salvation is to be had or expected are errors and corruptions of it contrary to the doctrine that the holy Apostles have deliver'd to them and us in their Writings So that I may justly ask them Where was your Creed and Church before Pope Pius who was hardly so old as Luther I might add several other Doctrines and Practices as contrary to Scripture if I understand any thing in it as Darkness is to Light particularly Concerning some practices in the Roman Church which are against Scripture As 1. Service in an unknown Tongue that unreasonable service of God in a Tongue the people do not-understand Can any thing be more plainly contradictory to the whole fourteenth Chapter of 1 Cor. Doth not Saint Paul there condemn all Speaking whether in Sermons Prayers or Thanksgivings in the Church in an unknown Tongue ver 2. Unknown not to God who knows all things even Sermons in Latin Greek or any Tongue else but to Men. He prefers Prophecying i.e. Preaching or expounding the Scripture before Tongues i. e. strange and not understood by the Hearers for this very reason because he that speaketh in an unknown Tongue speaketh to God not unto men for no man understandeth him howbeit in the Spirit i.e. by a miraculous gift of the Spirit Ver. 3. as the gift of Tongues was he speaketh mysteries i. e. profound and admirable Truths But he that prophesieth or preacheth in a known Tongue speaketh unto men to Edification Exhortation and Comfort He that speaketh in an unknown Tongue edifieth himself Ver. 4. not the Church But Saint Paul would have the whole Church edifi'd or profited by whatever is spoken Hence he commands ver 26. all things to be done to edification and forbids any one to use his miraculous gift of Tongues in the Church unless he interpret what he saith or another for him that so the Church may receive Edifying i.e. spiritual profit being built up in their most holy Faith. Is it not as clear as the day at Noon that according to St. Paul's doctrine there is no profit or edification redounding to the People by whatsoever is spoken in the Church in an unknown Tongue Neither doth he in that Chapter speak only of Sermons Papists themselves are not so absurd as to preach in Latin to their people or private Conferences as Bellarmine would evade he speaketh generally of whatever is spoken in the Church it must be in a Tongue known to the people that so the people may be profited by it in regard else they are not edify'd or profited at all Neither doth he speak of Sermons only but Prayers and Thanksgivings hence ver 15 16. I will pray with the spirit and I will pray with the understanding also I will sing with the spirit and I will sing with the understanding also So that in St. Paul's judgment it 's necessary to pray and sing Praises Psalm 47.7 as David saith with understanding Then he adds Else when thou shalt bless God with the Spirit i.e. by an extraordinary gift of strange Tongues bestow'd by the Spirit on many in those days how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen to thy giving of thanks seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest Where two things are as plain as if they had been written with a Sun-beam First That St. Paul in that Chapter discourseth not of Sermons or Conferences onely but Prayers and Hymns Secondly Justin Martyr Apol. 2. Hieron in Epist ad Galatas lib. 2. in praefat That the unlearned cannot as they ought say Amen to Prayers or Hymns of Thanksgiving they understand not We use as the ancient Church did to say Amen to Prayers not to Sermons or Conferences So that Saint Paul expresly condemns Prayers in an unknown Tongue used at this day by the Roman Church in her Latin Service And there is ground to think this is one reason why they suffer not the Laity to read the Scriptures lest they should by them discern this amongst other of their palpable erroneous and corrupt practices This may be a second instance that the Romish Religion is not Apostolical Denying the use of the Scripture to the Laity V. Claudium Espenceum in Titum cap. 2. For what can be more contrary to our Saviour's command John 5.39 Search the Scriptures c And that of Saint Paul Col. 3.16 Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom and spiritual understanding Yea to the very end of Gods giving the Scriptures than to forbid the generality of the people to read them lest they should by it become Hereticks i.e. Protestants Did Saint Paul write his Epistles to the learned or Clergy only at Corinth Ephesus Philippi c. and not to the whole Church Yea doth he not adjure them at Thessalonica to cause his Epistle to be read 1 Thess 5.27 not onely to the Rulers or Elders of the Church but to all the holy Brethren or Saints Might they hear what was written to them but not read it Were they not Greeks and did not Saint Paul write unto them in their own vulgar Tongue To what end if not that they should read it Otherwise surely he would have written to them in Hebrew or Syriack for he had the gift of many Tongues But say some Politicians The common people are apt to mistake and to wrest the Scriptures to Heresies and their own destruction To which I answer First Plus inde ob hominum temeritatem detrimenti quam utilitatis oriri c. Index libror. prohib Reg. 1. If the Scriptures be so apt to be misunderstood and do more hurt than good why should we look upon them as a singular blessing of God to his Church Secondly Do onely unlearn'd men wrest the Scriptures We know the old Hereticks as Arius Nestorius Pelagius c. were neither unlearn'd nor Laicks Thirdly Why did St. Paul if the Scripture be so dangerous to the common people command his Epistle to be read to all the holy Brethren Might they not mistake his true meaning by hearing it read as well as reading it Lastly I answer The Church of God is not to be govern'd by the late Policies of men but by the Laws of Christ and the example of the Primitive Church who altho many damnable Heresies arose in those Ages Cyril contra Julian lib. 6. and were colourably maintain'd by the Scripture Hom. 2. in Matth. Chrysost Hom. 3. in Lazarum Hom. 9. in Coloss Hieron Epist ad Eustochium Salvinam Celantiam in Epitaphio Paulae as Julian the Apostate objected yet never forbad any man to read the Scripture but exhorted and encourag'd the Laity even Women to do it A Licence to read the Scriptures would have been looked upon in those days as a prodigious Novelty Because many people receive the Sacrament of Christs Body and Blood unworthily to their own damnation may therefore the Laity be wholly and generally kept as well
Antient Fathers Clem. Rom. Epist ad Corinth Justin Martyr ad Diognet Origen in cap. 3. ad Rom. Ambrose in Rom. c. 4. 9. Basil de Humil. Theodoret de curand Graec. affect lib. 7. Chrysostome in Galat. c. 3. Hesychius in Levit. l. 4. c. 3. with others but by Aquinas in Galat. 3. lect 4. in Rom. 3. lect 4. Pighius de justific Cardinal Contarenus The Antirdidag Coloniens Anselm apud Hosium Tom. 1. Confess Cathol Bonaventure 4. dist 15. qu. 1. Jansenius Concordant c. 20. p. 157. Gerson lib. 4. de Consolat Theolog. prosa 1. 5. That good Works merit Eternal life is in like manner decreed by the Council of Trent But Waldensis Sacramental Tit. 1. c. 7. saith He is the better Catholick that simply denieth all Merit and confesseth that Heaven is obtained by Grace onely The like is affirmed by Ferus lib. 3. Com. cap. 20. in Matthaeum Stella in Lucam c. 8. Ibid. c. â—â— Marsilius de gratuita justif P. Adrian and Clitoveus apud Cassand Consult Art. 6. Faber Stapulensis in cap. 11. ad Roman Petavius the Jesuit in effect denieth all Merits which he saith Dissert Eccl. lib. 2. c. 4. depend on Gods Grace and free Promise Bellarmine after his long dispute about Justification by Works and Salvation by Merits confates all he had said in these few words De Justif lib. c. 7. Tutissinum est c. It 's the safest way propter incertitudinem propriae justitiae in regard of the uncertainty of our own righteousness on which the certain knowledge that we have any Merits at all is grounded and the danger of pride and vain glory periculum inanis gloriae to place our whole trust totam fiduciam ☞ in Gods mercy onely in solâ misericordia Dei. Can any Protestant say more in opposition to Merits and Justification C. Contarenus Epist ad Card. Farnesium by our good own Works Let our very Enemies be Judges I might add Greg. Ariminens 1. dist 17. qu. 1. art 2. Durand 2. dist 27. qu. 2. p. 400. Scotus lib. 1. c. 17. qu. 1. in solutione quaest 6. See Brerewoods Enquiries Ch. 26. Contaren Instructio Christ Rhemish Annotat. in 1 Cor. 14. Prayer in a Tongue not understood by the People is defended and practised in the Roman Church yet censured and disapproved by Cardinal Contarenus Cajetan and Aquinas in 1 Cor. 14. confess it were better for Edification of the people for Prayer and other sacred Offices to be performed in the Vulgar Tongue Of the same Judgment were Lyranus in 1 Cor. 14. Cassander defensio officii pii viri cont Calvin p. 141. Haymo and Sedulius in 1 Cor. 14. Biel in Can. Missae Lect. 62. 7. Auricular Confession so severely urged by the Roman Church is denied to be necessary by any Divine Law by Peresius a Tridentine Bishop de Tradit part 3. consid 3. Petrus Oxoniensis apud Caranzam in Sixto By Cajetan Bonaventure Rhenanus Erasmus with many others It were easie but I suppose needless to add any Points more These are sufficient to evince that besides other Doctrines some Articles of the present Roman Catholick Faith so decreed and made by the late Council of Trent were never Universally owned and received as such by the visible Catholick Church in all Ages no not by all such as lived and died in the Communion of the Roman Church not long before Luther's time but were openly opposed contradicted and condemn'd by them What is already said is as I conceive a full and satisfactory Answer to Roman Catholicks demanding of us some Professors of our Religion before the Reformation It being strange if it be from the Apostles and have been in all Ages that we can shew no Writings of some eminent Professors of it before the Reformation For here we have produced the Writings of Eminent Professors of it to wit of the Prophets Apostles Holy Fathers and many of their own modern most learned Writers As to the Writings of the Prophets and Apostles many of their own Writers Lindanus Peresius Soto Andradius c. confess Panopl lib. 3. c. 5. De Tradit Cont. Brent l. 2. c 68. Orthodox explic 1. 2. Canus Loc. Tom. l. 3. c. 3. that all or most of their new Trent Articles of Faith to wit Seven Sacraments Transubstantiation Purgatory Indulgences c. have little or no ground at all in Scripture but are unwritten Verities depending on Tradition onely to wit of their Roman Church We can shew what we believe as necessary to Salvation from the Scripture which they as they confess in many Points cannot Yea what soever we believe as Articles of Faith contained in the Primitive Creeds they dare not deny All our dispute is about Points either not at all to be found at least with any convincing evidence in the Bible or plainly contradicted by it The Protestant Religion then is the true antient visible Catholick and Apostolick Religion professed and taught by the Apostles in and by their Writings Iren. lib. 3. c. 1. Quod praeconiaverunt postea per Dei voiuntatem in scripturis nobis tradiderunt fundamentum columnam sidei nostrae futurum for what they first preached they afterward by the will of God set down in their Writings that so in them we might have a sure foundation to build our Faith upon as Irenaeus saith Father we have produced also the Writings of the Antient Farthers who lived in the Ages near the Apostles and have made it evident that they were either wholly ignorant of the new additional Articles of the present Roman Catholick Faith or much doubted of them or utterly condemned them It 's true these Writers were not known by the name of Protestants as some may object and no more were they known by the name of Papists But if they professed as to be sure they did that Doctrine or Religion onely which is delivered and declared in their Writings Who will deny that they were although not nominally yet really Protestants and Professours of our Antient not of their new-minted Roman Religion made as to some parts of it to wit Transubstantiation Purgatory c. and framed in late Councils near twelve hundred years after the decease of the Apostles To their usual Question then Where was the Protestant Church or Religion before Luther I Answer First That it was there where their whole Religion cannot as they grant be found to wit in the Holy Scriptures Secondly It was Dr. White sub Papatu non Papatus as Bishop Usher saith well where their Church was in the same place though not in the same state and condition The Reformation or Protestantism did not make a new Faith or Church but reduced things to the Primitive purity Plucked not up the good Seed the Catholick Faith or true Worship but the after-sown Tares of Errour as Image-worship Purgatory c. which were ready to choak it Did the Reformation in Hezekiah's or Josiah's days set up a new
Durand Rationale lib. 6. c. 72. Turrecremata de Consecrat Distinct 2. num 4. Ad annum Christi 304. Nomine Christianorum deleto qui rempub evertebant in the days of Dioclesian the worst and last persecutor of Christians such havock and prodigious destruction was made of the Christian Church that several Trophies and Monuments as Baronius grants were set up in Spain in memory of the total extirpation of Christianity superstitione Christi ubique deletâ Where was then the conspicuous as Costerus phraseth it and illustrious state of the Catholick or particular Roman Church Surely had not the Church of Rome her self as well as other Christian Churches been in a great degree invisible as to the knowledge of the Roman Emperour and his Inquisitors in all humane probability the name of Christians as they boasted had been wholly rooted out I might add the state of the Christian Church even Roman Ingemuit totus orbis se factum esse Arianum admiratus est Dialog contra Luciferianos under the prevalency of Arianism and its heretical Head Pope Liberius when as St. Hierom writes the whole World sighed and wonder'd how it became Arian When the Catholick Bishops were banish'd from their Sees and the Orthodox Christians forsaking the Churches worshipped God in cryptis in private houses and corners Concerning which deplorable times St. Hilary writeth in this manner to such as communicated with the Arians Malè voâ—â—â—s parietum amor cepit malè Ecclesiam Dei in tectis aedisiciisque veneramini Montes mihi lacus carceres sunt tutiores Addit Rarumesse apud Orientem invenire aut Episcopum aut populum Catholicum Lib. contr Auxentium Quae nunc Ecclesia Christum liberè adorat Siquidâ—m si pia est periculo subjacet Nam si alicubi sunt pii sunt atem ubique tales permulti illi itidem absconduntur c. Epist ad solitariam vitam agent Vid. Apolog. ejus ad Constant de fuga You are ill taken with the love of walls you ill seek or reverence the Church of God in Houses and Structures Mountains and Prisons and Dungeons are safer He adds that 't was hard to find in the East a Catholick Bishop or people Athanasius saith as much or more What Church saith he now adores Christ freely Seeing if it be pious it is in danger For if there be some pious and studious of Christ as there are every where many such they also as the great Prophet ELIAS are hid thrust themselves into holes and caverns of the Earth or wander in solitude These things being undeniably evident I desire to know whether in those days the true Church was not only visible but very conspicuous to the sight of all men so that it might be evidently distinguish'd and as it were pointed at with the finger as Costerus and Valentia affirm But what need is there of many words in this case Pauiò ante mundi finem externus status Ecclesiae Romanae cessabit publicum fidelium cum eâdem commercium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 passim obtinebit tamen tunc pii corde Papâ Ecclesiâ Romana communicabunt Rhemenses in Annotat. in animo cum 2 Thess 2. Revel 12. when our Adversaries themselves grant that a little before the end of the World when Antichrist shall come the external state of the Roman Church shall cease and that the publick worship of God shall by persecution be suppressed and that the truly pious shall communicate with the Pope only in heart and soul The difference then betwixt them and us cometh only to this that what we say hath been they say shall be hereafter whilst it is agreed on both sides that an illustrious conspicuous visibility is no essential property or inseparable note of the true Church Texts alledged for Visibility as meant by the Papists answered I now come to examine the places of Scripture mention'd in your Letter to evince the contrary The first and principal urg'd by Valentia and many other is Matth 15.14 15. Ye are the light of the World. A City that is set on an Hill cannot be hid Neither do men light a Candle to put it under a Bushel c. To which may be added Isa 2.2.60.20.61.9 Dan. 7.14 quoted in your Paper To all which the same Answer may be applied My reply is that those words do not prove a perpetual conspicuous and illustrious visibility of the Church in all Ages to all persons which our Adversaries contend for First Because the words are not spoken at least directly of the Church general or successive in all Ages but of and to the Apostles personally Ye are the light of the World. And seeing they were commanded by our Saviour to teach all Nations we may reasonably suppose that they were under a special protection of divine Providence until they had fulfill'd the work committed unto them But the case of ordinary Pastors and Teachers of the Church is not the same with that of Apostles Secondly Suppose we understand the words of the Church general or successive which we grant to be a light to the ignorant World and like a City set on a Hill yet it cannot be deny'd yea our Adversaries grant it that this light of Apostolick doctrine in the Church may be obscur'd or eclipsed by error Aug. Epist ad Vincentium supra scandal and persecumay be obscur'd or eclipsed by error scandal and persecution as the Sun and Moon sometimes are tho they be glorious and most visible lights In like manner a City set on an Hill may be so clouded by foggy mists and vapors that it may become for some time invisible at least not so visible or conspicuous as that any man may point at it with his finger The other Similitude of Mens lighting a Candle and setting it on a Candlestick that so it may give light to all in the House signifies the clearness universality and diffusiveness of the doctrine taught by the Apostles But that any one particular Church Greek or Roman should be such a Candlestick as can never fail or be remov'd as well as that of Ephesus and many other Apostolical Churches wholly rooted out by Mahometanism Revel 2. or which should be as our Adversaries too grosly affirm more visible and discernable to all men than the light it self viz. of the Gospel contain'd in the Scripture plac'd in the Candlestick i. e. the Church this I suppose no prudent man will take to be our Saviour's meaning in those words That they make their Church the Candlestick and its Authority more visible to us than the truth or light of the holy Scripture is so notorious I will not stand to prove it * Quae sit vera scriptura quis ejus verus sensus non possumus scire nisi ex Testimonio verae Ecclesiae Bellarmin de Notis Eccl. lib 4. c. 2. In a word A Candle tho burning clearly on a Candlestick
may in time want snuffing and so may the most Apostolical Church in after-Ages need Reformation The second place is Matth. 18.17 Tell the Church if he neglect to hear the Church let him be to thee as a Heathen or Publican Now saith the Letter It were very hard to be condemn'd for a Heathen or a Publican for not hearing a Church that hath so closely lain hid that none could hear see feel or understand it for 900. years First I answer That these words prove not the Church visible or palpable to all men Heathens and Infidels enquiring after the true Church but at most to Christians only who live under the Church's government and submit to her Censures Secondly The words relate to a particular Christian Church of which a person is a member for it were absurd to imagine our Saviour should oblige any Christian if his Brother should offend him to tell the whole Catholick Church throughout the World his offence per literas Encyclicas Yea it 's plain and undeniable the place respects not the whole diffused number of Christians no not in any particular Church but the Governours only Now our Adversaries will not I hope say that any particular Church except their own much less its Rulers or Representatives shall be eminently visible and conspicuous to all Christians at all times Certainly our Saviour in this place does not promise any special privilege to the Church of Rome more than Antioch Ephesus or any other Apostolical Church to whom that Precept of telling the Church doth equally belong some of whom are long since utterly extinguished by the overflowing of Mahometanism How can they then from this place infer that any particular Church shall be perpetually visible and conspicuous to the World exercising Church-Government over its members Nay farther How could the Christians belonging to their Roman Church when under the persecution of Dioclesian or Constantius at which time the Shepherds being smitten the sheep were all scatter'd the Church dissipated and all Church-discipline interrupted tell the Church or make complaint to the Governours of it when they scarcely knew where they were to whom in case of offence and scandal to make complaint Our Saviour's Precept then supposes the free exercise of Church-government which in times of violent persecution cannot be exercis'd or supposed I might add Acosta de Temp. noviss lib. 2. cap. 15. Telesphorus de Magnit tribulat pag. 32. Aquipontanus de Antichrist pag. 23. That their own Writers Acosta Telesphorus the Hermite and others confess that when Antichrist cometh all Ecclesiastical Order and publick service of God shall be buried the Church-doors destroy'd the Altars forsaken the Church empty c. Now I appeal to the conscience of any man whether at that time it would be possible in case of Scandal to tell the Church when the Church shall be forc'd to hide it self and all Ecclesiastical Order is suppress'd and dissolv'd by the violence of Persecution Lastly Whereas 't is objected that the Protestant Church hath so closely lain hid for 900. years that no man could see or understand it this is very falsly affirm'd as I shall shew afterward unless such as profess'd the Religion of the Scriptures Ancient Fathers and Councils protesting against some new Roman additional Articles impos'd of late by Pope Pius and the Tridentine Council were no true visible Church of God. The last place viz. 2 Cor. 4.5 If our Gospel be hid c. is least of all to the purpose for there Saint Paul plainly speaketh not of the Church but of the Gospel or Christian Faith Hieronym in Nahum c 2. Chrysost Hom. 49. in Matth. Nunc nullo modo cognoscitur quae sit vera Ecclesia Christi nimirum ex quo obtinuit haeresis Ecclesias nisi tantummodo per Scripturas Irenaeus cont Haeres lib. 2. Quae praeconiaverunt pestea per Dei voluntatem scripserunt c Costerus Enchirid. cap. 1. Alphonsus de Castro cont Haeres grant this which is clearly deliver'd by the Scripture to which as St. Hierom and St. Chrysostom acknowledge we ought especially in times of Heresie and Persecution to have recourse for our establishment in the truth and if the Gospel first preached and afterwards written by the Apostles for what they first preached they afterwards by the will of God as Irenaeus saith wrote be hid to any it 's hid to them that perish whose minds the Devil hath blinded Doth not this place expresly confute our Adversaries who affirm that the Gospel as reveal'd by the Scripture is dark obscure and invisible to the Laity that so they may hang their faith by a blind and implicite obedience on the visibility and infallible Authority of their Church or Popes who may be as some of them have been notorious and manifest Hereticks So that these words of St. Paul can do them no service The Fathers alledg'd for the Roman visibility consider'd I come now to the Fathers quoted in your Letter and first for Chrysostom's saying * Hom. 30. in Matth. It is easier for the Sun to be extinguish'd than the Church to be darkned I wonder any sober men should require us to believe that on Chrysostom's Authority which they do not believe themselves For the Romanists Valentia and others as we have seen confess that the Church even their Roman Church may be obscur'd or darkned as it undeniably was under the Heathen and Arian Emperours in times of prevailing Heresie and Persecution So that Chrysostom must even by them be understood of a total not partial Eclipse or darkness for in that place he treateth of times of persecution wherein all grant the Church may be darkned and saith the Tyrants are gone and perish'd but the Church remaineth unconquer'd As to the places quoted out of Saint Austin Tract in Joan. de Unitate Ecclesiae Cap. 7. I answer That he speaketh of the state of the Christian Church as it was in his days in its external lustre and glory retaining the Primitive Faith without addition or detraction It was indeed strange blindness in the Donatists he writeth against not to see the true Church which as a Mountain or light on a Hill was then plainly visible before them all over Africa yea the whole World but to dare to restrain it to pars Donati the faction of Donatus as now the Jesuits restrain it to the Popish party was plain impudence Nevertheless St. Austin doth not say that the Church should always and in all after-Ages remain in that visible prosperous and illustrious state yea contrarily he confesseth that it is sometimes obscur'd thro the multitude of scandals Aliquando obscuratur Epist ad Vincentium 47. Ecclesia non apparâ—bit impiis tunc persecutoribus ultra modum saevientibus Epist 80. ad Hesychium Vide de Baptist contra Donatistas lib. 6 cap. 4. Enarrat in Psalmum 10. that it is like the Moon that may be hid that it shall not appear by reason of the
unmeasurable rage of ungodly persecutors yea so obscur'd that the members thereof shall not know one another This arguing then from the State of the Church of old in St. Austins days is just like theirs who would persuade us that the Church of Rome is now the only true Catholick and Apostolick Church because St. Paul 1600 years ago saith their Faith was commended throughout the World Rom. 1. ver 8. so was their Obedience also Rom. 16.19 But doth the Apostle say they should continue in that Faith more than Obedience unto the end of the World or that their Church alone should never corrupt the Faith or apostatize in any degree from it Tim. 4.1 He seemeth to say otherwise when he thus writeth to the Roman Church Rom. 8.18 19 20 21 22. Boast not against the branches thou bearest not the root but the root thee Because of unbelief they i. e. the Jewish Church were broken off and thou standest by Faith be not high-minded but fear for if God spar'd not the natural branches take heed lest he also spare not thee And as to Christian Obedience De Pontif. in lib. 1. in Praefat. Genebrard Chronol lib. 4. seculo 10. Baronius in Ann. 912. num 8. in ann 985. num 1. it 's granted by Bellarmin Genebrard and others that some Popes have been so scandalously wicked that they were rather Apostatical than Apostolical and scarcely deserved to have their names register'd in the Catalogue of the Roman Bishops Concerning the Papists demanding the Names of such as professed the Protestant Religion before the Reformation As for the second Question wherein satisfaction is desir'd to answer Roman Catholicks when they demand the names of some Professors of the Protestant Religion before the Reformation it being to them strange that if Protestancy be from the Apostles and hath been in all Ages they can shew no Writings of some eminent Professors of it as well before the Reformation as many now since To this I reply first That altho the Apostles were not call'd by the name of Protestants as neither were they by the name of Catholicks or Papists yet they were really of that Religion Protestants do profess for from the Apostles and their Writings have we learn'd the Religion we maintain against additional Popish Errors and traditional or unwritten points of Faith. Such as these reckon'd up by Pope Pius as Articles of the Roman Catholick Faith which all Papists must swear to profess as necessary to salvation That there are seven Sacraments properly so call'd Transubstantiation Purgatory Invocation of Saints and Angels Worshiping Images and Reliques Indulgences the Bishop of Rome's Supremacy over all Christian Churches Real and proper Sacrificing of Christ in the Mass Communion in one kind c. All which are either not mention'd in the Apostles Writings or contradicted and condemn'd by them Secondly I answer That the Ancient Fathers and Councils for 4 or 500 years at least I might say more after Christ were not in the points above-mention'd of Pope Pius his Faith but either say nothing of them or testifie against them or at least speak doubtfully of them whence I conclude that they were of the Protestant not Popish Religion This I shall shew from their Writings Yea thirdly That some of the New Articles of Faith before named cannot be prov'd to be any part of the ancient Catholick belief by the Authority of any eminent Writers for above 1000 years after Christ particularly in the points of seven Sacraments Purgatory Indulgences Communion in one kind and some others Lastly That there is scarcely any point especially of them before rehears'd condemn'd by us in the present Roman Church but we are able to produce multitudes of eminent Writers and some of their own Communion who complain of them or protest against them as well as we in the Ages next before Luther To perform my promise I shall now prove 1. Assertion First That the Articles of the present Roman-Catholick Faith recited by Pope Pius and added by him to the Nicene Creed are either not mention'd at all in the Apostles Writings or refuted and condemn'd by them Seven Sacraments not taught by the Apostles First For their seven Sacraments The Apostles no where teach us to acknowledge seven Sacraments or that Matrimony Orders Extream Unction Confirmation Confession are such and as Bellarmin affirms Nec plura nec pauciora De Sacram. lib. 2. c. 24. Chrysost Ambros Austin c. only such Baptism and the Holy Eucharist we own flowing as the antient Fathers speak out of Christ's side whence came forth Water and Bloud which are answerable to the two only Jewish Sacraments Circumcision and the Passover as we read 1 Cor. 10.2 3 4. More we find not It 's true St. Paul discoursing of the Conjugal Union betwixt Christ and his Church termeth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ephes 5.32 a great Mystery The vulgar Latine translation renders it ambiguously and improperly magnum Sacramentum a great Sacrament Hence the Romish Church will needs have Matrimonv instituted by God in Paradise to be a proper Christian Sacrament but St. Paul declareth he meant no such matter In locum for as Cardinal Cajetan observes he immediately addeth But I speak of Christ and the Church St James also mentions Anointing the sick with Oil James 5.14 but that was in order to the miraculous gift of healing the Body as we may gather from Mar. So Cajetan expoundeth that place 6.13 It had no spiritual effect on the Soul as all Sacraments properly so call'd have and must have as is granted The forgiveness of sins was by Prayer to God not Oil ver 15. Nor Transubst Secondly The Apostles did not teach Transubstantiation Durand Biel Scotus Cameracensis Cajetan grant it canbe not evidently proved from the Scripture See below Matth. 26.26 1 Cor. 10.16 17. Card. Contarenus de Sacram l. 2. c. 3. Canus loc Theol. l. 3. c 3. Fisher cont Luther c. 10. say the same 1 Cor. 11.26 27 28. Verse 29. The Church is called Christs Body is it therefore his Natural Body in a literal sense 1 Cor. 10. John 15.1 Did Christ eat his own Body when the Sacrament was administred and taken by him So Chrysostom Hom 40 in Jean 3. or that by consecration the substance of the Bread and Wine in the Lord's Supper are annihilated or turned into the substance of Christ's body and blood Yea St. Paul expresly declares the contrary for he calleth it Bread and Wine even after consecration The Bread that we break but Christ first blessed and afterwards brake it is it not the communion of the Body of Christ The Cup of Blessing we bless is it not the communion of the bloud of Christ So that Bread and the Cup i. e. by a Figure or Metonymy as all must grant the Wine in the Cup remain in the Communion as means whereby we obtain the communion of Christ's Body and
omnes dicitur Aug. de agone Christi c. 30. 1 Pet. 5.2 Acts 20.28 Gal. 2. Chrysost at least in 18 places calls St. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Casaubon Exercit. 16. Paulus Apostolorum maximus Origen Hom. 3. in Numer Quamvis Apostolis omnibus post resurrectionem suam parem potestatem Christus tribuat c. Cypr. de unitate Ecclesiae Paulus erat Petro 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nec opus habuit Petro Chrysost in Gal. c. 2. that our Lord gave the Keys first to Peter to be communicated by him â—o the rest of the Apostles No. The Scripture plainly saith Christ breathed on them all at once together and said Receive ye the Holy Ghost whose sins ye remit they are remitted c. Here the Keys promis'd to Peter are given not onely to him or first to him to be given to the rest of the Apostles by him but to all of them together in one and the same breath without preferring one before another Neither doth that other place feed my Lambs feed my sheep prove in the least that Christ committed his whole Church to Peter onely as Universal Pastour and Head of it for to feed Christ's sheep is to teach them with the word of life and this is charg'd immediately and equally on all the Apostles who had their Mission and Commission not from Peter but from Christ himself saying All power is committed to me c. Go ye therefore teach all Nations c. Yea this duty of Feeding as also Ruling implied as some think in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a Duty incumbent on all inferiour Pastors and Bishops as St. Peter himself acknowledgeth Feed the flock of God taking the care thereof 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To this I might add that St. Paul had a greater part by far of Christs flock under his Pastoral care than St. Peter for he was the Apostle of the Uncircumcision or Gentiles preaching to them Peter of the Circumcision or Jewish Nation From all which it is evident that the Pope supposing him which is not at all granted to succeed Peter in his whole Apostolick Power in plenitudinem potestatis it no way follows that he is or can be Supreme Head of the Universal Church Other Apostles in their Apostolick Churches planted by them being as to Ecclesiastical Power not at all inferiour but equal to him and the Roman Church As for a priority of Place or Order in regard Rome was at first before Constantine's days the Seat of the Emperour we deny it not but this Preheminency as the General Councils of Constantinople and Chalcedon declare was given by the Ancient Fathers and Bishops they say not by any appointment of Christ in regard it was the Imperial City of which more hereafter But to put an end to this Controversie we will appeal to an infallible Judge such as the Pope himself shall not refuse even Saint Peter himself whose words are these 1 Pet. 2.13 Submit your selves c. whether to the King as supreme c. If St. Peter acknowledge not himself but the King to be Supream methinks it should ill become his Successours to deny Kings to be supream over them But possibly it will be said St. Peter meant this supremacy onely in matters Civil not Ecclesiastical Well we take what is granted Carerius de Potestate Pontificis lib. 2. cap. 23. Cajetan in Aquin. 2. qu. 99. art 3. See the R R. Bishop of Lincoln his observation on the Pope's Bull against Q Elizabeth How is it then consonant to Apostolical doctrine for St. Peter's Successors to exempt and that in civil matters all Clergy-men from the jurisdiction and commands of the King as if they were not his Subjects as well as others Yea farther to absolve the Laity also from all obedience to their natural Princes cursing all such as obey them stirring them up when they think fit to fight against depose and murther them Is this to acknowledge the King supream Peter did but draw his sword to rescue Christ the Son of God from the hands of Murtherers and he is commanded to put it up And may Popes as they often have done command Subjects to draw it against their lawful Sovereigns But the King here spoken of was an Heathen even Nero. True. However all Christians according to Apostolical doctrine must be subject to their King tho an Heathen and ought they not much rather then to be subject to him being a Christian St. Paul's Precept is general Let every soul be subject to the higher powers which Powers were at that time Heathens yet every soul i.e. a Synecdoche every Person tho an Apostle or Evangelist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost in locum As also Theodoret. Theophylact. and Oecumenius in locum Add Bernard Epist 64. ad Senonensem Archiepisc Qui scipsum excipit seipsum decipit as St. Chrysostom comments on that Text much more the Pope ought to be subject Possibly some will reply That the Church and St. Peter the Head of it had no Auhority over Heathens which are without but that they had a supremacy over all Christians and consequently over Kings as Christians If this exception be of any weight it unavoidably follows that whilst Nero was an Heathen St. Peter was his Subject and he Sovereign but if he had become a Christian S. Peter was his Sovereign and had the supremacy over him Was not this an excellent reason to persuade Nero to become a Christian whereby he must deprive himself of the Sovereignty The truth is Christ came not tollere jura sed peccata mundi to take away the sins not the rights of the meanest Subjects much less of Kings or in the least to diminish their just Authority 1 Tim. 6.1 2 The Apostles expresly charge Children to be obedient to their Parents Servants to their Masters tho they were Heathens and themselves Christians Dominion is not founded in Grace neither is Christ's Kingdom as he himself professed of this World for then would my Servants fight He that gives Kings converted a Crown of Glory deprives not them of their Earthly one or any due right belonging to it Obedience therefore in all things either active or passive is necessarily to be yielded unto them as supream Governours Nor the Sacrifice in the Mass Eighthly Concerning a real and proper Sacrifice of Christ in the Mass or Holy Eucharist it is expresly contradicted in the Scripture especially by St. Paul Heb. 7.27.9 25 26 27 28. 10.10 In which places the blessed Apostle distinguisheth Christ's Sacrifice from and prefers it before the Levitical ones in regard they were reiterated and often repeated not so this but by once offering of himself once offered up by himself Heb. 9.27 28. and once for all he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified As then men properly can die no more than once so Christ can be properly sacrific'd no more but once 'T is St. Paul's own argument In