prove and this is what we demand that they would shew us from the Writings of the Fathers that the Invocation of Saints and Worship of them and their Reliques was the Practice of the Vniversal Church in the first second third and fourth Ages of the Church the Practice of the Three first Centuries is that which they know we so much value and insist upon and therefore always demand Evidences thence of any Doctrine or Practice when Tradition was certainly freshest in their Memories and the Fathers in best capacity of knowing the sense of Scriptures and of the Apostles Our Compiler will not be the man serviceable to us in such demands As to honouring the Saints in observing days in honour of them he knows we doe it and therefore needed not to bring passages from the latter end of the fourth Century and the fifth d Nub. Test p. 63 64 c. N. Alex. Disser 5. in Panoplia in Par. 2. Sec. 5. p. 279 281 283 c. to prove it was then practised in the Church he might very easily have shewn such a Practice from the first Ages of the Church But I will pass on to Invocation of Saints and see whether He shews this to have been the Practice of the Three first Centuries and so on and here Alas his Authorities fail him and he is not able to produce us one for his passages from St. Cyprian and Origen e Nub. Test p. 67. N. Alex. p. 305. do onely prove what is generally piously believed that the glorified Saints do intercede for the Church Militant and the two next f Nub. Test p. 68. N Alex. p. 308. from the fourth Century prove no more But what is this to Invocation of Saints is there no difference betwixt our praying to them and their interceding for us The next Authority from Nazianzen g Nub. Test p 69. N. Alex. p. 309. cannot doe it since all know this to be a Rhetorical Apostrophe and his other Orations shew that this thing of addressing their discourse or wishes to the Saints was now but in its infancy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his third Oration against Julian addressing himself to Constantius does invincibly prove that it was far from being a settled belief then that the Saints could hear or perceive requests put up to them nor does any of his following Authorities h Nub. Test p. 70 71 c. N. Alex. p. 311 312 c. from Gregory Nyssen Chrysostome Ambrose prove any more than an interpellation or Request to the Saints that they would do that which they did believe they were always a doing that is praying for the distressed here on earth none of his Testimonies proceed so far as to prove any formal Prayers like those now used in the Church of Rome they look much liker the Requests from Equals or familiar Friends let but any one compare the Speech of Gregory Nyssen for example i Nub. Test p. 70. where he applies himself to Theodorus the Martyr with the Devotions of the present Church of Rome to the Saints and he will easily see the great difference betwixt the Prayers used now during Divine Service and the Requests then made in their Orations So that we of the Church of England are still where we were notwithstanding our Compiler we dare not practise Invocation of Saints because we believe Prayer or Religious Invocation to be peculiar to God alone who will not give his Glory k Isa 42.8 to any other who in any of our necessities hath directed us to call upon him l Psal 50.15 and hath promised that he will deliver us we believe our blessed Saviour knew his Father's mind better than all the men in the World who ordered his Disciples and us by them to put up our Prayers to Our Father not to this or that Saint that is in Heaven We do not follow the latter Ages of the Church in their Interpellations to Saints because as we are sure that they had not Scripture to ground their Practice upon so we are as certain that they had not the Example of the first Ages to guide them into such Practices But we are farthest of all from joyning with the present Church of Rome which hath turned the Interpellations and Requests used to Saints in the fifth and sixth Centuries into formal Prayers and Services and hath put her Prayers to them into the most solemn parts of her Devotions into her Litany for instance so that if we could not admit of using such Requests to Saints because groundless and without Example we have far more reason to reject Invocation and solemn Prayers to Saints as Superstitious since it is against Scripture and against the Practice of the three first Centuries of the Church against a Council in the fourth Century and wants a Pattern even in the fifth and sixth and hath no example in any of the places produced by our Compiler on this head This is sufficient to shew that what our Compiler hath produced from the End of the fourth and from the fifth Century does not defend or reach up to the present Practices of the Church of Rome in this point since there is so great a difference betwixt Interpellations put up in Rhetorical Orations and Homilies and Prayers used in the very Litanies themselves betwixt Requests not put up in the Liturgies of the Church nor commanded any where in Antiquity for those first five hundred years of the Church and Prayers formally put into the Liturgies of the Church of Rome and as strictly commanded to be used by all her members In Origen's time we are sure that the Doctrine of the Church was that no worship nor adoration nor consequently no Invocation was to be paid to Angels m 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 viz. Angelos 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Origen contr Celsum l. 5. p. 233. Edit Cantabr because all prayer supplication intercession and thanksgiving was to be offered up to God Almighty by the high Priest our Lord Jesus Christ and it was lookt upon as an absurd thing to invocate Angels or Saints for the same reason holds for both who had no knowledge of the particular affairs of men As this was the Doctrine of the third Century so as soon as Invocation of Angels began to take root in some parts of the Church in the fourth Age the Council of Laodicea which was confirmed by the General Council of Chalcedon in her 35th Canon did command that no Christians should leave the Church of God and go and Invocate Angels and did anathematize any that n 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 35. Conc. Laodicen p. 53. in Bibliotheca Juris Canonici Veteris Edit Justel 1661. should be guilty of this secret Idolatry and did interpret it to be a forsaking of Christ I cannot but observe upon this Canon that Theodoret interpreting the eighteenth verse o Quocirca Synodus quoque quae convenit Laodiceae
Text of St. Austin which runs thus nec eo ad adoranda daemonia non servio lapidibus sed tamen in parte Donati sum I wonder why F. Alexandre should be so much afraid of this passage though we do object to his Church as a most grievous crime the giving religious worship to Saints and Angels and their Images yet he cannot but know that we do not lay to their charge the worshiping of Devils which we are very glad our selves that we cannot doe But I begin to suspect strongly that Father Alexandre and our Compiler are very near a-kin that our Compiler hath made the same use of N. Alexandre that Alexandre himself hath done of others that which inclines me very much to this Opinion is that Father Alexandre never tells us that I have observed what Editions of the Fathers he used nor quotes the page where one may find his quoted passage above once in five hundred passages I believe through all his Volumes CHAP. II. Concerning the Pope's Supremacy SECT I. AFter twenty pages spent about matters that do not at all concern our present Controversie we are come to that which must be allowed not onely to be a Controversie but the greatest of any that are now on foot in the World and which hath been and is the cause of all those tyrannical pretensions and uncanonical impositions which do at present divide the Christian World. The Pope's Supremacy is that point which the Members of the Church of Rome especially the Vltramontaines are so carefull to defend and we of the Reformation to oppose Our Compiler being now come to a point of debate doth not forget his art of palliating which was so very serviceable to him in his Misrepresentations and Representations of Popery He cannot but know and therefore ought to have avoided it that this loose talk about Successor of Peter and Centre of Catholick Communion does not reach the Pretensions of the Bishops of Rome nor fully and fairly declare what Power Jurisdiction and Authority in and over the Catholick Church those Bishops challenge as their right To let him see how loosely he manages this debate betwixt us I can with putting in two or three necessary words subscribe to all our Compiler says for the Pope and yet be as far from owning the Pope's Supremacy as the Church of England is or ever was The Fathers teach Nub. Testium p. 22. says our Compiler that Christ built his Church upon Peter so say I too if by Fathers here be meant two or three of them and not the Fathers unanimously as he hath it before or generally That the Bishop of Rome is the Successour of Saint Peter is what I can also grant and that That See is the Centre of the Catholick Communion if I may but put in here what is absolutely necessary while possessed by an Orthodox Bishop and that whosoever separates himself from it I add professing the true Faith and possessed by a Catholick Bishop is guilty of Schism I can I say subscribe though I do not to all this without any Obligation in the least of believing the Pope's Supremacy all that our Compiler puts down here reaching no farther than a Primacy of Order does not at all suppose in the Popes any Jurisdiction or Authority over the Catholick Church Since then our Compiler seems to be afraid of setting down a true account of this Controversie betwixt us by mincing the matter so much about the Pope's power I must borrow of him his last Quotation under this head the Canon of the Council of Florence and set that down as the true account of their Doctrine concerning the Pope's power and then not onely shew our reasons why we dare not submit to it but that all the Testimonies our Compiler hath put down from F. Alexandre except two or three under this head do not prove the Pope's Supremacy as it is stated by their General Council of Florence m Diffinimus Sanctam Apostolicam Sedem Romanum Pontificem in universum orbem tenere Primatum ipsum Pontificem Romanum Successorem esse Beati Petri Principis Apostolorum verum Christi Vicarium totiúsque Ecclesiae Caput omnium Christianorum Patrem ac Doctorem existere ipsi in Beato Petro pascendi regendi ac gubernandi universalem Ecclesiam à Domino nostro Jesu Christo plenam potestatem traditam esse quemadmodum etiam in Gestis Oecumenicorum Conciliorum in Sacris Canonibus continetur Concil Florent Pars 2. Collatio 22. p. 1136. Edit Cossart We define says the Canon that the Holy Apostolick See and Bishop of Rome is invested with the Primacy over the whole World and that the Bishop of Rome is the Successour of Saint Peter Prince of the Apostles and that he is the true Vicar of Christ and Head of the whole Church and the Father and Doctour of all Christians and that the full power of feeding ruling and governing the whole Church was given to him in St. Peter by our Lord Jesus Christ as it is expressed or contained in the Acts of General Councils and in the Holy Canons The Reader will very easily see what a great difference there is betwixt this account of the Pope's Supremacy and that set down by our Compiler and yet this Gentleman would be thought to be an exact Stater of the Controversie betwixt us and to have represented fairly what the Doctrine of the Church of Rome is concerning their Popes Power and Jurisdiction I hope I am out of the danger of being made a Misrepresenter while I charge that onely upon them as their Doctrine which hath been defined by one of their General Councils which is the greatest strength and countenance that any Doctrine is capable of among them This then being the true state of their Doctrine concerning their Popes Power or Supremacy and that which I would call naked Popery I am sure I have Commission from the Church of England to declare that she cannot without betraying the Rights of all Bishops and the Interest of the Catholick Church espouse the Doctrine of the Pope's Supremacy which we of her Communion do believe is altogether without foundation either from Scripture or Primitive Antiquity It will not be consistent with that brevity I have confined my self to in this Answer to go through our several arguments against this usurped Supremacy of the Bishops of Rome I am onely desirous to consider in short whence they have this their extraordinary Power which they do as extraordinarily contend for there are but Three Sources whence they can pretend to derive it either that it is from the Law of God set down in the Scriptures or from the Laws of the Vniversal Church to be seen in her Code or lastly from the favour and authority of secular Princes the first of these is that which they commonly claim and insist upon the second is what this Canon of the Florentine Council doth challenge also in the
timeat Vae illud adjicientibus aut detrahentibus destinatum Tertull. advers Hermogen c. 22. He said he adored the Fulness of the Scripture and bids Hermogenes to have a care of the Woe denounced against those that added or took any thing away from Scripture if he could not shew that what he taught was to be found in the Scriptures And the same We can shew of St. Basil who as he does plead Tradition without express Scripture for the Practices and Constitutions of the Church with the rest of the Fathers as our Compiler hath quoted him t Nubes Test p. 55 56. Nat. Alexan. p. 375 376 377. so he is as earnest as any of the Fathers for the Sufficiency and Authority of the Written Word as to Matters of Faith and in his Sermon about True Faith u 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 S. Basil Sermo de vera Fide T. 2. p. 251. declares it to be a manifest deviation from Faith and a sign of Pride either to reject any part of the Scriptures or to add to them since Christ had told us that his Sheep would hear his voice and not a Stranger 's Our Compiler is very exact in his next quotation and * Nubes Test p. 57. Nat. Alexan. p. 377. gives us book and page but instead of thanking him we must thank F. Alexandre who help'd him to them but should have remembred himself to have quoted Oration instead of Book the place from Gregory Nyssen however might have been spared since the Tradition he speaks of is that of the Apostles and Evangelists and That we are sure was written in the Scriptures but allowing this Tradition to be an unwritten one it is not about a point of Faith but the Interpretation of it wherein we allow the Tradition of Antiquity to be highly usefull and necessary The first Authority from Epiphanius x Nub. Test p. 58. N. Alex. p. 351. is not against us who do not require express Scripture for every custome but admit of Tradition as Authority sufficient in such a case and in his next all that he contends for is that it was a Tradition of the Church to pray for the dead and y Nub. Test p. 58. N. Alex. p. 378. that the Holy Ghost did teach partly by the written word and partly by Tradition which last part of his words if it be stretched to speak of matter of Faith is more than can be allowed to Epiphanius since the first Fathers teach the direct contrary as I could have shewn from Tertullian and others as well as I did from Irenaeus St. Austin's places z Nub. Test p. 59 60. N. Alex. p. 380 381 382 383. as relating to Ecclesiastical Practices and Constitutions are answered above that from Vincentius Lirinensis relates to the same the last from St. Chrysostome * Nub. Test p. 61. N. Alex. p. 354. speaks of the times of the Apostles themselves whose Preachings as well as Writings were the very same did proceed from the same Holy Spirit and therefore were of equal Authority and for what he adds about the Tradition of the Church that when it is offered to us we should enquire no farther it does certainly refer onely to Practices and Customs of the Church since as to matters of a higher nature to wit those that concern our Faith and Salvation He makes Scripture-Authority absolutely necessary and teaches us not to say any thing of our own heads without the Testimony of the Sacred Inspired Writers for this very reason †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 S. Chrys Hom. in Ps 95. p. 1042. Tom. 3. Edit Ducaei because if we affirm or say any thing without having the Authority of Scripture for it the understandings of our Auditors waver one while assenting another while doubting one while rejecting our discourse as frivolous another while admitting it but as probable at most but when once we produce the Written Testimony of God's Word we confirm our own discourse and fix and settle the Vnderstanding of the Auditors I hope our Compiler when he hath read this will have another notion concerning the Authority of Tradition We do admit it as to Discipline and Practice with the Primitive Fathers but as to points of Faith and Doctrines of necessity to Salvation we do require with them the Written Testimony of the Word of God or an Vniversal uninterrupted Tradition as clear as that by which we receive the Scriptures themselves CHAP. IV. Concerning Invocation of Saints SECT I. HOW little the Church of Rome is able to produce Vniversal Tradition for those points of Controversie which we at present contend about is what our Compiler's next head comes now to shew That there is no foundation in Scripture no command for nor Practice of Invocation of Saints or paying any Religious Worship to them or their Reliques is what they are forced to grant they must then have recourse to Tradition and shew us from that what they were not able to doe from Scripture it self that the Church of God always practised and taught such a Worship of Saints and Reliques as the Church of Rome doth now teach and practise Our Compiler begins this point with an account of the Heresie of Vigilantius as F. Alexandre calls it this account he hath borrowed out of that Fathers a In Par. 1. Sec. 5. c. 3. p. 50 51 c. account of the Heresie of Vigilantius and every syllable of the Testimonies under this head for above twenty pages together out of the same Friend b Dissertat 5. in Panoplia adv Haereses Sect. 5. in Par. 2. Seculi quinti. He tells us that in the beginning of the fourth Century Vigilantius began to teach his pestilent Doctrines but this is a mistake of our Compiler who hath placed Vigilantius here by the same figure that he puts Damasus and Julius c Append. to Nub. Test p. 191. in the Third Century Victor in the first and Aerius exactly in the middle of the same Century Vigilantius lived in the beginning of the fifth Century when the quarrel betwixt him and St. Hierome began we are not at all concerned in this quarrel any farther than to stand by that Doctrine and those Practices which were most agreeable to the Scriptures the Foundation of Faith. The Differences betwixt us and the Church of Rome in these points are so well known that I need spend no time about shewing wherein they are it is sufficient to advertise that they of that Church teach and practise the putting up prayers to Saints and Angels paying Religious Worship to them prostrating themselves before Reliques and the like every one of which we refuse upon reasons which from Scripture and the purest Antiquity seem invincible to us The Church of Rome will have what she teaches and practises in these things to have been the Constant Practice and Original Tradition of the Whole Church of Christ and this is the thing which lies upon them to
Let us now see whether our Compiler can shew us the Practice of the Church to be contrary to what we have here set down and whether he can shew that the Primitive Church did use those Acts of Worship those Prostrations and Kissings those Processions and Resorts to them for Cures and Assistence in Distresses which are now the ordinary stated Practices in the Church of Rome during the three first Centuries which He knows we always insist upon and demand as the surest Witnesses of the Doctrines and Practices of the Apostles and the Church from the beginning Our Compiler is not able to produce even one Instance of any Reliques of Saints treasured up in order to cure Maladies or be prostrated unto but that he may not appear quite destitute of a Testimony from those purest Ages of the Church he brings us in the old Chair of St. James Bishop of Jerusalem but how comes this to be the Relique of that Saint were St. James and his Chair * Nub. Test p. 75. N. Alex. p. 231. so near a-kin as to be both of a piece the world is very low with such people when they are forc'd to bring in old Chairs instead of the Saints Bodies or any parts of them but let it pass for a sort of a Relique does it appear from Eusebius out of whom the quotation is brought that the Christians then worshipped it carried it about in solemn Processions or that it was resorted to for Cures or that it did any great Cures This our Compiler should have shewn and without it I must tell him that this is worse than trifling because we are now about the Defence of the present Practices of the Church of Rome by shewing that the Primitive Church practised the same But F. Alexandre told him and he doth tell us that the Faithfull of the Church of Jerusalem did shew great Reverence to this Chair 't is true Valesius his Translation which Father Alexandre follows here though Christopherson is his man at other times says this but the Mischief is Eusebius himself does not what Eusebius says is that the faithfull at Jerusalem were wont and to that day did shew to all Comers the x 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 7. c. 19. Chair it self which St. James sate Bishop in which I think is pretty different from Valesius his translation about shewing great reverence to the Chair it self as to the Honour they then payed to the Memories of the Saints themselves it was but what was highly just and that wherein they are imitated by us as well as any other Christians His next Testimony from St. Cyril y Nub. Test p. 75. Nat. Alex. p. 232. of Jerusalem is so far from being for them that I think it may and ought to rise up as a Witness against them for when God had given such a virtue to the bones of Elisha as to raise a dead man and when that Miracle was wrought by God's permission can our Compiler shew or dare any of his Church pretend to doe it that the Jewish Church did thereupon take up and enshrine the Prophets bones that they appointed Processions to them or did command the Worship of prostration or kissing to be paid to them or that they used to frequent his Monument for the same or like Miracles This they ought to reflect upon and to consider how far the Scriptures are from mentioning or the Jewish Church from practising any religious and superstitious addresses to those bones notwithstanding so extraordinary a Miracle effected by them How happy had it been for the Christian Church if Christians had kept within the same bounds and not given such a helping hand to the Superstitions and Idolatries of after ages by their hunting out and searching so much for the Ashes and Remains of the Servants of God some of whom had been buried above a thousand years before This therefore we must grant to the Members of the Church of Rome that Superstition taking root in the end of the fourth Century of the Church a great part of Religion began to be placed in searching for Martyrs bones in building Churches where they found or fixed them especially when they found that God was pleased at those places I dare not say by those ashes and bones to work Miracles upon which they did pay an Honour to those Reliques but that they did worship them as they now do in the Church of Rome is what themselves so often deny St. Hierome z Nos autem non dico Martyrum Reliquias sed nè Solem quidem non Angelos non Archangelos colimus adoramus D. Hieron adv Vigilant ad Riparium in particular who contended so earnestly for them with Vigilantius Had the Church of Rome stayed here and not proceeded so much farther in these things I do not see that we could have broken Communion with them upon such an account and therefore I need not examine by retail his Testimonies from the latter end of the fourth and fifth Centuries the design of which he himself makes onely to prove that the Fathers kept the Reliques of Saints with Respect and Veneration and believed that God often wrought Miracles by them which we do grant the Fathers of those latter ages did and might doe it too as long as they kept as they said of themselves that they always did from paying Religious Worship unto them but we say withall that what the Christians of those Ages did about these things does no ways defend the present Extravagancies of the Church of Rome the excesses wherein about Reliques are come to that Scandalous height as to make the learned men of their own Church ashamed of them As to the Practice of the Church of England which inquires not after nor is solicitous about the Reliques of Saints this may be said in her Defence that she finds no Practice or Command about any such searching after the bones of the Dead in any part of Scripture of either Testament but that their whole care then was to commit them to their Sepulchres in hopes of a future Resurrection and never to disturb their Ashes and therefore she thinks it must needs be her greatest commendation that she is more carefull to imitate what she finds written and practised in the Scriptures themselves than to imitate what the fourth Age of the Church began to practise when the Church of Christ was near four hundred years old The Holy Scriptures themselves are the Rule of her Faith and for any Apostolical Practices she inquires among them who lived with the Apostles or nearest to them among whom finding nothing of any searching for Reliques or any Miracles done by them in those first three hundred years she is resolved to practise what the Christians of those first and purest Ages did rather than what after-ages did wherein plenty and prosperity let loose the reins to some peoples fancies and made that a part of Religion which was
again He sees we are agreed and therefore what he hath put down here as a Point at present under debate betwixt us is really none at all But if He mean here Constitutions of Points of Faith necessary to Salvation let him undertake to produce Fathers when he pleases for that point and I do here promise him an Answer what He hath collected under this head are not to that purpose For as to his two e Nubes Test p. 48 49. Nat. Alexan. p. 358-360 first Authorities from Irenaeus they are taken out of that very book wherein St. Irenaeus as he tells him who put him upon writing against the Valentinians undertook to confute that Heresie from f In hoc autem tertio Libro ex SCRIPTVRIS inferamus ostensiones ut nihil tibi ex his quae praeceperas desit à nobis Iren. Pref. in Lib. 3. adv Haeres the Scriptures themselves I wish some in the World would but imitate him and not be angry at us for being solicitous and earnest for the same Method In this Book Irenaeus takes notice of the extravagant humour of the Hereticks that they would be confined to no Rule nor submit either to Scripture or Tradition g D. Iren. l. 3. c. 2. By Tradition here this Father meant the preaching of the Christian Faith and the Delivery of the Apostles Creed h Hanc praedicationem cùm acceperit hanc fidem Ecclesia diligenter custodit consonanter haec praedicat o docet tradit quasi unum possidens os D. Iren. adv Haer. l. 1. c. 3. every Article of which is expressy contained in the Holy Scriptures so that this cannot be of any service to them since both sides agree that the Creed is but a Summary of the Holy Scriptures which Creed he says was unanimously without any variation believed taught and delivered from hand to hand in every Church There is a passage in this third Chapter urged indeed by F. Alexandre k Nat. Alex. p. 359. but more prudently omitted by our Compiler which I think may with abundance of reason be turned upon the Romanists by us in all points of Controversie betwixt us as well as it was by St. Irenaeus against the Hereticks of his time He arguing against them that there were no Bishops in the World that either taught or knew of any such things as they held urges them with this argument That if the Apostles had known of any such hidden Mysteries l Etenim si recondita Mysteria scissent Apostoli quae seorsim latenter ab reliquis Perfectos docebant His vel maximè traderent ea quibus etiam ipsas Ecclesias committebant Valde enim perfectos irreprehensibiles in omnibus eos volebant esse quos Successores relinquebant c. St. Iren. c. Haer. l. 3. c. 3. which they were to teach the Perfect onely in private and unknown to the rest of their Disciples they would most likely have delivered them to those to whom they committed those Churches they had planted inforcing it with this reason because they certainly would be very desirous that those to whom they left their Churches and their Episcopal Charge should be very perfect and irreprovable in all things which they could not be if they wanted those secret Mysteries the Hereticks did pretend to And in the same manner may we urge against the Church of Rome that if the Apostles had known of such things as Purgatory Praying to Saints and the Lawfulness of Worshipping Images and the like they would certainly either have put them down in their own Writings or would have delivered them to those to whom they left their Charges that so we might have seen and heard of these things among them as frequently and as unanimously as we do of the Tradition of the Apostles Creed But to return and put a short Answer to these Quotations the Tradition here spoken of was about the Apostles Creed the Tradition here is what the Apostles had preached and what the Apostles preached is the very same that they afterwards by the Will of God and the Request of Christians as Eusebius m Hist Eccl. l. 3. c. 24. for example does inform us about three of the Gospels committed to Writing This is what Irenaeus himself says particularly in the first Chapter of this Book n Non enim per alios dispositionem salutis nostrae cognovimus quam per eos per quos Evangelium pervenit ad nos Quod quidem tunc praeconiaverunt postea verò per Dei voluntatem in SCRIPTVRIS nobis TRAVIDERVNT Fundamentum Columnam Fidei nostrae futurum St. Iren. adv Haer. l. 3. c. 1. that we had no other knowledge of the Oeconomy of our Salvation than by the Labours of those by whom we first received the Gospel which Gospel indeed at first They DELIVERED by PREACHING but afterwards by the Will and Appointment of God committed It to WRITING that IT might be the Foundation and Pillar of our Faith and so of our Salvation If those Divine Writings be of that Efficacy as to found and stablish us in the True Faith thither in God's name let us have recourse and learn what the Apostles taught by what they writ We have not the least ground or intimation from this Father of any Doctrines necessary to Salvation not written or forgotten to be penned by the Apostles among the rest We have his Opinion directly against any such secret Traditions In a word if it were God's Will that the Apostles should commit to writing the same Word of Salvation that they had preached I cannot see how it should come to pass that some part of it should be written and another not If it were all written I am sure our Compiler is besides the Cushion and the whole Church of Rome as much What I have said here is not onely answer sufficient for what is out of Irenaeus but for the two next Testimonies from Origen o Nubes Test p. 50 51. Nat. Alexan. p. 365 366. the latter of which speaking so very honourably of the Scriptures is a very unfit one for the Church of Rome's purpose and would have been omitted had either F. Alexandre or our Compiler read the whole Tract they so readily quote The last from Origen p Nubes Test p. 51. Nat. Alex. p. 366. and those from Tertullian q Nubes Test p. 52. Nat. Alex. p. 367. relate onely to Ecclesiastical Rites as for Tertullian's not disputing with the Hereticks from Scripture r Nubes Test p. 54. Nat. Alex. p. 369. it was not from the Imbecillity of Scriptures for such purposes but upon other accounts one of which was that they had nothing to doe with the Scriptures all the World knows the Reverence Tertullian had for the Fulness and Sufficiency of the Scriptures to all purposes when ſ Adoro Scripturae plenitudinem Scriptum esse doceat Hermogenis Officina Si non est scriptum
quae est Phrygiae Metropolis lege prohibuit NE PRECARENTVR ANGELOS in hodiernum usque diem licet videre apud illos eorum finitimos Oratoria Sancti Michaelis Theodoret. in Ep. ad Coloss c. 2.18 p. 766. Edit Lat. Paris 1608. of the second Chapter to the Colossians which speaks about the Worshipping of Angels makes this Canon to forbid the praying to Angels and farther that they that were so fond of this Superstition were forced to leave the Churches wherein it seems Invocation of Angels much less of Saints was not to be had nor any such Practices in their Liturgies I will conclude this Chapter and discourse with St. Austin who speaking of the honour due to the Martyrs says that they did not erect Temples to them as if they were Gods but appointed Commemorations of them as dead men whose Spirits are with the Lord that they were named in their place and order but not Invocated by the Priest who sacrificed m Nos autem Martyribus nostris non Templa sicut Diis sed Memorias sicut hominibus mortuis quorum apud Deum vivunt Spiritus fabricamus suo loco ordine NOMINANTVR non tamen à Sacerdote qui sacrificat INVOCANTVR Aug. D. de Civ Dei. l. 22. c. 10. SECT II. The very same Arguments that I had against the Invocation of Saints I must also use against the paying any Worship to their Reliques if the Saints themselves were never admitted by God into any share of his Worship we cannot think their bones or ashes were if the first ages of the Church never robbed God of his Honour by dividing of it betwixt him and his Servants we have much more reason to believe that they would not impart it to the mortal Remains of those Servants This we are certain of that in all the accounts we have of the History and Writers of the first ages of the Church when she certainly was in her greatest purity we find nothing of their solicitude about searching for the Bodies and enshrining the Reliques of Saints not a syllable about any worshipping of them or seeking to them for help and deliverance from diseases or troubles The Apostles and Virgin-Church of Christ had undoubtedly as great a value and as large apprehensions of the vast merit of the first Christian Martyr St. Stephen as any age since can have for any Martyrs or ought to pretend to and yet we find them onely decently interring their Martyred Brother no care about getting Reliques or mangling his Body to have fingers teeth or toes to shew in order to be kissed and prostrated to such foolish and Superstitious Actions were the issue of more degenerate and fancifull times When the blessed Martyr Ignatius had according to his intense desire finished his course with Martyrdom and was delivered a Prey in the Amphitheatre to the cruel Lions who devoured all of him but some hardest bones the Brethren then attending his Martyrdom took up those q Sola enim asperiora sanctorum ossium derelicta sunt qua in Antiochiam reportata sunt in capsa reposita sicut thesaurus inappreciabilis Martyrium S. Ignat. p. 6. Edit Usser 1647. most valued bones carried them to his beloved City and buried them there And not long after when his Fellow-bishop St. Polycarp had glorified his Redeemer in the same way and the faithfull notwithstanding the inveterate groundless malice of the Jews had gathered up all the bones that the fire had left they committed r 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 viz. Polycarpum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eccl. Smyrnensis Epistola de Martyrio Polycarpi p. 28. Edit Usser those bones which they valued more than costly Pearls or Gold to burial and celebrated with Joy and Praises the Birth day as the Church then called the day of Martyrdom of this Saint in Memory of him and such as had in the same victorious fights finished their courses and for an incitement and preparation to all that were to combate in such bloudy encounters I cannot pass here the observing of that in this Golden Letter of the Church of Smyrna which will give us the true sentiments and innocent practices of the then Christians the Devil and the malitious Jews by his instigation persuaded the Praefect to deny the Christians leave to take and bury the body ſ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 viz. Diabolus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eccl. Smyrn Epist de Martyrio Polycarp p. 27. Edit Usser 1647. of this blessed Saint Polycarp after the Executioner had done that office upon this Saint which the fire would not lest they should leave their Crucified Saviour and fall to worshipping of him This cheat and malice of the Devil and his Instruments the Church of Smyrna take notice of in this Epistle and shew that spite and ignorance together were the Causes of this Calumny t 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibidem since Christians never could leave the worship and service of Christ who had suffered all for their sins nor pay any worship or adoration to any other person or as the Old Latin Translation hath it nor offer up the supplication of prayer to any other person The Son of God say they we worship and adore but his Martyrs we justly love as being not onely his Disciples but Imitatours of his Sufferings we love them for that very great good-will which they have shewed to their King and Master I have often wondred how they of the Church of Rome who reade this Epistle either dare practise the Worshipping of Saints or Reliques or can pretend to say that Antiquity did doe the same I am sure this Apostolick Church of Smyrna was so far from it that they make it the spite and malice of the Infernal Fiend and the Devilish Jews to say they would and I am as sure that it is little less to say they did worship Saints or Reliques But to return to the Grave of that glorious Martyr we find his bones committed to the Earth after which it was the Care and Practice of the Church to dispose thus of the Bodies of their Martyred Brethren and so very carefull the Church was in the first Ages in this point that the Clergy of the Church of Rome v Et quod maximum est corpora Martyrum aut caeterorum si non sepeliantur grande periculum imminet eis quibus incumbit hoc opus Cleri Rom. ad Cler. Carth. Ep. 8. inter Cypriani Ep. p. 18. Edit Oxon. in their letter to the Clergy at Carthage among a great deal of good advice about Discipline and other things speak of this as a thing of greatest Concern that the Bodies of their Martyrs should be carefully buried by those who had the charge of that business and make it a dangerous fault in these persons to neglect their duty herein After this account of the Practice of the first Ages of the Church about their care of the dead Martyrs and Brethren
Compiler might very well have spared them since Eusebius in the very next words to his account of it tells us g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 7. c. 18. Edit Vales that it was through her heathenism that she did this and that upon the same ground the Painted Images of our Saviour and Peter and Paul were in many hands which a heathenish gratitude had taught some to make to shew their respect to them All the following Testimonies about the Transient Sign or Figures of the Cross used by Constantine the Great and afterwards h Nub. Test p. 155 156 157 c. N. Alex. in Panoplia Seculi septimi p. 67 68 69 70 76 71 64 65 77 78 c. are to no purpose since our Compiler cannot shew withall that they were worshipped if he could why did he not let him shew that as they used in Constantine's time the Figure of the Cross so They adored it let him shew that the Ancients did practise what the Church of Rome now does that They adored the Image of the Cross and which is far more according to themselves that Latria was paid to it which the Church of Rome now says i Crux Legati quia DEBETVR EI LATRIA erit à dextris c. Pontificale Romanum p. 480. col 1. Edit Romae 1611. is due to it That the Reader may see the direct contrary Practice betwixt the Church of God in those days and the Church of Rome at this present I will produce onely St. Ambrose's account of Helena the Mother of Constantine's finding at Jerusalem the Cross on which our Saviour was crucified He tells us k Invenit ergo Titulum REGEM ADORAVIT non LIGNUM utique quia hic GENTILIS est ERROR VANITAS IMPIORUM Ambros in Orat. de Obitu Theodosii T. 3. p. 61. Edit Erasm 1538. that upon her finding the Title by which she knew our Saviour's Cross from either of the other two She ADORED the KING of Heaven not THE WOOD OF THE CROSS which would have been in Helena and in it self is a PAGANISH ERROUR and the VANITY of the IMPIOUS By these words I question not but St. Ambrose meant that to have Adored the Cross would have been downright Idolatry and yet our Compiler hath furnished us in defence of Image-Worship with two or three Fathers which are of the opposite Opinion his St. Asterius Amasenus l Nub. Test p. 163 164. Nat. Alex. Panopl Sec. 7. p. 71. is so far from thinking it an Impious Vanity to adore the Cross that He if we may believe the Romish Writers and the second Synod at Nice for there is nothing of this Oration in Rubenius's Edition or in the Biliotheca Patrum of La Bigne says that Christians are COMMANDED by the LAW of GOD to ADORE the CROSS m Apparet Signum viz. Crucis Quod ex PRAESCRIPTO LEGIS Christiani ADORANT Asterius Orat. de S. Euphemia in Nubes Testium p. 164. We are very unhappy that we could never see this Command in the Law could we but see it or had St. Ambrose ever dreamt of such a Law neither He nor we would call Adoration of the Cross Idolatry but this of Asterius is too gross and too absurd to deserve a word of answer As Asterius said the Adoration of the Cross was commanded so Paulinus Nolanus another of our Compiler's Vouchers assures us n Nubes Testium p. 168 169. Nat. Alex. Panopl Sec. 7. p. 61 62. that it was practised yearly at Jerusalem when at every Easter the Bishop of that Church did produce the Cross on which our Saviour suffered and which was kept by Him to be ADORED by the People and his third Authour o 〈◊〉 Nubes Testium p. 172. Nat. Alex. Panopl Sec. 7. p. 66. Rusticus Diaconus to clear the Point tells us that the WHOLE CHVRCH throughout the WHOLE WORLD did without any Contradiction or Dispute ADORE the NAILS p Clavos Lignum venerabilis Crucis Omnis per totum mundum Ecclesia absque ulla contradictione-adorat Rust Diac. in Nubes Test p. 172. with which our Saviour was fastned as well as the WOOD of the HOLY CROSS on which He suffered I question not but every one that reads these passages will admire how things came to be so much altered or rather how St. Ambrose and this Paulinus who were Contemporaries for some time should give us such diametrically opposite accounts about the Adoration of the Cross I will onely desire the Reader that I may deliver him from his admiration to observe that Paulinus in this very Epistle tells us that the place from whence our Saviour ascended into Heaven could never after our Saviour's ascension be paved with Marble or any thing else but that the Earth threw it all off and that the footsteps of our Saviour are plainly to be seen there and which is a better Story that though the Bishops of Jerusalem did give an infinite number of the pieces of the Cross to Pilgrims and others who begged them of those Bishops yet that the Cross it self is to put it into our Compiler's translation nothing at all diminished but remains as entire as if never touch'd or mangled I hope this will give the Reader enough of Paulinus whose Epistle I have once read over but hope in God I never shall again As for Rusticus Diaconus I will return no other answer than that those who know any thing of the State and Practices of the Church for the first six Centuries know very well that what Rusticus says is not to speak softly the greatest Truth Though Paulinus Nolanus is not worth the vindicating yet I cannot but tell our Compiler that he wrongs Him very much when He says q Nubes Test p. 166 167. Nat. Alexan. Dissert 6. Sec. 8. p. 631. after F. Alexandre that the blessed Trinity was described in Mosaick work in a Church built by this Paulinus whereas there is no such thing mentioned by Paulinus there in that Epistle nor ought it or can it be gathered from the Verses set down by F. Alexandre and our Compiler since though the Son might be represented by a Lamb and the Holy Ghost by a Dove there was nothing to represent God the Father except these wise Gentlemen will have him represented by a Voice which is a little too odd and a Voice too hard a thing to be painted The rest of our Compiler's Testimonies within the first six Centuries prove no more than the use of r Nub. Test p. 160 163 164 165 172. Nat. Alexan. Dissert 6. Sec. 8. p. 629. 630 631 632 633. Painting in the Churches the Saints and the Martyrs Sufferings and some Scripture Histories all which is nothing to the purpose except he could prove which he is far from being able to doe that those that brought those Paints into the Churches were as carefull to worship them as the Church of Rome now is However we
must inform the Reader that as this Custome of having Paints and Images in the Churches was without any Command from Scripture and without any Example of the Church for the golden Ages thereof the first three hundred years so neither was it universal but met with great opposition In the beginning of the fourth Century the Council of Illebiris in Spain commanded that there should be no Pictures in any Church ſ Placuit Picturas in Ecclesia esse non debere Concil Eliberit can 36. in T. 1. Concil p. 974. and the Story of St. Epiphanius in the end of this Century is sufficiently known who coming by chance into a Church which had a Veil over the door painted with the Picture of our Saviour or some other Saint tore it to pieces and gives this reason for his doing so in his Letter to the Bishop of Jerusalem because t Cùm ergò hoc vidissem in Ecclesia Christi contra Autoritatem Scripturarum hominis pendere Imaginem scidi illud c. Epiphan Ep. ad Joann Episc Hierosol apud Hieronymi Opera Tom. 2. p. 58. Edit Paris 1533. it was against Scripture to have the Picture or Image of any person hang in a Christian Church But afterwards Custome by degrees brought these Pictures into most Churches and the ignorant people began to worship and fell to adoring them in the sixth Century which one of the Bishops of the Church Serenus of Marseilles taking notice of broke down the Pictures and Images and cast them out of the Church This was taken notice of by Gregory the Great and though he would not have had him to have broken the Images yet v Et quidem Zelum vos nè quid manu factum adorari possit habuisse laudavimus sed frangere easdem Imagines non debuisse judicamus Greg. M. in Ep. 109. l. 7. Edit Frob. 1564. he commends his Zeal against their being worshipped I think his Authority sufficient to end this point of Controversie betwixt me and the Compiler He does in this Epistle fully declare himself that he would have the people kept by all means from giving any worship to Images and recommends onely an Historical Vse of them for the Ignorant * Tua ergò fraternitas illas servare ab earum ADORATV populum prohibere debuit Idem Ibidem He is of the same mind in his next Epistle to this same Bishop Serenus and though at this day in the Church of Rome Images are set up not onely for an Historical Vse but to be worshipped yet I am sure from his own Pen that Gregory the Great 's Doctrine was that Images were placed in the Churches for an Historical Vse onely and NOT TO BE WORSHIPPED x Frangi verò non debuit Quòd NON ad ADORANDVM in Ecclesiis sed ad instruendas SOLVMMODO mentes fuit Nescientium collocatum Idem Ep. 9. l. 9. and Gregory concludes his Directions to that Bishop that if any body would have an Image made He should not hinder it but for the paying Adoration to Images He should by all means hinder and forbid it and He advises him to admonish y Et si quis Imagines facere voluerit minimè prohibe Adorare verò Imagines omnibus modis DEVITA Sed hoc sollicitè fraternitas tua admoneat ut ex visione rei gestae ardorem compunctionis percipiant in ADORATIONE SOLIVS OMNIPOTENTIS SANCTAE TRINITATIS humiliter prosternantur Idem Ibidem his Charge that upon the sight of those representations they would raise up in themselves sutable affections and with humility prostrate themselves to and pay all their Adoration to the OMNIPOTENT BLESSED TRINITY ALONE Such passages as this I have just mentioned to which I could add many more out of Antiquity do so much affect me that I cannot enough wonder at the Index Expurgatorius of the present Church of Rome z Index Libror Prohibit Expurgandorum p. 234. Edit Madriti 1667. which commands Solus Deus Adorandus to be struck out of the Marginal Notes of Humfredus's Latin Translation and Edition of St. Cyril of Alexandria's Comments upon Esaias a Cyrillus ex Vers Humfredi Basil 1566. p. 258. and out of the Marginal Notes in Robert Stephens Bible printed 1557. Serviendum Soli Deo * Index Expurg p. 99. whereas both these passages are the very words of our Saviour himself Matthew 4.10 I would fain know of any Romanist how this is not virtually and in effect to command that that Verse in the Gospel should be struck out though it contains our Saviour's own expressions who should surely be allowed to understand his own Religion as well as the Managers of the Index Expurgatorius And for what relates to the Cross it self they have b Index Expurg p. 47. col 2. ordered that non ut Adoremus not that we should Adore it should be struck out of Masius his Learned Commentary upon Joshua 22.28 These are things so very notorious that my wonder increases and my admiration at those people who notwithstanding all this would fain have us believe that they do not worship the Cross it self when not onely their PONTIFICAL and their SERVICE on Good-friday teach and shew that they of the Church of Rome adore the Cross but their Index Expurgatorius is so carefull to strike out of the Indexes to the Fathers Works any thing that doth but appear to thwart or contradict such worship If the Church of Rome doth not worship Images why is she so carefull to strike out c Index Expurg p. 311. of the Index to St. Hierome such innocent passages as these Adorare Statuas vel Imagines Cultores Dei non debent the Worshippers of God ought not to ADORE Statues or Images Imago una tantùm veneranda One onely Image to wit God the Son the express Image of his Father is to be worshipped Why doth the poor Index suffer here and not St. Hierome in whom d Nos autem unum habemus virum VNAM veneramur Imaginem quae est invisibilis omnipotentis Dei. D. Hier. in Ezek. l. 4. c. 16. these very expressions are If the Church of Rome give no Adoration to Saints or Angels why doth her Index Expurgatorius command such passages as these following to be struck out of e Index Expurg p. 52. the Index to St. Athanasius's Works Adorari solius Dei est nullius autem creaturae Adoration is to be paid to God alone and to no creature with him Angeli non sunt Adorandi Angels are not to be Adored Creatura nulla adoranda nulla invocanda immo eam adorare Arianorum Ethnicorum sit No creature is to be adored or invocated to adore which would be to play the Arian or the Pagan I would fain know why the Index to his Works must be dealt so severely with while Athanasius himself is guilty if there be any crime in them of every expression in the passages
which are condemned by the Index Expurgatorius Let any one but look into St. Athanasius's third Oration against the Arians and He may there find this Great Father upon occasion of his mentioning St. John 's offer to worship the Angel speaking out f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 D. Athanas Orat. 3. contra Arian p. 204. Edit Commel 1600. plainly enough that God alone is to be adored and that the Angels since they are but Creatures notwithstanding their Excellencies are in the number of Worshippers not of the worshipped In his Epistle to Bishop Adelphius He himself says what the Index to him did but transcribe That we do not adore any Creature God forbid says the Good Father g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 D. Athan. Ep. ad Adelph p. 331. that we should since this would be the same sin that the Arians and Pagans are guilty of but we do adore the Lord of the Creation the incarnate Word of God. If the Church of Rome doth not adore the Martyrs and their Reliques why doth her Index Expurgatorius strike out of the Index to St. Hierome Non adorantur Martyres Martyrs are not to be adored Adoramus Solum Deum honoramus Reliquias Martyrum We adore God alone and honour onely the Reliques of the Martyrs The Managers of the Index Expurgatorius ought to have considered that if there be any crime in these passages St. Hierome himself ought to answer for them since it was He that said Christians did not adore the Martyrs h Quis enim O insanum caput aliquando Martyras adoravit quis hominem putavit Deum c. D. Hier. c. Vigilan T. 2. p. 122. much less their Reliques Either the present Writers of the Church of Rome are not serious and in earnest with us or they think our eyes shut and that we do not see some of their Books it is very vain to talk as our Compiler doth of respect onely and honour to Saints and their Reliques and Images when we see that any thing which offers to deny Adoration to all these is condemned by their Autentick earthly Purgatory the Roman Index I will insist no farther on these scandalous things but hope I may under the Protection and after the Example of Gregory the Great conclude not onely against Images as i Greg. M. Ep. 9. l. 9. He did but against every Creature animate or inanimate that NO RELIGIOVS WORSHIP is or can be due or given to any of them because of that saying of our blessed Saviour Matth. 4.10 Thou shalt WORSHIP THE LORD THY GOD and HIM ONELY shalt thou SERVE CONCLUSION HAving now gone through all our Compiler's Collections and answered all his Testimonies that were of moment or came within the first six Centuries I have nothing left but his Appendix upon my hands but since He owns whence he borrowed this Appendix and all Scholars know how solidly Bishop Morton answered the whole of Brereley's Apology I need not trouble my self with answering any little parcels of it Having answered our Compiler's Collections out of the Fathers themselves and shewn that they neither taught nor believed nor practised what our Compiler would have them to have done the Appendix is not worth considering since if any Protestants did confess that the Fathers believed and practised as the Church of Rome now doth they were mistaken as hath been sufficiently proved but if they did not as I think it were easie to shew They are abusively brought in here being Witnesses against not for the Church of Rome I always lookt upon it so servile a thing to flatter or court a Reader for his good opinion or approbation that as I dislike it in our Compiler's Preface so I am resolved to keep it out of my Book as well as Preface All I intreat of the Reader is that he would read without Prejudice and judge impartially betwixt this Answer and the Nubes Testium and then I believe he will see very good reason for that which I will conclude with That the Fathers of the first five hundred years did neither believe nor practise in relation to the Points at present under debate what the Church of Rome at present doth believe and practise POSTSCRIPT HAving a little room lest here I cannot employ it better than to take notice of a very great cheat put upon His Sacred Majesty as well as the rest of the Auditours by F. Sabran in his Sermon before the King at Chester in August last Sermon preached at Chester before the King August 28. and Printed by Henry Hills He told his Auditory that he followed the Advice of St. Austin when he did recommend himself to the most blessed Virgin 's Intercession and did advise them to doe the same and he quotes for this Saint Austin's 35th Sermon de Sanctis whereas it is confessed by all men of any Learning that this Sermon was not St. Austin's the very Title of it is sufficient to convince all that know any thing of Antiquity Sermo in Festo Assumptionis Mariae does not at all agree to any thing that is near St. Austin's time the Benedictines of Paris have cast it into the Appendix as spurious and tell us In Praes Serm. 208. in Append. Tom. 5. p. 343. Edit Par. 1683. that in their Manuscripts it wants the name of any Authour but the Divines of Louvain tell us that in several MSS. which they used in their Edition of St. Austin In Praes Serm. 83. in Apend T. 10. p. 631. Colon Agripp 1616. this Sermon de Sanctis was intituled to Fulbertus Carnotensis It is certain it was not writ by St. Austin or within two hundred years after him from St. Isidore's being quoted in it who lived in the beginning of the seventh Century it is probable that it does belong to Fulbertus who lived not till past a thousand years after Christ So that I have reason to conclude that F. Sabran was guilty either of great Ignorance or of notorious disingenuity who would ascribe to the venerable St. Austin this notorious forgery and lay that brat to St. Austin which their own Divines do and cannot but own to be altogether illegitimate and therefore F. Sabran now he cannot but see his great errour ought to undeceive the Members of his Church that so we may have no more boasting from them of this egregious cheat as if it were the genuine issue of St. Austin THE END Books printed for and sold by H. Mortlock at the Phoenix in St. Paul's Church-yard A Letter to Mr. G. giving a True Account of the Late Conference at the D. of P. in Quarto A second Letter to Mr. G. In Answer to Two Letters lately published concerning The Conference at the D. of P. in Quarto VETERES VINDICATI In an Expostulatory Letter to Mr. Sclater of Putney upon his Consensus Veterum c. wherein the Absurdity of his method and the Weakness of his reasons are shewn His false Aspersions upon the Church of England are wiped off and Her Faith concerning the Eucharist proved to be that of the Primitive Church Together with Animadversions on Dean Boileau's French Translation of and Remarks upon Bertram In Quarto