Gap should stand for a sufficient Fence for our English Vine-yard onely I was something confident that they might be serviceable to you and be made use of in part as being Materials prepared for your use wherewith you might firmly repair the Breach which the Doctor has made which being set by your more Divine hands might become a growing Rampire against the Wolves and Foxes that would steal into your Vine-yard to pluck your Grapes and a standing Bulwark to keep her up maugre the engines of Hell and Satan I know it is you to whom the charge of the Plantation is committed it is you that are the proper Husband-men and know best how to fence her clusters you are the Levites must repair the breaches in our English Tabernacle I beseech you be not offended that I have taken notice of this Gap made in your Fence but rather let this my boldness finde pardon from your goodness and let this piece be acceptable to you as coming from one that in humility and love desires you to have an eye to this breach and if when you view the pieces I have thrown into the Gap you finde any that are proper for your Fence fix it down and throw the rest by or if in your judgements you think it need no further reparation yet vouchsafe to confirm it with your holy hand sith this bold
and therefore I have adventured to lay open the Eâ—ors of his choyce which if he please to consider seriously I may win him again to his proper Sheepfold from whence he is gone astray how ever I hope I shall by the blessing of God hinder others from wandering after him and shall be a means to make up that gap which the Doctor hath made in the pale of our Church which whilest it lay open administred occasion for some to escape into the Wilderness Wherefore I will not hold the Reader longer in suspence with a dilatory Introduction but will briefly shew that the Doctor is not gone to the Catholique Church which is the main thing he perswades though it be obscurely wrapt in general terms in his first Chapter but that he has forsaken the faith once given to the Saints he has gone away from the puâ—e Fountain of Verity to the puddle of Error he has forsaken the living water and chosen the Romish cisterns digged by mens hands which hold no water CHAP. II. That the Roman Church is not the Catholique Church either in respect of the Vniversality of her Doctrine or any Jurisdiction she can claim from Peter or by the consent of the Primitive Churches and that the Pope is not the governing Head of the Catholique Church THe Church is called Catholique in several respects 1. In respect of places as being spread universally through the whole world and is not tyed to any place or Kingdom 2. In respect of Times because but one Church of all Times it having ever been from the beginning of the World and shall continue on Earth till the end thereof Isai 59.21 and Matth. 28. the Church of both Testaments being one and the same 3. In respect of the Collective Body thereof the Catholique Church being gathered of men of both Testaments and the Communion of Saints being the union and coherence of all the Saints in Christ their Head according to that of Paul Ephes 1.10 That he might gather together in one all things both which are in Heaven and which are in Earth even into Christ who is and ever shall be King and Head thereof And generally when we speak of the Catholique Church this Collective Church is to be understood which appellation Catholique was used by the Apostles before ever Rome was a Church So that neither in respect of Place Time or Catholiqueness may Rome justly challenge the onely Title of Catholique she being but a particular part or member of this Catholique Church we the Saints being the Body and Members for our part Eph. 1.22 But for the better illustration of this Point I will examine the Doctors Arguments in particular concerning Romes Catholiqueship and I shall in so doing more plainly disprove her Title thereunto The word Catholique as it is defined by the Doctor is not a word of Belief onely but of Communion also So that that Church which holds the same Belief with the ancient Church and yet doth not communicate with her may not rightly be called Catholique I shall retort this Argument which he intended against the Protestants and prove it to be their Justification and the Church of Romes own Condemnation Catholique as I said in a general sence comprehendeth all the Elect and is the full Body of Christ that filleth all things in all things Eph. 4. And when we in our Creed say We beleeve in the Holy Catholique Church it is understood of all the Elect of God which have been are or shall be of which the Church-Militant on Earth is but part But because I suppose the Doctor means onely of a Church upon Earth I will therefore insist upon his own definition and treat of the Church upon Earth which as it is universally spred over the Earth by the Apostles who had equal commission to teach all Nations no one particular Church can or ought to claim to be the Catholique or Universal Church upon Earth As for the Distinction which the Doctor makes betwixt Doctrine and Discipline thereby to excuse the unproper stile of Roman Catholique That is says he Catholique in respect of Doctrine Roman in respect of Discipline That will no ways strengthen her claim or clear her incongruous Title He doth but thereby shew the World how distinct her Discipline is from her Doctrine and thereby give occasion to the world to suspect both And upon this score may the Presbyterian Church of Geneva be called the Geneva Catholique Church that is Geneva for Discipline Catholique for Doctrine she professing the Catholique Faith of the holy and blessed Trinity and yet the Church of Rome I perswade my self would think much that such a glorious appellation should be given to such an upstart Youngling that wind-egg of a Tumult Geneva Church which being braddened under a Toad of France is become a staring Cockatrice and thinks to center the World within the compass of his contagious Den darting poyson upon whom he first espies as experience tells us how he glancing upon the poor Scot has given him such a deadly wound that he will scarce ever recover it teaching those that have escaped that plague with the Wesel each morning to bite on Rue which says Avicen secures her against the toxicating of that venomous Basilisk I say if the Church of Rome think much that the Geneva Church should arrogate such a glorious stile let her never stand upon her own Title which is equally weak to challenge the same The Doctor proceeds further upon Romes Tiâ—le to her Catholiqueship and gives a further explication of the same Catholique says the Doctor imports both the vast extention of Doctrine to Persons and Places and the union of all these places in communion It cannot be denyed but that there were other Churches of ancienter and more reverend setlement then the Church of Rome as the Churches in the East as Jerusalem Antioch Ephesus c. and in after-times the Gospel was to be carryed before Kings and to the Gentiles by S. Paul being by Jesus ordained a Minister and an Apostle of the Gentiles amongst whom Rome was then a chief City which as she received the Faith by S. Paul or S. Peter cannot properly be called a Mother Church but as a babe and suckling received the sincere milk of the Word She was one of the places to which the Doctrine of the Catholique Church of Christ was extended but no extender of that Doctrine So that by the Doctors own definition she cannot properly be called the Catholique Church she being in her Institution but a private particular Member of the Catholique Church as Englands or any other Church planted by the Embassadors of Christ And if since by the indulgent favors of her nursing Fathers the Christian Princes she has grown to that maturity that she has many Daughter Churches of her own plantation in the dark corners of the old known and the new discovered parts of the World yet she cannot by reason thereof assume to her self any
Creed we whilst we say we believe the holy Catholique Church mean thereby the whole Elect of God as well Saints in heaven as the Church upon earth which is the full body of Christ Ephes 4. and Rom. 12. but they thereby will have Rome understood which as I said was not in being before the Creed was composed and it seems strange to some that the Church of Rome should admit of the following Article to wit the Communion of Saints to extend to the Saints in heaven and will exclude them from the Catholique Church but the reason 's plain for it stands not with the Majesty of the Pope for in admitting the first he loses his headship we being all members of the Catholike Church but by the other his honor is not diminished in respect none are to be reputed Saints but such as are of his own making But if the Doctor will not admit of our definition I hope he will not be against our embracing of his which is this A Church is a Society of those whom God hath called to salvation by the profession of the true Faith and sincere administration of the Sacraments and the adherence to lawful Pastors I wonder what the Doctor means by the society of those that God hath called to salvation by the profession of the true Faith sure he will not deny but that those Societies which were gathered by other Apostles were true Churches as well as those which were gathered by Peter He himself fol. 192. confesses the true Church visible in Ethiopia where the Eunuch which Philip baptized preached the Faith and it is hard he should dâ—ny this to his own mother County which he allowes to Ethiopians especially considering wee as is believed by some received the Faith by the same Apostle Philip. But 't is no great matter we need not stand to the Doctors courtesie herein we have a better warrant then his Concession Act. 20.28 the flocks whereof the holy Ghost made the Elders over-seers is called the Church of Gâ—d Paul ordained Elders and committed charge of Flocks unto them A Christian Society makes a Church c. That the distinct Societies of Christians are called Churches is likewise manifest by severall other places of Scripture 1 Cor. 1. Paul writ to the Church that was at Corinth and to all that call upon the name of the Lord Jesus Gal. 1. to the Churches at Galatia Grace c. 1 Thes to the Church of the Thessalonians Col. 1.4 salute the brethren which are of Laodicea and Nymphas and the Church which is in his house Rev. 1.11 there were seven Churches in Asia Ephesus Smyrna Pergamos c. In the same manner Rome may be called a Church if she have a Sociâ—ty of the faithful calling upon the name of Christ Jesus wherefore Peter writing his Epistle from Babylon which the Papists interpret Rome sâ—â—es The Church that is at Bâ—bylon elected together with you saluteth you that is the Saints which dwell here and there dispersed through Pontus Galatia Cappadocia Asia and Bythinia the society of the Saints of Babylon saluteth the several societies of the Saints of those parts which were severall respective Churches members of the Catholike Church elected together in Christ Jesus So that from these places it is evident that the name of Church is applicable to all Christian Societies whether they be of Peters or any other of the Apostles gathering For the Apostles had equal commission from Christ for the gathering together of the Saints for the work of the Ministry and for the edification of the Body of Christ though in the Church were men of different Gifts as Apostles Teachers Evangelists c. yet the Apostles amongst themselves were equall and their severall plantations coordinate and equal as to any power or Jurisdiction If then we be in the faith of Jesus and have Societies of Christian believers in him we may properly be called a Church and that especially because we are of Apostolical plantation and are not beholding to Rome for that Plantation as coming from Eleutherius successour as they pretend to Peter But if we had our Faith from Rome it came by the means of Paul and certainly we had that Faith long before Eleutherius time as I have already proved in the precedent chapter wherefore we may properly both according to our own and the Doctors definition of a Church assume that title to our selves we being a Society of Christians calling upon the name of Jesus which is called a Church 1 Cor. 1.2 Rome a particular Church and for Rome or any other Church to arrogate more then to be a particular member of the Catholike Church whereof Christ is the Head and Hierusalem which is above free and the mother of us all is Antichristian and abominable especially for Rome that she should stile her self the onely Catholike Church when as Ephesus the See of John and John the surviving Apostle in whom alone survived the Apostleship calls that Church but one of the seven in Asia Rev. 1. Were John Peter or any of the Apostles alive to see to what a lofty pitch ambition has hurried the aspiring Prelates of Rome they would blush to behold such iniquity and reprove any that should call Rome the Catholike Church For alas The Pride of Rome how little doth she resemble Christs Spouse his Church Christs Church was planted in humility Romes Church lords it in Soveraignty Christs Church had her White vest of Innocency Romes Church is clad in her purple of bloud and cruelty how little doth the Scarlet tribe resemble the train of Christ were Peter or any of Christs disciples now at Rome and should see the Pope they would rather take him for Pilate an Officer or Judge of Cesars then for Peter a fisher-man and servant of Jesus and would think his Cardinalls to be rather the Embassadors of Bozra then the Messengers of the Gospel and servants of Christ and should any but assume that Christian boldnes to tel them that their Scarlet Robes did cover and make invisible the Seamlesse coat of Jesus he were in danger of a Councell To such a height of Majesty are they of late aspired that they exercise dominion without restraint little regarding Christs precept to his Apostles the Kings of the Gentiles bear Rule and exercise dominion Vos autem non sic And here by the way I will insert a story of Peter and Simon Magus incertainty of Peter being at Rome Aegesippus lib. 2. de excidio Hierusal cap. 2. reports that Peter came to Rome to withstand Simon Magus 44 Christi Eusebius says he was crucified 36 Christi others that Paul and he together others that Paul was crucified a yeer after and on the same day Prudentius that Paul followed Peter to Rome from which contradictions no certainty of his being there is to be concluded but I return to my story It is said that Simon Magus taking some offence with the Citizens threatned to leave
them and to flie away from them in their sight to fetch down vengeance from Heaven upon them and the day being appointed he began to take his flight in mount Capitolinus into the air and that Peter by the power of the Lord Jesus brought him down and broke his bones which act of Peters occasioned his persecution for that Simon Magus was beloved of Cesar this Story is in the Roman Legends I could wish the Pope to make this moral use of this story to wit to beware how he exalts Rome above the heavenly Hierusalem for if he continue to cuff the Heavens with his towring waxen pinions he must expect the divine majestick rayes of the heavenly Sun to melt his proud supporters into nothing he must not think to exalt himself against God and prosper Is it not enough for him to be primus Episcoporum ordine but he will contrary to Gods Word be Supremus Potestate c. God gives wings to the Ant. that she may destroy her self the sooner let Romes Bishop be content with his own Province for it is a rule that that State that goes beyond the lists of mediocrity passes the bounds of safety all Churches of Europe would honour her as a sister but 't is unnaturall to love a stepmother we are all fellow members of Christ let not Rome therefore despise her sister England Let us strive together in love and let the Church that is at Rome salute the Church that is in England and let us greet each other with an holy kisse she must not rob England of her name of a Church if she think not to bastard her self for we are all ingrafted in the same stock and baptized into one faith by the spirit of Jesus it is not for her to be busy in anothers diocess to judge of our matters of discipline or doctrin in that wherein we differ from her any further then that if she conceive we erre to give admonishment to those of her own Province they fall not into the like cōdemnation she must not upon this score deny the society of Christian believers the name of a church Admit the unfriendly appellations of Schismaticks and hereticks which they bestow upon us were deserved Haereticus est pars ecclesiae because we do not in all points agree and communicate w th Rome yet we must not therefore be denyed to be a church for this assertion I have the authority of the Councell of Trent I say which was wholly gathered of men against the reformed churches and men totally for the Popes supremacy yet they did not deny but that Schismatichs and Hereticks were in the Catholike Church and might confer orders administer and baptize and the councel of Florens agrees herewith sum Sacrament Rom. Ecclesiae Sect. 136.28 and therefore it is very harsh dealing in the Doctor to deny us this which their own Councels allow so that Saint Pauls saying is verified in him Heb. 12.15 when one falls away from the faith a root of bitternesse springs up in him and that 's the reason the Doctor is so harsh against the English Church The name Protestant The name Protestant and English Protestant which the Dr. so much spurns at doth not at all speak us members cut off from the old stock the Catholick Church for as the Doctor maintains that the name Romane Catholick is proper and significant language and sense so may we as well say English Protestant and with more reason for we will note by the Doctors distinction thereby the difference between our discipline doctrine only for our particular selv s assert the Catholick faith thereby to manifest the readinesse of us a particular member of the Catholick Church to give the head thereof our Master Christ for the word Protestant is comprehensive of Catholick and is no more but to assert the faith which faith is Catholick so that an English Protestant may be said truly to be he that will hold stick to and to his power maintain the Catholick faith taught and maintained in the English Church For the word Protestant though of a new addition proves not the Religion new or profession not agreeable to the Old Faith and profession of the Primitive Churches but being added with reference to their profession is an evidence of their zeal and affection to maintain and professe that ancient and Catholike truth For we do not professe our selves to have left the Catholike faith once preached and professed at Rome but that Rome has left of to be a Catholick Church bringing in strange delusions and perswading people to believe lies which especially since her pretence to universality has been much studied to make her new claims good whereas we desire only to impugne her late errors and to protest against them to maintain the ancient faith and though in this we may to some seem to set our selves against the Church of Rome to forfeit our interest in the Catholike Church because as they suppose we claimed our Religion from her yet there is nothing lesse for we are a Province and had a Metropolitane of our own and might call a Councell and reform things amisse by the authority Ecclesiasticall without appealing to Rome nor do we hereby forfeit the title of a Church But rather justifie the same in respect we differ in nothing but we would submit it to a free Generall Councel and though we were hereticall in some points yet having a society of believers in Jesus and having Apostolicall orders amongst us we still may without offence to any retain the name and appellation of a Church CHAP. IV. Of the right of Collation to Bishopricks and of the Ordination of Bishops of succession of Pastors and particularly of the Succession in England that the Pope ought not to intermedle in the appointing of Bishops in England THe Doctor has a great spleen towards our succession of Bishops in our Church and would fain perswade the world we are not of the Catholick Church for our defect therein It rests therefore that I clear our Church from that new devised scandall Ecclesia non consistit in hominibus ratione potestatis vel dignitatis Ecclesiasticae vel secularis quia multi Principes summi Pontifices inventi sunt qui à fide apostatasse propter quod ecclesia consistit in illis personis in quibus est notitia vera confessio fidei veritatis Could we not prove one line of succession it much matters not for we may notwithstanding lay claim to be of the Catholick Church and having a society of believers in Christ do notwithstanding make a Church If we agree with the Apostles and Fathers of the Primitive Church it is sufficient saith Tertullian to give us the name of Catholike Church Ecclesia quae licet nullum ex Apostolis authorem suum praeferant tamen in eadem fide conspirantes non minus Apostolicae reputantur pro consanguinitate doctrinae Though our first planter
third another way c. and so being meandred upon the waves of severall opinions it is by chance if any of them bottom upon mount Sion What good Christian of Apostolicall Faith looks upon Rome as she now is and hangs not his Harp upon the Willowes and with the children of Israel by the waters of Babylon sit down and weep to remember Sion Sion at unity within it self and Babylon full of strife envie Papists differ about the Keyes and debate Sanders maintains that S. Peter received both temporall and spirituall power by the Keyes not so saith another Jesuite affirming the power of the Keyes to be alia à civili potestate Baronius affirms that the Pope may positively dispose of Kingdomes Bellarmine not so but onely in ordine ad spiritualia Cauterenus saith that this power was given when Christ said to Peter Quaere Ante 2. Thou art Peter c. de sacra Christi lege lib. 3. Bellarmine de Rom. Pontif. lib. cap. 12. that it was not given untill the treble passe But of this more at large in the 9th chapter why should any be so lame as to allow to Rome this prerogative sith she cannot tell how to revive her Title to it I might instance in many more differences of this nature amongst the Papists themselves wherein they dissent one from another nor are these differences onely betwixt Cardinall and Cardinall Doctor and Doctor but the Church of Rome against the Church of Rome differing from the ancient Fathers and primitive Church nay point-blank contradicting their own modern Contestation of Popish Generall Councels as I shall shew in the ninth Chapter neither are the differences amongst them of small consequence but in the most concerning points of Religion as whether the holy Ghost proceed more principally from the Father or the Son about meritum congrui about the thing designed by the word hoc est Corpus about the conception of the Virgin and all high matters of Divinity and are not of any small importance For whereas the Doctor would perswade us fol. 236. that these are not differences in point of Faith the Church having not interposed her Decree and in the mean time without breach of Unity one Doctour may differ against another in point of Reason which is but to guide to a conclusive Faith so by the same reason no Church but is at Unity for in their Councells they may conclude points of Faith and in the intervals of Councels wrangle about the Reasons of those points and yet by the Doctors Logick are at unity because the reasonings of private men If they hold against their Decrees why doth she not punish them as Hereticks and if the points be of importance and the Church doth not interpose her Decree Infra 92.11 chap. she then suffers those contentions to be amongst her own Saints and then drawes on her a suspition of a false Church because she seeks not peace and truth to preserve the unity of spirit and bond of peace for discords are not musicall in the heavenly ear and if she be not afraid to loose a Faction by displeasing them should she interpose her Decree or else have some such like worldly end why doth she suffer those contentions daily to grow which whilst she doth not rectifie it administers just occasion to others to deny her to be a true Church in respect of her unity and they have very much reason to induce them thereunto as I shall shew anon in the nineth Chapter I am loath to rifle into this matter could I otherwise avoid it Sanctity of life no mark of the Church of Rome's truth I desire rather to lay open the errors of the Chair then to tax the persons possessing that Seat I would reprove the Heresie of Rome but not the Bishop I doe not maligne a Papist but only Popery And now that I must goe about to lay open the fulnesse of these men otherwise the Doctor will take it for granted that I subscribe to that mark of of Romes truth that she hath none but godly and sanctified Pastors it goes against my nature If I seem satyricall blame the Doctor who provoked me hereunto by this false position of his and by an unworthy upbrading of the Crown of England by his cutting Crosse capers upon the dust of one of our Royall Monarchs whereas he is forbid to speak evill of dignities Judge 8. the Prophets boldly reproved Princes 2 Kings 58. but it was to reclaim their Vices not to traduce their persons they may be reproved being alive when as by that means amendment may be wrought upon them or else by vexation they will be grieved Against Ruling Princes but these ends cannot be in any reproving of a person that is Dead Saint Paul withstood Peter to his face but backbiting defileth a mans own soul Eccles 21.28 yet the Doctor not caring for to follow these Presidents takes a liberty to himself to rake in the quiet Urn of a deceased Prince and with insultation to inscribe a new Epitaph Here lies no King The Doctor his injury to Henry 8. Kings being called Gods but such an one as the Poets fain Jupiter who was transformed into a Beast for the Love of Women which unworthy act of the Doctors gives me occasion to say of him as Saint Jude saith of false Prophets As beasts without reason they speak evill of these things they know not It is reported that when Silla set one on work to kill Marius when the Vassall came to put into execution that bloody command he beheld such Majesty in his face that his conscience presently was prict with the horrour of the act his heart failed him his flesh trembled and his hand knew not how to mannage that black instrument which should have pierced that noble Cask and let his Royall liquor to the ground And no lesse Majesty as our Stories mention dwelt in the Princely countenance of our noble Henry so that should the Doctor have appeared before him as a traducer of his worthy and noblenesse with one majestick frown he would have sent his Satyricall spirit to the infernall shades to study invectives Principem populi non maledices was Moses precept Exod. 22. and Saint Paul appears of that rule Acts 23.5 and by the 74 Cann of the Apostles a severe censure was to be against any that should be called Contumeliosus in Magistratum So that the Doctors reviling of Hen. 8. is on his part inexcusable now let me examine whether I may not incur the same censure by setting forth the Errours of the Romane Bishops and I conceive under favour I may not 1. Because I doe it not out of any malignity towards their persons but their Profession of Vice under the hood of godlinesse and infallibility 2. Because whilst she perswaded others of the truth of her Church for the mark of sanctity of life and yet her Bishop the visible Head of that Church is evill they hereby
Urim and Thummim he is no Ark with the Tables of God the Rod of Aaron or the golden pot of Manna that the Papists should put such confidence in him take a view of him as he is decyphered to us by their own writers Peter de Alliaco a Cardinal in libde reform Eccl. grants that there were many things amiss in the Romane Church which had need of reformation both in faith and manners and Adrian the sixth confesseth that all the mischiefs in the Church proceeded from the Popes and promised reformation to the Germanes by his Legate Cheregalus Saint Bernard in sermone primo in conversione St. Pauli long since complained of the iniquity of Popes and of the dissoluteness of Priests and people The Bishop of Bitonto preaching in the first session of the councel of Trent acknowledgeth the Apostacy of the Church of Rome in the chief heads both of doctrine and of life Chrysostome 30. Hom. in 12 Mat. calls them dry men which have not the dew of Gods Word in their breasts which he plainly expresses of the Bishops of Rome Nicolas Lyra who writ three hundred yeers since says Ab Ecclesia Romana jam diu est quod recessit gratia and Johannes Episcopus Chemensis one of Romes Religion confesses in his book intituled Onus Ecclesiae chap. 9. Ecce Roma nunc est vorago mammon inferni ubi diabolus totius avaritiae Capitaneus Je. ch 12. residet Gerson a man of great esteem amongst the fathers of the councel of Constance and Chanceler of Paris in prima parte exam doctr consid 2. saith that the resolution of the Pope alone in things pertaining to faith doth not tye a man to believe it and infinite of other presidents of this nature might be produced all concurring to this point that the Church of Rome hath and may err For is this any more but what other Churches have done as for example Particular Churches have and may err the Church of Galatia is said to have erred not as the Church of Corinth which erred but in part some of her Church denying the resurrection 1 Cor. 15.12 but totally about the matters of justification Gal. 3.1 O foolish Galatians who hath bewitched you that you should not obey the truth and the Churches of Ephesus Pergamus Thyatira Sardis and Laodicea are blamed by Saint John in his Revelation for their erring from the truth and this is a truth so manifest that the Papists themselves cannot deny onely they would excuse the Church of Rome by the subtle sophistry of humane invention and salve the errors of Romes Church with distinction they confess to their own shame that Bishops per se may err which Bellarmine in his book de conc cap. 2. in fine Sine dubio singuli Episcopi errare possint aliquando errant inter se quandoque dissentiunt so that we may not know which of them to follow How the Pope may crr and if this be so I wonder he should elswhere contradict himself maintaining the Pope alone infallible of which contradiction he having been formerly taxed he was put to his trumps and plaid another distinction that he might err in matter of fact not of faith in matter of fact as concerning the condemnation of this or that Bishop c. but in matters of faith he cannot judicially err and thus the learned Cardinal being too busie in this point Meanders himself into contradictions without satisfactory conclusions to the principal point according to that saying of Solomon Eccl. 12.12 There is no end of making many books The stout maintainers of his Holiness infallibily being thus tript in their own devices and forced to wave the quarrel being overcome with the strength of Reason drawn from divine examples and the testimony of many learned Authors and being thorowly convinced yet notwithstanding out of a self-love and pertainacy to maintaine their pontificial patron having drawn from their education blind principles of his justification will not quite desist but scrue their wits to new inventions to deceive the world perswading the world that they are not overcome with dispute nor his Holiness right to infallibily though shaken quite blown up by the root and therefore they publish to the world that notwithstanding all gainesaying the Church of Rome is infallible with this distinction that her Bishop per se may err but not when the Bishops are met together then they cannot err To which I answer If the Bishop of Rome may err per se then the late councels of Laterane and Trent which have declared him above councels have thereby consented that the Church of Rome may err or else if it be to be understood that the Pope of Rome with his other Bishops of Rome cannot err they do hereby make the private Councel of Rome above the general Councel which is absurd and utterly against all principles of reason and divinity I will therefore proceed to shew that Councels have erred and therefore in no respect whatsoever is the Church of Rome infallible The Pope is declared above Councels General Councels have erred in matter of faith and yet he is confessed to be fallible per se And whereas he would force a distinction upon the world that he may err as a man not as a Pope judicially Ante ch 6. I have elswhere answered to that point it now remaines to look upon him in his chaire Infra with his Court of Cardinals about him to examine his judical proceedings and try if they be infallible I would fain know in what capacity the Pope claims this infallibility by the power of succession from Peter I have proved he cannot claime it and if he claime it as from the consent of the late councels then is this his politick capacity dirivative from thence and must not exalt it self above the Primitive or admit that those councels declared the then present Popes infallible for such certain notes of sanctity as was to them discovered it doth not follow that their successors should be so But that I may put all scruples out of mens hearts concerning this point I will prove that those Councels in themselves were not infallible and much less any substituted power of judicature which must have its rise from them The councel of Carthage decreed rebaptisation of those that were Baptised by Hereticks Councils erred in matter of faith this Saint Austine after opposed and the Councel of Trent Sess 7. can 4. repealed this and allowed of such baptisme to be sufficient if done in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost The second councel of Nice was diametrically against the councel of Constantinople in matters of Images the one approving the other condemning the use of them in the Church The councels of Constantinople and Basil decreed the councels to be above the Pope and the councels of Laterane and Trent decreed the Pope above councels Fox 132. Pope John the tenth called a
expectations and other proceedings of the Popes of Rome's pretensed Jurisdiction And 't was thought by many that H. 4. would have revived this which many conceive did given occasion to shorten his days And as these Provincials were free and immune without appealing to the See of Rome so had England the same priviledge and jurisdiction nor did she ever in any businesses appeal to Rome she being a distinct Province of old and declared by the Bishop of Rome Eleutherius that the King is Vicarius summus infra Regna might call Councils and by the ensuing Liberties granted to Provincials by the first Councils might make Rules of Faith to which the people by the Princes consent were bound and this to be without appealing to the See of Rome and never before Becket's business Becket's câ—se ante Chap. 4. of which I have already spoken in the fourth Chapter did the Pope intermeddle here Besides that business of Becket was betwixt the King and his own Clergie about a Law made at Clerudun by which Law Ecclesiastical persons were not to be freed by Church-priviledge from murder and one Brock a Monk after committing a murder was by contrivance of Becket and others delivered from publike Justice whereupon the variance began and the Pope excommunicating the King the King was forced through necessity of State at that time to submit yet nevertheless in the Articles made between the King and Pope Alexander at that time it was conditioned amongst other things that the King should suffer the people of England to appeal to Rome as appears by the Annals of those days which is an argument it was not before due to the See of Rome And indeed that it was not due is a truth so manifest and a right and jurisdiction belonging to every Province so unquestionably that I will forbear to insist any further upon this particular and submit to the Reader whether upon what I have here fairly laid down we in England may not call a Council without appealing to the See of Rome For as for that concession of H. 2. it was afterwards declared void it being a thing not properly lying within his conusance compass or capacity to grant being a right inherent in his Provincials and those bare Articles forced through necessity of State from the King could no ways oblige the successors in the See of Canterbury and York but that still notwithstanding there may be Provincial Synods in England for reformation of Schism or reconcilement of Controversies as occasion shall require and that without any allowance or approbation of the Pope of Rome For to argue a claim to the Pope to require Appeals from hence by reason of the Articles between H. 2. and Pope Alexander and that the Provinces of Canterbury and York should be thereby bound is no more reasonable then if the Emperour should condition with a Bishop of Canterbury that the Bishops of Rome should appeal to them which I believe his Holiness would not think should bind him or his successor And for that there was no right to be proved before those Articles I say the case is equally just and therefore as the Bishop of Rome for shame must not claim it from this argument of H. 2. so may we in no other respect grant it but that we as I said before may still without his allowance call Provincial Councils for deciding controversies and correction of Schism and Disorders in our Church I must confess that the Doctor has justly reproved some dissentions and varieties of Opinions amongst us in England Sects in England But that excuse he made for the differences which are amongst the Papists salvs up our sore as well as theirs For as the Doctor fol. 236. says They are but Reasonings of private men and the Church not having interposed her Decree may not be properly said differences of our Church or distracted contradictions in our Articles of Faith For should our Church convene a Synod she would either reconcile the differences or condemn them as Hereticks which dissent from her and after that sentence pronounced they are no more of our Church though they may be said to be in our Church according to that of S. John 1 Joh. 2.19 Si ex nob is essent permanserint nobiscum And let me not appear partial in this point to pass it over barely thus without shewing the reasons the Church of England doth not reform these differences sith before in this Treatise Chap. 5. I have taxed the Church of Rome of errour of negligence in this particular The Church of Rome at present is in so flourishing a condition that nothing can stop her unless the private interest of her Pope hinder her to reform the differences that are in her own Church She may convene a Council without any opposition But such is the distressed condition of the Church of England that on a sudden her â—lilies were over-topped with weeds the Sectaries which fed upon wilde olives gave thereof unto the giddy multitude who were presently like cursed children of old Adam tempted to eat that forbidden fruit and having Liberty promised to be masters and lords of the whole Vintage they claim bargain with the merchandizers of holy wares and presently cry down the ancient Husbandmen of the Vineyard Which strange and unheard-of change struck such amazement in the hearts of the people and caused such struglings in nature to digest this new-tempered Potion she was to drink that the whole body of the Land was severed so that till this fit of her sickness be over her ancient Husbandmen cannot nay must not enter into the Vineyard to prune and dress her and to cut off those extravagant branches which like ill weeds have thriven fast and make the whole Plantation seem out of order Let us therefore pray the Lord of the Vineyard that he would restore her Husbandmen unto her that he would repair her walls which are troden down and make up her hedge that she may no longer be eaten up that in stead of these wilâ—e grapes she may bring forth fruits meet for her Lord and Master and that he would strengthen their hearts in this day of visitation and give them patience to undergo the Cross that 's laid upon them and no doubt but in due time he will give her joy for heaviness and turn the hearts of her persecutors to support with the right hand whom they have buffered with the left This is the Lords doing thus to visit her and would it please him to say to the destroying Angel It is enough would he in mercy turn to his Vineyard and have pity on her would he please to restore her beauty that she might rejoyce in her salvation and and that the world might no longer laugh to see Christs disciples weep Joh. 16.20 Then I dare on her behalf promise she would not be slack to reform the enormities committed against Christ and his Truth And as in the mean time she may not justly
significantly there present then they agree with us but if really in the bread then we do not concur in opinion with them for the reasons afore in pare rehearsed and for other reasons hereafter following I might instance many particular reasons against this Romish errour of Transubstantiation as that 1. Nothing was broken eaten drunken and chawed but the accidents of the body because they deny the bread and wine to be the visible elements which is against Reason and all authority or else if they will have a body there That it is without accidents and so they must either make accidents without substances or substances without accidents 2. When the bread mouldeth and turneth into worms or the wine sowreth or turneth into vinegar it is the bread mouldeth and the wine that sowreth Christ is the same yesterday to day and for ever Therefore are the bread and wine substantially there and if they were but accidents then no body could be made thereof as worms or material vinegar 3. Let a dog or cat c. eat of that bread and he is nourished thereby which could not be if the substance remained not 4. The Scripture calleth them bread and wine after consecration which are names of substance not of accidents which if substance remained not it were a meer illusion of our senses and so we with the Jews make Christ a Jugler making things appear to our outward senses which are not 5. The Sacrament had a beginning and hath an end put to it it is to be received in remembrance of Christs death till he come and then to cease Wherefore there can be no real transubstantiated presence of Christ for he is from eternity to eternity 6. If there be a transubstantiated body of Christ then is Christ every day new made and as many Wafers as many Christs which is impossible for his substantial body to be in several places either in the several Wafers or the several places of consecration at one and the same instant of time 7. This doctrine doth impugn the consent of the ancient Catholike Church which de fide professeth and believeth Christ to be made of the nature and substance of his blessed mother and therefore not every day to be made anew of the substance of bread and wine for if it were so then the same body that was crucified is not eaten or else that body which was crucified was made of bread and wine which is flat blasphemy against the holy Ghost by whose operation Christ was made and born of the flesh of his mother and suffered upon the Cross for the salvation of all believers Which Christ is no otherwise joyned to the elements in this Sacrament but Sacramentally as the holy Ghost in Baptism is joyned to the water not that the holy Spirit is made of the substance of the water or the water turned into the holy Ghost 8. It is against the express Scripture and Symbole of Faith grounded upon that Scripture which teaches that Christ concerning his body and humane nature is in heaven We believe that he was conceived of the holy Ghost born of the Virgin Mary suffered under Pontius Pilate was crucified dead buried that he descended into hell the third day he rose again from the dead and ascended into heaven and sits at the right hand of God the Father from whence he shall come to judge both quick and dead Christ said to his disciples I leave the world Joh. 16. and Mat. 26. Ye shall ever have poor folks with you but me ye shall not have always Mark 16. He was taken up into heaven and sits at the right hand of his Father Col. 1.3 Heb. 8. and Heb. 10. He sits continually at the right hand of God And Saint Peter Act. 3. faith that the heavens shall contain him until the time that all things shall be restored And Christ himself gave warning of this errour aforehand in Matth. 24. saying The time will come when there shall be many deceivers in the world which shall say Here is Christ and there is Christ but believe them not Thus the whole current of the Scripture makes against this Romish errour of Transubstantiation And because the Papists may not object against us that it is a novel interpretation or our mis-understanding of Scripture in this point I will make it manifest that the Primitive Church never taught this doctrine of Transubstantiation but were utterly against it as may appear by the testimony of these ancient Fathers Origen upon Matthew Tract 33. The Fathers against Transubstantiation saith Christ hath two natures God and Man as God he is with us always unto the end of the world as man he is not He is gone hence and absent in his Humanity but is always present in his Divinity S. Austin in his Epist 55. ad Dardanium Christ as concerning his Manhood is now there from whence he shall come to judge both quick and dead and as he ascended so shall he come in the self-same form and substance to the which he gave immortality but thereby did not change the nature Now saith he after this form we must not say that he is everywhere for we must take heed saith he that we do not so stablish his Divinity that we take away the verity of his body Cyril upon S. John lib. 6. cap. 14. Christ took away from hence the presence of his body but in the majesty of his Godhead he is everywhere he according to his promise is with his disciples even unto the end of the world S. Ambrose upon Luke lib. 10. cap. 24. We must not seek Christ upon earth but in heaven where he sits at the right hand of God And S. Gregory in Hom. Pasch saith Christ is not here in the presence of his flesh and yet as he is God he is absent nowhere by the presence of his majestie all unanimously and Apostolike being of one consent in this that Christ as touching his humanity is onely in heaven at the right hand of God And particularly these Fathers following are absolutely against this very point of Transubstantiation Justinus The Fathers against Transubstantiation an ancient Writer and holy Martyr who wrote about an hundred yeers after Christ in his second Apologie saith that the bread and wine in the Sacrament are not to be taken as other meats and drinks be they being purposely ordained to give thanks to God in and therefore be called Eucharistia and be called the body and blood of Christ and yet the same meat and drink be changed into our flesh and blood and nourish our bodies By which it is plain that the substance of the elements remain because saith he they are changed into flesh and blood and nourish our bodies Irenaeus contr Valent. lib. 1. c. 4. who wrote about 150 yeers after Christ and was a disciple of Polycarpus who was a disciple of John the Evangelist says The bread wherein we give thanks to God hath two things
in it one earthly another heavenly by the heavenly understanding the sanctification which cometh by the invocation of the name of God and by the earthly the substance of bread which doth nourish our bodies Shortly after Irenaeus was Origen about 200 yeers after Christ who affirms in Matth. cap. 15. that the material bread remains whose matter availeth nothing but goeth down into the belly and is voided downward but the Word spoke upon the bread is it that availeth Eusebius Emissaenus who wrote about 300 yeers after Christ de consecrat dist 2. says that outwardly was nothing changed all the change was inwardly As man made new in Baptism doth visibly remain in the same measure receiving a new inward without making any change in the outward man not seen not felt but believed so likewise when thou dost go up to the altar to receive the spiritual meat in thy faith look upon the body and blood of Christ and feed upon him with thy inward man By which it is plain that it is onely a spiritual change by faith not an outward and corporal change Epiphanius contra Haereses lib. 3. tom 2. The bread saith he is meat but the vertue that is in it giveth life Chrysostome who wrote about 420 yeers after Christ ad Caesarium Monachum The bread saith he before it is consecrate is called bread but after it is consecrate it is delivered from the name of bread and exalted to the name of the Lords body although the nature of the bread doth still remain S. Austin who lived about the same time in Sermone ad Infantes That which you see on the Altar is the bread and the cup which your eyes shew you is the wine but faith sheweth you that that bread is the body and that cup the blood of Christ Gelasius Bishop of Rome contra Eutichem Nestorium proving the Godhead and Humanity of Christ he enforceth it with two reasons the one drawn from the example of Man who being but one is made of two parts and hath two natures the Body and the Soul the other drawn from the Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ which saith he is a godly thing and yet the nature of the bread and wine do not cease to be there still This was the opinion of the Fathers of those days and thus Transubstantiation is a new doctrine and no otherwise held the Church of Rome for a thousand yeers after Christ there being never so much as question made about this point for a thousand yeers compleat the time of Satans being let at large Apoc. 20. at which time by reason of some pretended miracles this doctrine was by the private opinion of some men set abroach which being once published it being the nature of evil weeds to spread and grow fast if once they get rooting in any garden it presently got abettors and champions to justifie it against all opposers some out of curiosity of Wit striving to blinde Truth with subtil reasons others out of dulness of apprehension God having withdrawn his Spirit from them were given up to this delusion so that in 60 yeers this new bantling wanted not foster-fathers to nourish it up to a greater and fuller growth A mongst the rest one Paschasius was one that first publikely maintained it and after him the Popes enclined to this opinion insomuch that Berengarius a French-man and Arch-deacon of Anjou opposing this Heresie was himself censured of that he urged against the then Pope of Rome and was the first that ever was questioned for maintaining against this doctrine of Transubstantiation and the Pope adhering to the adverse party which was for Transubstantiation Berengarius was forced to recant the Councel of Vorcellense held 1051. swaying against him which opinion of his he again resumed and did recognize the Truth again after that the then-Pope was dead which when Pope Nicolas 2. heard of he sent his busie agent and Cardinal-Chaplain Hildebrand into France to bring Berengerius under coram nobis who being sore troubled and molested and seeing by the faction of the Pope and Hildebrand that the current was against him through the treachery of a base timorous nature he suffered his noble parts his intellects to be clouded with the mists of the times errour and tamely did recant his former tenents and did therefore take an Oath never to oppose that doctrine of his Holiliness in this point of Transubstantiation And thus this doctrine began And although Pope Nicolas did avouch this doctrine in a Councel at Laterane held anno 1059. Ante chap. 14. and there framed the term of Transubstantiation yet notwithstanding this pretty Papal babe of Heresie was Christned and put forth to nurse yet nevertheless it grew not to be free and to bear rule till 1215. when Pope Innocent the third manumitted the stripling and by another Lateran-Councel did decree this doctrine as a point of Catholike Faith enjoyning all to the obedience thereof upon pain of Hetesie Johannes Scotus who was called Duns lib. 4. writing of this matter saith that the words of the Scripture might be expounded more easily and plainly without Transubstantiation but it pleased the Church to chuse this sense which is more hard being moved thereunto most chiefly because that of the Sacraments men ought to hold as the holy Church of Rome doth hold Which kinde of blinde obedience Blinde obedience makes the Popish Religion in no better condition then the State of Athens was whilst it was governed by the arbitrary power of a standing Legislative Councel which daily gave new Laws unto the people so that the people could not by any known Rule say their clothes were their own all the Law by which they derived any property being under an arbitrary power insomuch that as they were not secure by walking after any known Law so neither was it safe for them to rely upon such new Laws as the Councel it self proposed the Councel altering every day her own Laws as time administred occasion for self-advantage so that Athens was in a miserable condition during this slavery of her Legislative power not dissolvable by any Authority the people not having liberty to dissolve it and to call as occasion shall require a Councel to redress grievances and not otherwise to continue but to be dissolved that so in the intervals they might know what Law stood good and unalterable amongst them Even so stands the Religion of the Papists Now that the Pope is declared above Councels and that he may continually prescribe Rules of Faith by vertue thereof their Religion is a meer nose of wax alterable at his will and pleasure who has a faithful tribe of Ignations which will blandish his new doctrines and make the people believe they are but growings in faith whenas they are diametrically opposite to the Catholike Faith of the Primitive Church but if it stand for conveniency or advantage to the Pope and his creatures it must be believed
as a matter of faith and that upon pain of damnation as witness this novel point and some others which are of later times crept into that Church And when any thing of Papal will and interest must be held forth to the other Churches then is the Lateran at Rome pitched upon Ante chap. 14. as I have formerly said as the onely convenient place to have the matter debated it being there likely to receive the least opposition by reason his Holiness is at hand to take notice of his enemies and to punish them and to flatter and promote such as stand for his Papal pleasure In this Councel of Laterane The Councel of Laterane chap. 17. likewise was hatched that other Cockatrice that strange brazen-fac'd and staring opinion of deposing Kings from which root of bitterness springs many tart branches of dangerous and poysonful Errours the nauseating juyce of whose sowre grapes being given to some other Churches to drink it hath intoxicated them making their Vertigious heads turn after the Laterane Weather-cock and in their brain-sick fit conceit that her high-reared Spire is the onely supporter of the heavenly Pole whilst the sober and discreet Christian knows that her proud top being exalted to that height is but so much the neereâ— the pattern of Babels Tower And whilst they think she is dignified before others her head being lifted above them others know she hath not whereof to boast unless in this That shee has the upper room in Satan 's airy principality which how much the higher she is lifted she is but thereby rendered more subject to be muffled with the black contractions of the Devil's Cimerian clouds of Errours And though the top thereof be forged out of that material Sword as is by the Romish Legends maintained which cut off Saint John Baptist's head it should not therefore arrogate to be the onely decolling instrument of Principality and Temporal power But I return to the subject matter of this Chapter That I may the further lay open the errours of the Church of Rome in this particular Miracles the cause of Transubstantiation and that the Papists shall not have whereof to boast in that I said they were induced by Miracles to maintain this doctrine should I pass those Miracles by in silence I will let the Reader know what they were It is reported that a Bishop of Canterbury about the time of this change did shew unto some for their conversion the Host turned into flesh and blood in outward appearance dropping into the Chalice and that thereupon they believed Transubstantiation Another is reported by Paschasius of one Plegildus a Priest of Almain who did see and handle visibly the shape of a childe upon the Altar and after it turned into bread and he was to receive it Another is reported of a Jew-boy who coming into the Church with another boy which was a Christian he saw upon the Altar a little childe torn in pieces and afterwards by portions distributed which he reporting was condemned to be burned but was after rescued from the flame by the Christians These Miracles were the onely arguments used against Berengarius and the convincing perswasions of the facile consciences of those days which how it stands with the doctrine of Christ Joh. 6.63 the practice of the Apostles the profession of the Primitive times and the faith and doctrine of the ancient Fathers let any judge S. Paul says 1 Cor. 11. That which he had received of the Lord Jesus that he delivered That as often as they did eat the bread and drink the cup they shewed the Lords death till he came Saint Paul calls it bread and the Evangelist wine and that after consecration and the Fathers of the Church taught that doctrine with them and Christ himself calls them bread and fruit of the vine and S. Paul The communion of the body And this being the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles though an Angel from heaven should come and teach any other doctrine let him be accursed Gal. 1. Wherefore these miraculous apparitions were no ground for Rome to change her faith in this point If these stories be true they ought to be considered as extraordinary apparitions like the light from heaven which shone about S. Paul These external miraculous apparitions were but to perswade the consciences of Infidels and Heathens to turn to the faith of Christ and to be perswaded of the truth of that Sacrament and not to make the true and already-grounded Christians to change the nature of their faith which is the ground of things hoped for and the evidence of things which are not seen Heb. 11.1 This was to perswade the mis-believing Jew of Christ and of the truth of this blessed Sacrament whereby he was to be made partaker of the benefits of his precious death and passion not to teach the Christian any new doctrine concerning the same These miracles should rather confirm him in his faith received that it was a spiritual banquet in respect that after the apparition as the story runs at the receiving that which was received was become bread again and not to ensnare him into this novel errour which was contrary to Christs doctrine the Apostles preaching and the practice of the Primitive Church But I will no longer insist upon this point I submit to any good Christian whether it be safer to follow Christs explanation of this mystery to be spiritual with which S. Paul and the ancient Fathers do concur then to humour the times and to be observant to the late Popes which about the time of this change were grown great and since have by cunning practices enlarged that power insomuch that now they are declared above Councels and whatsoever they propound must de fide be received upon the score of their infallibility be it never so contrary to the truth of Gods Word And they by this doctrine receiving advantage by their Altar-Sacrifices will not easily be induced to renounce the errour thereof and though never so palpably against the Truth of God yet the Jesuites will maintain it for their Masters advantage this doctrine tending more to his avail then any good to the souls of his flock Wherefore the Church of England having a right to reform errours in her own Province has chosen to cast off this blinde tenent of the Pope and his Parasites and she having the warrant of Christ the rules of the Apostles the practice of the Primitive Church and the consent of the ancient Fathers for her doctrine in this point hath therefore made choice with them in unity of Spirit firmly to hold and maintain that Christ in his humanity is not really and corporally in the Sacrament but figuratively in the outward elements being thereby signified and is spiritually eaten and drunken of the worthy receiver CHAP. XVI Against Communion in one kinde That the Church of Rome's withholding the Cup from the Layty is a novelty against Christs precept and the ancient
Commandment is drawn from the example of Christs precept who himself gave the Cup as well as the Bread and bade them drink as well as eat the one being the outward element to signifie his flesh the other his blood and Christ having said Vnless ye eat the flesh and drink the blood ye have no life in you it follows of necessity and in obedience to the precept that both be given that both be received Wherefore the Doctor might well have spared his twit against the Protestants who do not by that place of John â—â—derstand bare faith as he saith without the outward elements fol. 340. but they do thereby understand the holy Sacrament of Christs body and blood which by the receiving of those outward elements according to Christs institution and the operation of faith is conveyed to the spiritual nourishment of the soul Such weak objections as these against the Protestants gives occasion to the world to suspect the Doctor did not understand the Protestant Religion and that his going to the Romish Church proceeded of ignorance and if so he is less to be blamed for chusing Rome for his Mother Church for unless she reform he may according to such humour be shaddowed under her wing and spend the rest of his dayes in blind obedience and make his own ignorance mother of his devotion The Doctor would perswade that these words import no precept because in respect Christ intended to injoyn no more but the substance to wit really to receive his body and blood which sayes he fol. 341. may be done under one kind 'T is a strange presumption to argue this against the express words of Christ and Saint Paul Do this drink of this Except ye eat the flesh and drink the blood c Which certainly they would never have practised according to these words had it been needless to receive the Cup as well as the Bread whenas they are thereby made all to drink into one Spirit 1 Cor. 12.13 Plutarch reports that Pericles had such skill in wrastling that though he received a fall he would perswade the standers by and the wrastler that cast him that he himself was the Conqueror and such art doth the Doctor use in denying this to be a precept and yet beside the overthrows that Christ and Saint Paul have given him he has crossed legs with himself and given himself the fall So fol. 338. he sayes the Priests receive in both kinds because they offer a sacrifice upon the Cross which sayes he is not perfect without that and if that be not a perfect sacrifice of Christ that suffered without the Cup I desire to know how it came to pass to be a perfect Transubstantion of perfect Christ in the Cake onely to the people and not to the Priest unless he will confess the people receive nor the same body the Priest doth offer I for my part know not how this should be and desire to be better informed herein otherwise to persist to maintain the Cup to be necessarily given to the people We do not when we receive his flesh by the Bread and his blood by the Wine receive dead Christ as the Doctor would infer fol. 342. because we separate the blood from the flesh for this were to tax Christ of giving and the Apostles of receiving dead Christ which is gross and impious Besides he himself has answered himself as to that objection fol. 338. for saith he the Priest receiving under both doth not receive two Sacraments because the Sacrament is essentially and entirely contained under either kind and being received both at once they make but one refection signifying one thing and producing one effect no more saith he then 6 or 7 dishes of meat make but one dinner Now as the Priest doth not divide the flesh and blood and receive two Sacraments no more do we and if the Doctor would have advisedly considered with himself when he taxed us in this he might easily have perceived that he did through our sides wound Christ and his Apostles nay the Church of Rome it self for that she administred and her people received in both kinds and after the same manner and unless he can shew stronger reasons then these for her change the Church of England desires her not to censure too severely of her for not conforming with her for that she is not easily induced to forsake the practice of Christ and his Apostles and for that the Sacrament is to be administred in remembrance of Christ she conceives we ought not to forget the manner of Christs institution were there no precept for it but especially sith we are enjoyned so to do we desire to drink the blood and to eat the flesh that we may have eternal life thereby We must drink his blood Eating and drinking as well as eat his flesh and although as the Doctor affirms admitting Transubstantiation we may be said to drink that that is drinkable and eat that that is eatable yet we are to remember the end for which we are commanded to drink that blood which is in remembrance that Christs blood was shed This Cup is my blood in the new Testament which is shed for many for the remission of sins Matth. 26.28 And Saint Paul witnessing that it was Christs will it should be drunk in remembrance thereof 1 Cor. 11. which cannot be properly signified in the Cake there being no outward Element to represent the shedding of Christr blood and precious price of our redemption and for which end this Sacrament was ordained Besides Christ calls himself the Vine as well as the Bread and we hereby become Branches lively growing and budding upon our ever-living Root Christ Jesus whose holy institution whilst we follow and reject any other rule of humane institution we may truly say We bear not the Root but the Root beareth us Rom. 11.18 The Doctor 3. And taken for or by the Doctors construction to avoid the precept of Christ in relation to the Cup takes upon him to construe and for or Joh. 6.53 Except ye eat the flesh and drink the blood he reads it or drink the blood ye have no life in you And this he would have done for avoiding of contradiction because that in the same Chapter eternal life is promised to them that eat onely To which I answer The Bread is not Sacramentally so often in Scripture mentioned alone as it is with the Cup joyntly wherefore if avoiding contradiction be the reason then must we not admit or for and in that of John and 1 Cor. 11.27 For if so then we contradict 1 Cor. 10. Our Fathers did eat the same spiritual meat and drink the same spiritual drink Saint Cyprian lib. 2. Epist 3. sayes this was prefigured by the bread and wine which Melchizedek gave to Abraham Gen. 14. and likewise that text of the 1 Cor. 11.28 Let a man examine himself and so let him eat and drink c. And we further do hereby contradict all
superfluous as to the cup the Church of Rome administers in one kind as if nothing were perfect and to be received in the Catholick Church but what his Holiness please to teach and allow And their reasons are so weak they offer for such their alterations that any one may plainly discern it is Will not Reason brings her into such changes Who but knows that Christ as he was man and the Apostles likewise were obnoxious to the same inconveniences of spilling the Wine as the Doctor alledges or part sticking upon their beards as the people of these dayes are But they knowing that it was Christs order to separate the cup from the bread and give it to be divided amongst them thereby denoting to them how his blood should be separated from his flesh and by Christ left as a pattern for them to follow and to have continuance till his comming again they by eating the bread and drinking the cup shew the Lords death till he come and for that the same was to be continued in remembrance thereof and they being commanded likewise hereunto Drink ye all of this Let a man examine himself and let him eat and let him drink They would not and we dare not admit of Romes alteration but desire of God to hold fast this truth we have received and that it would please him to confirm us herein that we may be blameless in the day of the Lord Jesus praying that all other Churches as in this so in all other points of faith and doctrine may be of one consent and firmly united together in one mind and one judgement that we may all proceed in one Rule and walk together as followers of Christ and his Apostles having them for an ensample to us that we may with one mind and one mouth praise God even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ Amen CHAP. XVII That the Lyturgie and private Prayers ought not to be in an unknown Language which the Congregation doth not understand WHereas Saint Paul in the 1 Cor. 14. is against giving of thanks or praying without understanding because the hearer is not edified nor can say Amen to he knows not what the Doctor to help the lame Dogg over the style and to clear his new step-mother the Church of Rome from the errors which other Churches lay to her charge for that she restrains her Prayers and her Lyturgy universally to the Latine tongue would needs have us to understand that S. Paul doth not hereby impugne the Lyturgie of the Church of Rome which sayes he was for the service and praise of God and he to whom it is directed understands any tongue but it is meant sayes he of Church-meetings which were onely for instruction and edification of the Auditors and not at all to be understood to gainsay the Lyturgie of Romes Church To which I answer 1. S. Paul's meaning is as well meant of the one as of the other for vers 26. When ye come says he together according as every one hath a tongue or hath interpretation let it be done to edifying By which it is plain that both praises and prayers Psalms as well as doctrine ought to be with understanding For vers 28. If any man hath an unknown tongue let him keep silence in the Church and speak to himself and to God That man that hath the spirit of Tongues may speak to God and himself but he must be silent to others unless they can understand him for how shall they say Amen to they know not what God requires from us the heart Give me thine heart David desired to praise the Lord in soul and spirit Praise the Lord O my soul and all that is within me praise his holy Name We must not think that a little lip-labour to say Amen to we know not what can be acceptable unto God 1 Sam. 1. Hannah prayed in her heart to the Lord. Not every one that saith Lord Lord shall be saved Matth. 7. God doth not require lip-service he condemned the Scribes and Pharisees who drew neer unto him with their lips but their hearts were far off Matth. 15. We are commanded to serve God with all our heart and soul Josh 24. We must sing and make melody to the Lord in our hearts Ephes 5. We must approve that which is pleasing to the Lord vers 10. God is King of all the earth sing ye praises therefore with understanding By all which and many more places of Scripture it is plain that the service of the Congregation it must be with the heart that is with the understanding We must not think that God is well pleased with the peoples devotion that proceeds not from the heart I will for the better satisfaction of those that seem to be satisfied with the Doctor 's exposition of S. Paul offer these reasons to his consideration against those he has propounded to justifie the Romane Lyturgie universally Platina writes Laâ—ne service first set up that the first Latine Service that ever was at Constantinople was anno 687. whenas the sixth Councel there held was assembled for before that it was never had in the Latine but in the Greek or Hebrew Tongue But now was the Pope grown to be universal by the late donation of Phocas for countenancing his murder of Mauritius and it did not stand with his new-acquired honour and dignity that the Language of any other Church should be preferred before that of Rome and therefore at a General Councel the representative of the several Churches must the Language of the Romane See be preferred before any other For as the Pope was universal Head he must needs have an Universal Tongue otherwise his Universality were dumb And this was the true ground of composing the Latine Lyturgie and not as the Doctor would perswade us because it was the most general Tongue for whenas this was consented unto by many other Bishops to please the Lordly Pope the Emperours great favourite it gave occasion for the spreading of that Language because the Service began to be in many places in it not that it was so copious or known a Tongue before Nor doth the reason the Doctor brings justifie but rather condemn the Latine Lyturgie for saith he the Lyturgie of the Eastern Churches was used in Greek though all the Eastern parts spoke not that Language therefore why may not Rome prescribe a Lyturgie in Latine to the Western Churches To which I answer It was thought fit by the Fathers of the Primitive Church to have one uniform Lyturgie in all the Churches upon earth and â—o that end did those then-visible Churches use the Greek Tongue Why has the Church of Rome set up another form By this the Doctor contradicts her Antiquity and the other mark that she should never have separated from a Society more ancient then her self or else denâ—es her Universality in that she is but to prescribe a Latine Lyturgie to the Western Churcbes and so he makes those marks
by which he would have her distinguished to be a true Church to become Brands and Stigmatizings of her errors and falling from the Primitive Church 3. Another reason the Doctor enforces is this that there are many words in peoples Languages which are hard to be understood and therefore they may as well have all in Latine for that the common people do not understand every word they speak This seems to me a very strange Argument whilst he thus strives to clear this point he doth more condemn it or obscure the truth for this is ignotum per ignotius because the common people do not understand all the words of their Language therefore they shall understand none at all he may perchance perswade some fool that is blind of the one eye to put out the other to make them both alike but he must bring stronger reasons and prove himself a better Scholar else it will be hard for him to turn our English into Latine and make the Lyturgie of other Churches to speak the Romane tongue When Vitalianus decreed the Latine service Greek was more generally known then the Latine insomuch that in several parts of Italy the Latine was not spoken as in Calabria the Greek was spoken in Itruria the Tuscan in Apulia the Mesapian tongue the Latine being onely the proper language of the territories of Latium in which Rome is situate neither was any thing generall wrote but in the Greek tongue so that if it was convenient to have the Lyturgie in one tongue universally the alteration from the Greek into Latine was at first unlawful in respect of the narrowness of the language in those daies it being done onely out of ostentation and for the glory of the Romane See to make others receive the Latine Lyturgie after she had surreptitiously acquired the title of Universality 4. Whereas the Doctor alledges If the Lyturgie should be in distinct proper languages of several people whether could the Church of Rome understand the errors therein nor they be sure there were none in it This argues Romes intolerable arrogancy as if none could be Christians which had not received the faith from her whenas the Apostles were sent to all Nations and preached the Gospel in their own languages and having received the faith by Apostolical plantation it is equally just with them to correct Rome as she to correct them both being herein bound to the Discipline of a general Councel sending thither some one or other which shall in some general language there make known their case Besides this argument of the Doctors has given Rome a most deadly blow for if Rome be the onely Catholick Church and her Bishop have all Apostolical power devolved upon her own head certainly she is either enabled to teach all Nations or else it will follow that those people which have not yet received the faith must still remain in darkness because Rome wants the gift of interpretation of tongues and knows not how to make them understand the Gospel of Jesus and for that faith comes by hearing not by dumb shewes unless Rome be able to make such people understand service and prayer they will think her Priests are mad It is not his praising God with an understanding heart that can edifie them though the Priest should praise the Lord upon the Harp they will but think as the Negroes did when they first heard Bag-pipes that they were living creatures and ascribe Deity to them and so instead of preaching Jesus or offering praise to him they would make the people commit Idolatry if the Priest knew not how to perswade them of their errors much less to make them sensible of the Church of Rome's prescribed rules and so by this means the Doctor has confessed the people to want Brains correspondent to his universal head And whereas the Doctor alledges The difference of languages that all Languages are not of equal extent and therefore incongruities would arise Besides sayes he the inconvenience of having it in Latine is but in part and that to the ignorant I conceive these reasons make rather against it then otherwise It is true all Languages are not of the same latitude in some Languages one word comprehending several word in another language God has given to every Nation several gifts of tongues Reason taught men to reduce out of confused and indictinct sounds articulate sillables and peculiar words to signifie their own meaning and time and Art hath perfected those beginnings so that now every Nation abounds in its own language the languages of the Nations being at first made different according to the different imaginations of several people at the first composing of such languages but yet nothing that is imaginable but they have or can give a name whereby to represent to their senses the nature of the thing or if they already have a name for any thing and do not know the reason of that denomination yet they rest satisfied with the articulate sound of the words which brings unto their mind the thing intended and meant Now because of those several Nations and people which at first invented several different languages insomuch that in the language of one Country one word may comprehend a parephrasis of another that therefore such a Countries language is too short it must not be imagined For though to strangers it seem imperfect yet amongst themselves it is sufficiently to describe the thing intended wherefore I should think that understanding the Doctors objection it were fit that every Nation had a Lyturgie in its own proper language it perchance may seem to some to breed incongruities but indeed it doth not it denotes the difference of languages in respect of latitude or extent but it retains a royal and concuring sense and understanding of the thing presented to their fancy without which the people must for ever remain in darkness and lockt up in ignorance which was not Gods will he commanded his Apostles to teach all Nations and sent them especially to the lost sheep of the house of Israel Matth. 10. God is light and Jesus is the tender day-spring from on high which hath visited us to give light to them that sit in darkness and in the shadow of death and to guide our feet in the way of peace Wherefore for Rome to take away this light to let this inconvenience as the Doctor says to be upon the ignorant is not to discharge the office of Peter and Paul who were sent out to bring into light them that sit in darkness Matth. 4. To them that sate in darkness is light risen up Jesus came into the world a light says S. John John 12.46 that whosoever believeth in him should not abide in darkness Whether Jewes or Gentiles we are one sheep under one Shepherd Christ Jesus John 10.16 Wherefore for the Doctor to extenuate this error of Rome to say that the inconvenience is onely to the ignorant is to me a strange Divinity for The whole
and praise ought to be in faith Whatsoever ye ask if ye believe ye shall receive it Matth. 21.22 We must come unto the Father in the Sons Name and he will hear us ask and he will do it John 14.14 By faith in Jesus we have boldness and entrance with confidence Eph. 3.12 So that Whatsoever we desire when we pray believe that we shall have it and it shall be done unto us Mark 11.24 But without faith it is impossible to please God For He that cometh to God must believe that God is and that he is a rewarder of them that seek him Heb. 11. And without faith our prayer turns into sin for Whatsoever is not of faith is sinne Rom. 14.23 So then for any society to come to Divine service in a Tonge they do not understand their prayer and praise cannot be of faith in respect they know not what they ask their Priest is their mouth and they cannot in heart go along with him because they understand not what he sayes and their saying Amen to they know not what cannot be acceptable unto God according as S. Paul writes to the Romanes Rom. 10.14 How shall we call on him in whom we have not believed and how shall we believe in him of whom we have not heard We must believe in him and by him and by him offer the sacrifice of praise to God we must draw neer unto him with a pure heart in the assurance of faith Heh 10.22 This was the Doctrine of the Apostles and this was the practice of the Primitive Churches Theodoret lib. 5. de Graec. affect curat pag. 521. telleth us that in his time which was about 440 years after Christ the Scriptures were translated into all manner of languages and that they were not onely understood of Doctors and Masters of the Church but of Lay-people and common Artificers Hebraici libri non modo in Graecum Idioma conversi sunt sed in Romanam Aegyptam Persicam Judicam Armenicam Scyithicam linguam semelque ut dicam in omnes linguas quibus ad hunc diem nationes utuntur It was then the practice that every Nation should have the Scriptures in their own Tongue which Bellarmine unawares confessed Bellarm. Chap. 106. Tom. 1. col 191. lib. 4. de verb. Dei Script cap 11. But such is the pride and vain-glory of the Popes of Rome that they will not admit this in these latter dayes for since the Bishop of Rome grew up to be the Universal head all Churches must receive anew the Scriptures in their own Tongue and not onely so but their Lyturgies too burning such Scriptures as the people understand in their own vulgar Tongue and excommunicating all persons of the Laity be they neveâ— so well learned that shall reason of matters of faith or dispute of his power commanding Latine Service and Latine Homilies to the vulgar and though they cannot understand it yet he has Decreed it shall be so 6 Decret lib. 5. cap. quicunque By which means he thinks to gain an opinion of being the onely Planter of those Churches whenas indeed he is but a busie intruder upon the Apostolical foundations of others and in this his Holiness has a further reach for by this means he pleads Authority to rule over them producing this in evidence against them should they oppose him that Conqueror-like he has given them a Law in the proper language of Rome And if any questions should arise concerning any points taught in those Translations he likewise did by this means obtain the priviledge to be the Interpreter it being more proper to Rome to unfold the sense of that language than to any other place And thus and for those ends did the Popes of Rome obtrude the Latine Lyturgies upon several Churches which how it agrees with the Law Divine for the work of the Ministry for the gathering of the Saints and for the edification of the body of Christ till we all meet together in the unity of the faith and knowledge of the Son of God let the holy Spirit of that God and the Angels of the several Churches witness CHAP. XVIII The Conclusion Wherein the Reformation of England is justified notwithstanding the Objections of Rome against it and that the Pope was the cause of the Protestant Churches their separations from the Church of Rome I Have briefly touched most of those points which the Doctor hath urged against the Protestants wherein I conceive the Church of England doth differ from the Church of Rome and for that it is not my desire to make the breaches wider but if possible to reconcile them into one and to make up the gap of separation betwixt them I now hasten to a conclusion Yet let not any one censure me as if I were weary of my enterprize because to some particular Chapters I have not given particular answers for I conceive that the scope of their matter is sufficiently refuted in this discourse and those Chapters not concerning any points of controversie betwixt us any further than I have already answered I did therefore forbear to multiply words against the Doctor but hastned to the conclusion The Doctor in his 22. and 23. Chapters doth flutter with the Lapwing and makes most bussle when he is furthest off the Nest He had formerly cast his sting and there in conclusion ends with buzzing and noise onely he rolls up himself in Rhetorick and with the Seriphian Froggs of which Pliny writes lib. 8. cap. 85. he is clamorous in invectives he like an untamed Colt having leaped the Pale which kept him in a safe and fitting Pasture ranges up and down the miry paths throwing up dirt behind him till at length having run himself out of breath he becomes tame and is content to take scraps at the Jesuites hands he feeds upon the Orts of Parsons Saunders and such like Renegadoes he has turned away his face from England's Sion in whose true mirror of divinity he might have seen the image of Christ himself and his own face beauteous as a Son of that Church but now having turned aside he has forgot what manner of man he was or what before he had beheld by the help of the reflections and now he altogether contemplates upon a false gloss which doth present unto him deceiving objects on the one hand is the Church of England presented to him black and ugly being transformed by the false Vail they and such like have put upon her for which they are with all indulgence cherished and encouraged by his Holiness according to the saying of Salomon Prov. 26.22 The words of a Tale-bearer are as flatterings and they go down into his belly But on the other hand the Church of Rome is set out with all the Art imaginable so that any who will give up himself unto the speculative Religion of Popery is cheated into an opinion of Romes beauty and comliness and into a â—aâ—â—en and deâ—â—â—tation of the Protestâ—nt Religion because
wine we do signifie the flesh and blood which he offered for us And the Old Testament saith he was instituted in blood because that blood was a witness of Gods benefits in signification and figure whereof we take the mystical cup of his blood for the tuition of our body and soul he and many more concurring in judgement in this point that the Sacramental bread and wine are not corporally and really the natural substance of the flesh and blood of Christ but that they are similitudes significations figures and sâ—gnes of his body and blood and therefore be called and have the name of his flesh and blood and were but indeed tokens thereof and meant of a spiritual grace as Christ witnesses The words which he spake were spirit and life Joh. 6. It was bread which he took it was wine which he gave saying I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine till I drink it with you in my Fathers kingdom They were the elementary parts of the Sacrament signifying the spiritual substance of his body and blood And when he took the bread and the cup and said This is my body this is my blood it is manifest by what I have already spoken that that saying was a figurative speech To maintain that it was very flesh and very blood Christ gave to his disciples Bread and wide are the outward elements of the invisible grace doth utterly destroy the nature of a Sacrament both according to the Tenents of the Church of Rome and all other Churches concerning the nature of a Sacrament The Church of England holds that the bread and wine are but the outward visible signes of the inward spiritual grace And herewith agrees S. Austin in his definition of a Sacrament lib. 2. de doctr Christian Sacramentum est sacrae rei signum sensibile sanctificans nos S. Tho. part 3. quaest 60. art 3. says Tria significantur primuÌ„ causa effectiva nostrae sanctificationis scilicet Passionem Christi Hoc facite in mei commemorationem 1 Cor. 11. secundum causam formalem nostrae sanctificationis scil gratiam tertium cansam finalem quae est gloria Whereupon the Church hath this heavenly Song Oh sacred banquet in which Christ is received and the memory of his Passion recollected by which our mindes are filled with grace receiving a blessed pledge of future glory Hugo de Sancta Victoria part 1. cap. 1. Sacramentum è materiale elementum foris sensibus praepositum ex similitudine representans ex institutione significans ex sanctificatione continens aliquam invisibilem spiritualem gratiam And herewith agreeth S. Austin saying Sacramentum signum est quod praeter speciem quam ingerit sensibus facit quicquid in cognitionem venire The Councel of Florens treating upon the Sacrament of Confirmation have resolved that all Sacraments must consist of matter and form there must be an outward signe to signifie the inward grace Wherefore I wonder that the Papists can for shame deny that the matter of bread and wine should remain in the Eucharist for by this means they deny it to be a Sacrament destroying the end of Christs holy institution which was That it should be had in remembrance of him And they generally gainsay the publike profession of their Church by the contradictory practices in private and particular Masses and Altar-Sacrifices And they likewise go against Christ who says This bread is my body He did not say This is no bread but my body And certainly if Christ would have had us to think the substance of the elements were changed he would not have called them bread and the fruit of the vine Nay he would not when he explained the words of giving his flesh to eat and his blood to drink have said his words were spirit and life And S. Paul therefore to witness this truth with the Church of England says The bread which we break is it not the communion of the body of Christ He thereby explaining Christs saying Hoc est corpus meum to be meant of a spiritual eating and of a communion of his body we being hereby made one with Christ he dwelling in us and we in him Besides when Christ bade them drink all of the Cup it was wine he bade them drink for the words of consecration follow And therefore if the Apostles drank any thing else they did not fulfil the precept or else Christ commanded them to drink that that was not there which were impious to imagine And as for the bread it is called bread after consecration for S. Paul calls bread the communion of Christs body which must needs be understood of bread consecrate otherwise it is not the communion of his body So that it is evident that the elements of bread and wine remain in the Sacrament and are not materially changed And this the Monks which administred to King John of England and to Henry the seventh the Emperour knew well enough which Princes the better to further the holy designes of the Pope were dispatched hence out of this world by the poysoned elements of the Eucharist which elements Christ ordained Sacramentally to be received for our nourishment thereby signifying our communion with Christ by the bread and wine made of many ears and many grapes and our growing up by faith in Jesus even as those elements turn into our flesh and blood by natural digestion so Christ is spiritually conveyed unto our souls which are fed by his flesh and blood which every faithful and worthy receiver is by the receiving of this Sacrament made partaker of The Doctor would perswade us fol. 327. that if by denying the bodily presence we mean onely not with accidents of his body as quantity figure and the like and that Christ is â—ot so bodily in the Sacrament but spiritually Then we agree with the Catholikes But then in the same leaf â—e would again perswade us that Christ cannot be really there unless his body be there and that it must be as well corporally as spiritually there or else we deny Christs being there To which I answer The errour of Transubstantiation We by maintaining a spiritual eating and drinking of the body and blood do not divide the spirit from the body as the Church of Rome doth by maintaining a bodily presence because according to their doctrine the wicked receive the body and not the Spirit as I have already proved we by taking the bread and wine which tend to the nourishment of our outward bodies the thing signified by them to wit Christ Jesus is hereby conveyed unto us to be the food of our souls and becomes spirit and life to us he living in us and we in him and this is onely to the worthy receiver who by faith feeds upon him and lays hold of the benefits of his Passion The ungodly they onely receive the bread wine not discerning the Lords body And if the Church of Rome mean that his body is