hath erred therefore it can err You will put your Converters in their turn into some kind of perplexity For there will be a necessity either that they hold their peace and say nothing but absurdities or else that they endeavour to prove by discussion of Opinions that the Church of Rome has not erred and 't is a Head of Discourse where I am in no fear or concern for you for how little soever you are instructed in the Word of God you will easily dismount the most able Sophisters when you endeavour to prove that neither Transubstantiation nor the Worship of Images nor the Invocation of Saints nor the Adoration of the Eucharist nor the Mass nor Purgatory are in the Scripture There needs no greater ability for that than for a Man to prove that a Chamber is empty when there is nothing in it They object unto you that the Scripture has not said all but 't is a sensible absurdity that the Scripture should be given to instruct us concerning what we ought to adore and it should forget three fourth parts of the objects of our Adoration It speaks not to us but of the Adoration of God and nevertheless Religious Worship must be given to Saints to Images to Reliques and to the Sacrament of the Altar Are you so filly as to be taken in so pitiful a snare The Scripture has not said all let it be granted with respect to the Ceremonies and Orders of Discipline which are not of the Essence of Religion but to believe that the Scripture has not told us all which is of the Essence of the Christian Religion is ridiculous I do maintain that he ought to have lost all shame that shall advance it and to permit himself to be persuaded thereof he must have lost all reason and be degenerated to a Beast Was it agreeable to the Wisdom of God imperfectly to instruct the Apostolick Church and to leave to posterity the charge of adding those essential parts which were wanting But provided you can draw your Converters from these Methods of Prescription which are the true Snares of the Devil invented as his last Remedies I shall not fear or be concerned for you altho they should batter you with the Arms of Tradition and tho they should tell you an hundred times the Scripture has not said all Tradition adds the rest For you will always have an infallible Refuge in the Scripture and you will be able to say if Tradition may add to the Scripture at least it ought not to destroy and teach or command that which the Scripture condemns After which it will not be difficult to prove that not only the Scripture says nothing of Transubstantiation or the taking away of the Cup or the Sacrifice of the Mass of Purgatory or the Worship of Images or the Invocation of Saints c. but that the Scripture does formally condemn them Behold the first general method for ruining the fallacious Arguments on the behalf of Infallibility Behold another the most sensible proof and that unto which you will be obliged to have regard when they would prove that you ought to have a blind submission to the Church of Rome is Texts of Scripture 'T is for example that which our Lord Jesus said Matth. 16. That he hath built his Church upon S. Peter in such sort that the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it That which S. Paul says in 1 Tim. 3.15 That the Church is the pillar and ground of truth There 's that which is their strength But first of all demand of these Gentlemen whether the Church of Rome be mentioned there Say I grant that Text signifies that the Church is infallible and that the Devil never can introduce any Error but how shall I know that 't is the Roman Church to whom this glorious promise of Infallibility is made The Greek Church that of the Nestorians Jacobites or Eutychians are very great Communions in the East which call themselves Christians upon as good a Title as the Church of Rome The Apostles certainly founded the Eastern Churches it is without peradventure and it is apparent that Jesus Christ hath left the privilege of being infallible to them Why should he cause it to pass from the East to the West To that they will say you see that 't is to the Church of S. Peter that the promise of Infallibility is made Upon thee will I build my Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it Now the Roman Church is the Church of S. Peter Upon that demand that they prove by the Scripture these two Articles First That this promise was not made but to the Church of S. Peter Secondly That S. Peter is the Founder of the Church of Rome The first thing is impossible to be proved 'T is a prodigious absurdity that of the twelve Apostles to whom Christ Jesus said that they ought to found Churches he should have no regard but to S. Peter and to the Church which he ought to found 'T is more clear than the day that that which our Lord promised he promised to the twelve Apostles and to other Churches But your Converters will have yet more trouble to prove by the Scripture that the Roman Church is the Church of S. Peter There appears not any Footstep thereof in the whole New Testament on the contrary 't is clear there was a Church at Rome before S. Peter and S. Paul had been there It may be one may prove that S. Peter was never at Rome At least it may be proved that he never resided there in the Quality of Bishop For S. Paul says expresly that S. Peter was the Apostle or Bishop of the Jews or Circumcision and that he was the Bishop of the Gentiles Therefore S. Peter in the Quality of the Bishop of the converted Jews ought to have his Seat either at Jerusalem or Babylon in the Confines whereof was the main body of the dispersed Jews Moreover he writ and dated his Epistles from Babylon You may therefore hold your selves there and say I am well content that there be an infallible Church on earth but when I see with all my eyes that the Roman Church has erred you shall permit me to search an infallible Church elsewhere and to keep me where I am expecting till I sind it You may I say keep you there but don't do it move on further and tell your Converters Gentlemen I perceive that these words the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against the Church may have two senses For they may signifie that the Devil shall never introduce any error into the Church of what nature soever it be Or it may signifie that the Devil shall never ruin the Church that he shall never entirely destroy it by ruining its Foundations i. e. it s fundamental Verities Tell me do these words signifie necessarily the first that is to say that the Devil shall never introduce any capital or considerable Errors into the
is true that in his Book of Prescriptions from the 15th Chapter to the 22th he proves that we may not dispute against Hereticks by the Scripture but by the Tradition of the Churches And he returns to it again in the 37th and 38th Chapters thereof But if the new Converts which have written to us and do send us to that Book had read it with some wisdom and attention of mind they would have seen that it neither doth nor can concern us 1. The Hereticks concerning whom the question is there were no Christians they were Magicians Disciples of Simon Magus who retained the Name of Christian and no mâ—â—â— Besides Tertullian says plainly * Chap. 37. That we must 〈◊〉 them at a distance from the Scriptures because being no Christians they did not belong to them 2. These Hereticks did not acknowledg the Authority of the Scriptures they rejected them or received only some pieces of them cut off from the rest and which were wholly corrupt and falsified And when the Catholicks quoted to them the Holy Scripture they derided it as a fabulous Writing How then could any man dispute with them from a Book whose Authority they did not acknowledge there was a necessity of having recourse to another sort of proofs 2. That which was good in the time of Tertullian is not good at this time of day I do maintain that it was then very easie and very convenient to dispute against Hereticks by Tradition It was then not above an hundred years since the last of the Apostles died There was nothing more easie than to learn what had been their Doctrine by their Successors It is about a hundred and fifty years since the Reformed Church of Geneva had its existence If the Doctrin of Calvin were now under dispute nothing were more easie than to prove without Book that his Doctrine passed without alteration even to those that now teach in that Church and School But is it the same thing when there are 1200 1500 and 2000 years past By what way can we search so far and ascend so high through an infinite number of Men of whom not one hath retained the Doctrine that he did receive in the same estate in which it was delivered to him Behold a very fine Comparison 3. Add to this that Tertullian sends us to the Testimony of those Churches which were founded by the Apostles because those Churches had the Authentick Letters as he calls them that is to say the Original Writings of the Apostles so that to send the Hereticks to the Churches and to their Testimony by reason of those Authentick Letters was to sâ—â—d them to the Scripture it self 4. Besides let thes◠〈◊〉 â—nd She Converts which have been seduced by the reading of this Book read it from the 22 to the 32 Chap. and they will see that the Doctrine which Tertullian would have us search in Tradition is the same which was contained in the Writings of the Apostles and not an unwritten Word and certain Doctrines which the Apostles did commit to the Ears and the Memories of their Successors The Hereticks would not acknowledge the Authority of the sacred Volumes Go to says Tertullian to them lay by the Holy Bocks and let us lay hold of Tradition let us see what the Bishops have taught since the Apostles and I will prove that 't is precisely the same Doctrine with that which is written in our Books which you reject Read you that have suffered your selves to be abused read I say the 22 Chap. and those that follow to the 27 and you will see that the Hereticks spake exactly the same Language which your Converters do that we must not apply to nor support our selves by the Writings of the Apostles * Tertull. de Prescrip c. 25. That the Apostles indeed might know all and agree in the things which they did preach but they did not reveal all things to all that they said certain things publickly and to all but that there were other things which they said in secret and to a few and that is it which St. Paul means when he saith to Timothy O Timothy keep that good thing which was committed to thee Behold exactly the Doctrine of your Converters and that of the ancient Hereticks 'T is that which Tertullian opposes proving that the Apostles delivered nothing by Tradition but that which is written 5. Poor silly Fools which have suffered your selves to be seduced by I know not what shadows and appearances and who put your selves to judge of Antiquity without knowing any thing thereof If you knew against what Hereticks Tertullian disputed you would see that the Contrversie was not about things that were not in the Holy Scriptures These Hereticks denied that Jesus Christ was God and that he was a true Man They said that he had no true Flesh and that his Passion was nothing but a Tragedy and an appearance of a great many Phantoms they denied the Resurrection of the Flesh Was there any need to recur to Tradition to prove such things as these Doth not the Scripture contain those Truths that are opposite to these wicked Imaginations as clearly as Tradition And do you not see that Tertullian forsakes the Scriptures on this Subject only because the Enemies against which he disputed had forsaken them and had no reverence for their Authority 6. To conclude If there be any hard terms in this Book attribute them in the first place to the heat of Dispute which always carries Men too far secondly to the Genius and African manner of Tertullian's Expressions and learn that according to the same Author * Lib. Prescrip c. 15. One cannot prove any thing which respects the Faith but by those Letters and Writings which are the Rule thereof Learn by this excellent Passage of Tatian who was then the Judge of Controversies and the Source and Fountain of Instruction 't is to that he refers the manner of his becoming a Christian †Tatian Orat. in Graec. As I sought every where with care I happened on some Books of the Barbarians so the Pagans call the Books of Christians and Jews and I sound them as to time much more ancient than the Philosophy of the Greeks and much more venerable if we consider the Errors which are in the Grecian Books I gave credit to these Books because their style was simple and yet magnificent because there was nothing affected in them because the Discourses were not obscure and many things to come were predicted in them I was affected with them because of the greatness of the Promises and because they learn'd me that there was but one Moâ—â—rch in the Vniverse This Ancient knew not as yet the Divinity of Monsieur de Meaux that the first Article of Faith is I believe the Church and that we ought not to believe that the Scripture is Divine but because the Church says so And as to Tradition you which suffer your selves to be dazled by the
off Heads to hang and burn therefore it ought not to be imputed to her A Sovereign Magistrate contents himself to be Judg and to condemn to Death but he doth not execute he leaves that to the Hangman by consequence if he condemn the Innocent and cause them to die it ought to be imputed to the Hangman and not to him The Church doth a very fine honour to Magistrates she makes them her Hangmen she herself doth not kill but she constrains Princes to kill and burn She constrains I say by Excommunications Censures Exhortations Seductions Sollicitations and the end thereof is she would be able to say The Church dips not her hand in Blood the Church by it self never makes use of force Did the Devil ever cheat after a more impudent and frontless manner I will not say after a more fine and subtil manner for it is to lye without any hope to deceive the Snare is so broad and so ridiculous It were better without Craft to take the way that the Bishop of Meaux takes at last and to maintain that Christian Princes as such have right to punish pretended Hereticks with Death Understand you says he That Princes who are Sons of the Church never ought to make use of the Sword to abuse the Enemies thereof Do you dare to say contrary to the opinion of your Doctors which have maintaind by so many Writings that the Republick of Geneva had power and right to condemn Servetus to the Fire for having denied the Divinity of the Son of God It must be avowed that these Gentlemen are admirable in their confidence Do you dare to say Yes we dare to say it since we say it with most part of the Ancients and with the wisest and most understanding of the Moderns We dare say that the Doctrine which the B. of Meaux maintains here is bloody and cruel and that the Church ought to leave it in share to him who was a Liar and Murderer from the beginning Servetus was burnt at Geneva therefore it is lawful to burn Hugonots and the Calvinists God forgive these unhappy men which have the Cruelty to compare us with Servetus This man was not only an Enemy of the Divinity of Jesus Christ but he was an Enemy of all Divinity he was impious he was a Blasphemer And although he made profession of believing one God the irreverent manner wherewith he speaks of Holy Mysteries makes it plain enough that he had renounced all Religion as well as all Shame It ought to be permitted us to quit our hands of such men They object unto us the Sentiment of our Doctors I answer Our Doctors never did believe that we ought to persecute and burn men that confess God and Jesus Christ according to the three Creeds They never put Papists to Death for the sake of their Religion But although some of our first Writers should have gone too far in speaking concerning the punishment of Hereticks it ought to be known that our Authors are not our Teachers we have but one only Teacher and that is Jesus Christ speaking by his Prophets and Apostles We swear to no mans words but to those of God. And without serving my self of the Examples and Authority of your Doctors tell me in what place of Scripture Hereticks and Schismaticks are excepted from the number of those Malefactors against whom S. Paul hath said that God hath armed Kings and Princes It appertains not to us to shew you that Hereticks are not of the number of those against which God hath put a Sword in the hands of Princes 'T is for you Gentlemen Persecutors to prove to us that they are comprehended there For we have sense reason piety and humanity on our side and besides we have the consent of sound Antiquity for more than four hundred years How could the Church be able to put the Sword in the hand of Magistrates for the punishment of her Enemies in a time when the most scrupulous Christians found it difficult to consent to the Death of those Criminals that disturbed the publick peace and that of particular persons and did maintain that Christians without exception never ought to dip their hands in Blood. In what Dictionary hath Monsieur de Meaux found that evil thinkers and evil doers are the same thing Princes have right to punish evil doers with Death therefore they have also right to punish evil thinkers with Death They have right to punish those whose Crimes are apparent to the publick ruine therefore they have right to burn men whose Crime is in the Conscience the Empire whereof appertains only to God. If the Church have right to call in the Secular Power for the punishment of Hereticks why did S. Paul say simply A man that is an Heretick reject after the first and second admonition Why did he not say Deliver him to the secular Power that he may be burnt Did he not know that in a few Ages Princes would become Christians and have the Sword in their hands Did he only give Precepts for the present time and state Hath this Cruelty of Massacring honest well-meaning but mistaken Persons any affinity with the Precepts of Jesus Christ which commands us to serve our selves with Sweetness Humanity Prayers Exhortations and reasons for the reduction of them It is then permitted to Massacre the Jews for there are none greater Enemies to the Church than they are Is that the Spirit of the Gospel which promises a return and conversion to that Nation How shall they return if they be destroyed Will men never be ashamed of this Antichristian Barbarity Will they never know that it is the Beast in the Revelations who makes himself drunk with the Blood of Saints devours their Flesh makes War upon them and overcomes them and is therefore called Beast Lion Bear and Leopard For he must have renounced reason and humanity and be transformed into a Savage Beast that behaves himself towards Christians as the Church of Rome behaves it self towards us Monsieur de Meaux affirms that what they do against us at this day is nothing but a lawful exercise of the Power that Princes enjoy by Authority from God for the punishment of Offenders And I will prove to him in three words that it is false 1. Princes in the use of the Sword against Malefactors design their ruin that publick Societies be no more troubled with them 'T was the end that was heretofore proposed in Persecutions for Religion 'T was the end that Charles the Ninth pretended to have in the Massacre of S. Bartholomew 'T is the end of the Inquisitors who burn all those that are suspected of Heresie It hath been the end of all Persecutors in past Ages But this is not their end at this day they intend not the Destruction of the pretended Hereticks but their Conversion Therefore although it should be true that Hereticks are not eccepted out of the number of those Malefactors against whom God hath armed Princes this will
Church or to speak better that the Church shall never fall into any Error Not at all For if one say to a Prince I will take care that your Enemies shall never prevail upon you that will not necessarily signifie that the Enemy shall never have any Victory upon him or gain any considerable advantage against him Altho this Prince should lose some Villages yea and some Provinces yet if the gross and capital parts of his Empire always subsist notwithstanding he would have the accomplishment of the promise made unto him Provided therefore that the Church subsist in all Ages altho corrupt provided that the Fundamentals of Christianity remain throughout in their integrity the promise the gates of hell shall not prevail against it hath its accomplishment But your Converters will tell you these words signifie not so for they signifie that the Church can never fall into any Error Answer them That is the thing that is in question between you and me But who shall judge for us concerning the sense of these words It must not be you for you are a party and who can better judge than Scripture and Experience Now 't is clear by the Scripture that the sense of these words the gates of hell shall never prevail against the Church is not that the Church shall never suffer any considerable Errors in its Faith. All the Holy Scripture affirms the contrary It complains sometimes that the ancient Church was become idolatrous and had served other gods It foretels in express words that the Christian Church should corrupt it self That grievous wolves should enter into the fold not sparing the flock That there would be perilous times in which there would be an Apostacy from the Faith and seducing Spirits would teach Doctrines of Devils That Antichrist the son of perdition should sit in the Temple and in the Church of God. That the Church should be hid and as in a desart for the space of one thousand two hundred and sixty prophetick days that is one thousand two hundred and sixty years That when the Son of Man shall come he shall not find faith nor love among Men. That false Prophets and false Christs shall arise and deceive many To conclude for one Text by which it may be proved that the Church cannot err we can produce an hundred that do affirm that false Teachers should introduce Errors there-into Let us leave the Scriptures and pass to Experience and see whether the Church hath not actually erred It is proved clearly that she hath erred because she hath established a Worship directly opposite to that pure and simple Worship the Model whereof is found in the New Testament viz. of Images of Saints and Saintesses of a second sort of Mediators of Masses Sacrifices and a hundred other things that have not the least shadow of appointment there Let us return to our Text The Gates of Hell shall not prevail against the Church It is disputed whether this Text doth signifie that the Church can never Err in any wise or whether it signifies that the foundations and fundamental verities of the Church can never be overturned In truth the last sense is that of Jesus Christ And all that can be granted to the Papists is that they are capable of the other But is it not very clear that we ought to chuse the latter seeing the Holy Scripture and experience determines us thereunto by a manner wholly invincible It is true and we see it that by a singular Providence God hath not permitted the Foundations of Christianity to be subverted in any of the Christian Communions all receive the Creeds of the Apostles Nice Constantinople yea even that attributed to St. Athanasius Behold therefore what our Lord would mean thereby But besides this we see that there is no Communion that hath continued pure all have embraced Errors and some of them such as are filthy shameful and mortal Therefore it is not that which our Lord Jesus Christ would say it is not a promise of absolute infallibility that is made to the Christian Church Without doubt he foretold what is come to pass and not that which never happened Behold my Brethren two general methods by which you may be able to rescue your selves from the Sophisms and fallacious Arguments which they call ways of Prescription till we can clear up those difficulties that you your selves cannot resolve about that submission that people ought to have for their Guides to the end that they may walk safely The second medium or argument wherewith all these Gentlemen serve themselves and whereof Monsieur de Meaux serves himself here to prove that they have a succession of Doctrine as well as a succession of Seats is the impossibility of insensible changes If the Invocation of Saints say they the worship of Images Masses without Communicants the taking away of the Cup had been newly introduced the Innovator would have been known and his name would have been branded with infamy as that of Arrius and Nestorius I do not think that ever any thing hath been done more opposite to reason and fidelity than the disputes these Gentlemen have thought fit to raise against insensible changes and alterations I say first it is opposite to fidelity For it is not possible that these Gentlemen can believe what they say when they tell us that we cannot determine the Authors nor the times of the principal Changes whereof we complain seeing on the contrary we observe to them the times the principal Authors and the noise that these Innovations made in the World. Does not every one know that the introduction of Images into the Church the taking away of the Cup and the establishment of the Papal Authority did make a terrible noise suffer great contraditions cause great troubles and even the shedding of much blood in the Church It is therefore notoriously to dispute against honesty and fidelity to deny that we are able to give any account of the most eminent and principal Innovations But is it not to dispute against reason and sound judgment to say as Monsieur de Meaux doth that if there had been any Innovators in the Church the spirit of Truth would have marked them and their names would have been infamous as those of Arrius Nestorius c. How could the names of these Innovators be infamous seeing their Innovations were received and entertained The Authors of Heresies and Superstitions which are rejected are indeed noted with infamy but those that are received are Canonized and adored Therefore those of the fourth Age which introduced the Invocation of Saints had no note of infamy put upon them because the beginnings of that unhappy Superstition were greedily imbraced The reason why those things in those Ages were not treated as Innovations and the Authors of them as Innovators was because they adopted and received them Had they assigned any note of infamy upon them they had condemned the worship which they admitted they had accused it of
its Ceremonies were intirely unknown As to what appertains to other Sacraments as is that of Marriage and Penance he must have a mind blinded by prejudice beyond all imagination to believe they may be found in the Scripture Marriage and Penance are indeed found there but there is not one word which does establish them as sacred Ceremonies designed to seal the Covenant of Grace and to confer forgiveness of sins Confirmation is found there i. e. the custom of laying on of hands for the giving the Holy Spirit and that of Anointing the Sick to recover them from Diseases Some of the Proselytes of these Gentlemen make a great business of it and have said to us as a great reproach that we have taken away Confirmation and Extreme Unction It is a great pity that minds which seem inlightned should stumble at trifles And is it not clear that this Imposition of Hands and Extreme Unction was designed for doing of Miracles which are long since ceased But they say that the following Ages did nevertheless practise it That we shall see afterward The Invocation of the Holy Virgin and Saints the Worship of Relicks Adoring of Images and the Service of Creatures in Popery is an affair so considerable that it fills almost all Nevertheless the Scripture of the New Testament says nothing of it Nor is it possible that Men well Educated can persuade themselves that these are Apostolical Traditions when we see not the least footsteps of them in the Writings of the Apostles It is a blindness which cannot be understood As to matter of Fact we can have no dispute with Papists concerning it They must acknowledge that the Apostles and Evangelists speak not one word either of the Invocation of Saints and Angels nor of the Veneration of Relicks nor of the Adoration of Images As to matter of Right if the Church has power to introduce these new Worships let it be proved and put past doubt and Controversie for I do affirm that he must be smitten with a spirit of blockishness that maintains that we may Religiously invoke creatures without the Authority of God and order of his Apostles Plainly it will be said that the Apostles have appointed the Invocation of Saints and that they themselves have practised it but they have left nothing written concerning it I do affirm that he must have a Forehead made of Brass who shall say such a thing And the new Converts who can be persuaded of it make no use of their reason It will never enter into the mind of a reasonable Man that the Apostles have appointed Invocation of Saints and said nothing of it in their Writings Purgatory which they would have pass for a little thing is nevertheless a very great one For Prayers for the dead publick and private Masses and almost all the Roman Worship is founded thereon So that the Holy Spirit could not let it slip If there be a Purgatory it must be in the Scripture or there is none .. I take it for granted and 't is to scoff People to go search this pretended Fire in the prison whence we must not go out till we have paid the utmost farthing in the fire that ought to try all things at the end of the world in the prison where are the Spirits to which Noah preach'd If Heaven and Hell were no other ways revealed in the Scripture the profane would have a fair opportunity to laugh at us The Authority of the Pope is the last of those Articles of Popery that I have represented 'T is an Affair about which there can be no Controversie which has any foundation in the World. Ask your Converters where-is the Pope in the Scriptures they will quote to you the Words of Jesus Christ to S. Peter Thou art Peter and upon this rock will I build my church Call a Turk a Jew or any other Man that hath common sense and ask him whether he sees therein that God hath established a Man at Rome with full authority to guide the whole Church to damn to save to judge of all Differences to determine without Appeal to excommunicate Kings Princes and Sovereigns he will believe you laugh him to scorn The new Converts which see therein the Apostolick Chair from S. Peter to Innocent the Eleventh have very good Eyes I beseech you my Brethren take your Converters a little to those Texts of Scripture where S. Paul enumerates the Officers of the Church He has given some to be Pastors Teachers Apostles Evangelists Bishops Deacons Elders and Prophets in those places where he declares the Duties of those who enjoy the Offices of the Church Press them say I and demand of them whether they dare say that the Apostle hath omitted the first of all Offices an Office alone in its kind infinitely superior to all others Ask them if they do believe in good earnest that S. Paul declared the Duties of Bishops in general and that he said nothing for the Regulation of the Bishop of Bishops I am persuaded if you press them earnestly thereon they will blush in your Faces Behold I do maintain that I have said enough already for the History of the first Age. The silence of the Scripture about all the Articles of Popery is an indisputable proof that then it was wholly unknown But there is much more you have an hundred positive Proofs that then the Christian Religion was wholly opposite to Popery Against the Real Presence you have all those Passages where the Eucharist is called Bread and a Commemoration of the Death of our Lord all those where 't is said our Lord is on high and not here below Against the Sacrifice of the Mass you have all the Epistle to the Hebrews Against the Worship of Creatures you have the Decalogue and a thousand other Commandments which do appoint that you adore and invoke God alone Against the taking away the Cup and the Adoration of the Eucharist you have the History of its Institution Against Purgatory you have an hundred Texts which tell you that after this life Believers go to Heaven Against the Pope you have all those places where our Lord and the Apostles forbid the Domination of Church-Men both over their Flocks and one another This is not a place to engage in a long Controversie by the Scripture we compose a History not a Disputation Know therefore historically in the following Articles what was the Primitive Christianity Behold what was the form of the Apostolick Church 1. Christians having as yet no Churches assembled where they could for the Service of God and it was almost always from House to House This is apparent both in the History of the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles of S. Paul. 2. In the Assemblies they preached and declared the Word of God. This is also certain and read in divers Texts in the Book of the Acts. 3 They brake Bread from House to House the Sacred Scripture says so expresly that is to say
years without having one word of General Councils she passed without them during all that time Nevertheless she had never more need of them supposing them to be infallible means of ending Controversies and suppressing Heresies For in the first three Hundred years the Church was plagued with near Fifty differing Heresies Now judg you whether it be likely that God should appoint an infallible Judg to his Church and a sure way of knowing the Truth and that he should deny her the use of this means for the space of well near two Hundred and fifty years that is to say from the death of S. John the last of the Apostles till the Council of Nice So that in the Ages of greatest purity it will be found that the Church did not derive this purity from any other Fountain but from the simple and pure word of God it makes it evident that the Church may be pure without an infallible Judg in the midst of her Now if the Church may continue pure for the space of two Hundred and twenty five years without a General Council that is to say without an infallible Judg why may she not continue pure three four or five Hundred years For my part I call this a Demonstration that the Church may very well make a shift without those Judges that are called Infallible Let them answer it when they please Observe also that the Church was tormented with Fifty horrible Heresies which thought to have overwhelmed and sunk her and having no Councils she was then left to a Spirit of Error in those times that she had greatest need of a Guide for she had no other Rule but the Writings of the Apostles which according to our Adversaries are Medals with two Faces which may be looked on in a various manner and which all men expound in favour of their own Perswasions It is not amiss to bring hither Tertullian's Book of Prescriptions of which they make use with such success to deceive those that are weak among us It appears by this Book that the Orthodox were in the greatest distress in the World to convince and stop the mouths of Hereticks The Hereticks gave themselves to expound the Scripture after their own manner and in a sense contrary to the truth Tertullian complains thereof and says That false Interpretations do as much injury to Truth as the boldness of those that corrupt the Scriptures He adds That the weak find themselves confounded seeing Hereticks as well as Catholicks dispute from the Scripture To get out of this perplexity he recurs to the Succession of Bishops by whom it might be proved that they taught nothing but what the Apostles had taught before them he found no other way of escape this man had a Mind very much straitned or he was very ignorant Why did he not think of General Councils who are the only infallible means of knowing the sense of the Scriptures Neither he nor any of the Writers of this Age and of that which followed it had any knowledg of them Nevertheless as it is said it was a means established and appointed by God and yet for the space of two Hundred years it must be acknowledged that God hid this means from the whole Church and that he left her in a streight given up to the Humors of Hereticks and to their lewd and false Interpretations No reasonable Man will ever swallow such a Prodigy 3. I intreat you my Brethren to consider if it be likely that God should place Infallibility in Assemblies whose Original was wholly casual and accidental The occasion which gave birth to General Councils was the Conversion of the Roman Emperors to Christianity and the great extent of that Empire For if the Emperors had continued Pagans Councils from all parts of the Empire had never been assembled the Emperors would have looked upon it as a Conspiracy and would never have permitted it Besides if the Roman Emperors by becoming Christians had lost half the Provinces of the Empire there had never been any General Councils neither For the divers Princes which had possessed themselves of the Provinces of the Empire would not have permitted their Subjects to assemble with those who continued under the Rule of the Romans for fear lest these Conferences should be designed to search out ways of returning under the Government of their first Masters Now judg if a Tribunal which in the purpose of God was to be the Fountain of the Oracles of the Church in all Ages ought to owe its birth to a concourse of Affairs and Mundane Circumstances that were wholly and purely so Ought not God to have established this Tribunal without dependance on the World and the Affairs thereof as from the beginning he established Presbyteries so S. Paul calls the Assemblies of Pastors is every City and in every particular Church He must have a very obdurate Mind I think who is not moved and touched with this Discourse and Reason 4. What may be the assurance that a Man may have of such an Article of Faith which is founded on a Matter of Fact notoriously false 'T is that the Councils of the Fourth and Fifth Ages were assembled from the whole Universal Church That say I is notoriously false there were not above three Hundred and eighteen Fathers in the Council of Nice the most ancient and the most venerable of all the Councils What are three Hundred and eighteen Bishops for the whole vast extent of the Roman Empire where there was an infinite number of them It does not appear that all the Churches did depute their Bishops thither nor that all the Provinces of the Roman Empire did assemble to choose some one out of their Body who should carry their Counsel and Advice Constantine called together all the Bishops in general those that could and those that would appeared there none appeared there but those of the Eastern Church there were not Twelve of the Latin Church there out of all Spain none were seen but Hosius Bishop of Corduba out of all France none but Nicasius Bishop of Die or Dijon Besides this there were Churches out of the Roman Empire it may be there were Churches even in the Indies at least those which tell us that S. Thomas carried the Gospel thither ought to believe so 'T is certain at least that there were large Churches in Persia Ecclesiastical History speaks of a great Persecution which was raised at that time against the Christian Churches of Persia by the Impudence or ill guided Zeal of Maruthas a Bishop who burnt one of the Temples which the Persians had consecrated to the Honor of the Fire These Churches of Persia were not called to this Council nor did they appear there All the World are at an Agreement that the first Council of Constantinople held under Theodosius the Great was not General There were none but Eastern Bishops there yea two Hundred years after in the time of Gregory the first Bishop of Rome the Western
she is visible in this old age an corruption as she was visible in her youth and purity so that neither her youth nor her old age neither purity nor corruption signifie any thing to Visibility The case is the same concerning the Perpetuity of the Ministery the Ministery is perpetual therefore 't is incorruptible Deny that consequence without scruple for 't is false but some will say Does not the Lord teach with those Pastors which follow one another in the order of Ages Answer Ye because these Pastors teach the three Creeds conformably to the Holy Scriptures Jesus Christ teaches with them and they with Jesus Christ But because they teach beyond the three Creeds Idolatrous and superstitious Doctrines they teach against Jesus Christ My Brethren that which I have said unto you in this and the preceding Letter is sufficient to make you understand what is the perpetual Visibility of the Church Read it and read it again until you understand and possess it very well and you will easily answer the two Sophisms which your Adversaries put upon you The first is That if the Church hath not been always visible the Pagans for a thousand or twelve hundred years before Luther's Reformation had no door open to their conversion For how should they be converted and how should they find the Church if she were invisible Now 't is a prodigy contrary to all reason and probability that God for the space of so many Ages should hold the door of the Church close and hidden Besides this is contrary to History and Experience which learns us that the most part of the Northern Nations Sweden Denmark Poland and many Provinces of Germany did not receive the Christian Faith till since the eighth Age i. e. since the time that Antichristianity was mixed with the Christian Doctrine For the Roman Church began according to us to be Antichristian before the sixth Age. This is a difficulty which they propose to you to which you ought to answer That according to what we have told you we do not teach that the Church became invsible by the Antichristianity which is entered there she is corrupt but she continues visible Christianity hath not failed to continue its integrity in Popery therefore the Church remains intirely there I have told you that Christianity and the Church are the same thing This Christianity continuing visible in the Books of the Old and New Testament and in the three Creeds which the providence of God hath preserved in Popery the door of conversion hath been always open to the Pagan Nations for Jesus Christ crucified and his true Mysteries have not failed to preserve their force and efficacy in despight to all the Darkness which the bastard Mysteries of Antichristianity have brought in thither There hath been Conversion and Perversion and Perversion in the Pagan Nations which have joyn'd themselves to the Church of Rome since the eighth Age. There hath been Conversion for they have entertained one God in three Persons one God Creator of Heaven and Earth one Jesus the Eternal Son of God the Word made Flesh who died and rose again for the Sins of Men who will come to Judge the Living and the Dead and having raised men from their Graves will send some men to everlasting Torments and some to the Kingdom of Heaven This is Christianity by receiving this they became Converts to Jesus Christ There hath been Perversion also for by receiving a Vicar of Jesus Christ a Vice-God upon Earth a Soveraign to all the World a Master of Kings as of Subjects of Crowns as of Shepherds Crooks by adoring Bread Angels Saints Reliques and Images they have done nothing else but changed their ancient Paganism for a new one But however it be their Perversion has not hindered their Conversion and that they have entertained Antichristianity hinders not that they have not embraced also the Christian Doctrine So that the Gate of Conversion to Christianity was never shut But the question is Whether this Gate be saving whether these Conversions be profitable or whether we ought to say of the Missionaries of the Roman Church what Christ Jesus said of the Pharisees That they compass sea and land to make Proselites whom they made twofold more children of hell than themselves The question is Whether the Antichristianity which they have embraced hath more power to destroy them than the Christianity which they have received hath to save them It behoves you to answer that these People who are joyned to the Church of Rome since the eighth Age have some portion and lot with her ancient Members that God doth nothing in vain that he hath not converted so many men to Christianity to destroy them all though it be a corrupt Christianity which in the times when there were no Churches which were not very corrupt as well as the Church of Rome it may be granted that God did preserve unto himself children in these corrupt Societies that in these Pagan Nations which are joyned to the Church of Rome God had his Elect and that he found means to save these Elect from among the Nations by the Christianity which they had embraced and that he gave them the grace to separate the Antichristianity and not to be hurt or injured thereby How this was done is not for us precisely to determine These are the depths of the ways of God. We will say the same concerning the Conversions which the Roman Church hath made in the Indies that God saves his Elect from among these Nations by the Christianity which the Missionaries cause them to embrace and defends them from the wounds and hurts which the Antichristianity that is joyned unto it might do unto them by ways known to his profound Wisdom We might believe this say I were it not that according to the report that the Papists themselves make unto us of the Christianity which the Jesuites teach the Indians and the Chinesees is not so much as an honest Paganism This is it which must be answered to the first Difficulty Behold the second If you confess say they that the Church is visible and always visible the Church of Luther and Calvin cannot be the true Church for it was not visible two hundred years agon having no existence in the World. When you shall have made a dissection of this Difficulty you will find it the most pittiful one that ever was made Know then my Brethren that when we say the Church was visible and always visible we understand the Church Universal and not any particular Church By the Universal Church must be understood Christianity dispersed through all Nations in the East West North and South in all places where they retain the Books of the Old and New Testament with the three Greeds which are the Abridgment of them This Church is always visible for God cannot permit that she perish wholly nor yet that it be wholly hidden but the particular Churches of which the Universal Church is made
prove the Church to the weakest by Scripture In the second That a man may prove the Church to the most weak by Tradition And in the third That the Church of Rome is not unfurnished with exterior marks which make her known to be the true Church to the weak Behold three Sources of visibility for the Roman Church 1. Tradition 2. Exterior Marks 3. The Scripture As this is one of the Books which your Converters put into your hands I do intreat you to give attention to what I have to say to you thereon I begin with Tradition They understand by Tradition the Testimony of the Fathers Councils and Authors of all Ages therefore the meaning is they can prove the Church of Rome is the true Church by the testimony of the Greek and Latin Fathers and by the Councils of the Greek and Latin Church And at first this is a contradiction that stares you in the face It may be proved says he to the weak by the Fathers and the Greek and Latin Councils that the Church of Rome is the true Church And how can a man prove to the weak a truth by the testimonies of the Greek and Latin Fathers To those which understand neither Latin nor Greek or who have neither means nor time to turn over the Leaves or read and examine these great Volumes Behold the way nothing more remains than to employ these two means the first is a Principle founded on a Rule of St. Austin that all Customs that are found universally established whose original and beginning we know not may be very justly ascribed to the Apostles The second means is included in this Syllogism which Mr. Nicholas makes The Scripture and Tradition teach that there hath been always in the World one Church visible and successive and that this Church is infallible for the instruction of believers in the truths of Faith. Now the Church of Rome is this only visible Church Therefore the Church of Rome is the infallible Church and to her alone it belongs to instruct men in the truths of Faith. And behold how Mr. Nicholas forms a light upon the first medium which makes the Church of Rome visible to the weak All the Traditions which the Hereticks dispute saye he have their certain Epoche's or beginnings which are not disputed by them The Calvinists agree that in the fourth Age men called upon Saints adored Reliques and observed Lent that in the seventh Age they worshipped Images in the eleventh they believed Transubstantiation The weak have no need to assure themselves of this matter of fact by way of examination for 't is confessed on both sides Apply the Principle of St. Austin that all Customs found universally established in one Age and whose beginning we know not may be justly attributed to the Apostles Now the customs of invoking Saints adoring Images observing Lent and worshipping the Sacrament are found generally established in some Ages as the Calvinists confess and we know not where to find the original of them therefore they ought to be referred to the Apostles A man cannot tell how many Illusions there are therein which are unworthy of an honest man yea a man of a good understanding First 't is to scoff at mankind to say 't is a light proper to make the Church visible to the weak For this method of reasoning doth necessarily suppose 1. That a person must know that this pretended Rule on which they support themselves is St. Austin's 2. That the Ministers consent to the truth of this rule 3. That they confess that upon certain times the customs of adoring Images praying to Saints c. were generally received 4. That from thence it follows that these customs generally established in some Ages ought to be referred to the Apostles All this is disputed and there are large Books written on the Subject which the weak cannot read and this requires an examination which is above the capacity of those which are not men of learning This is that which we have proved invincibly in our Answer to Mr. Nicholas * System of the Church l. 2. c. 16. Secondly It is to be observed that this fine Principle upon which this pretended Evidence is founded viz. the Rule of St. Austin is false especially if it be applied to all Ages It hath been observed that the Fathers of the fourth Age were very much inclined to support the Novelties crept into the Church upon the authorities of the Apostles and to make all things pass for Apostolick the beginning whereof the People were not then able to see It is therefore false that all Customs which are found establish'd in a certain Age although we be not able to find the beginning of them in a distinct manner ought to be ascribed to the Apostles For example The custom of adoring the Sacrament of the Eucharist was not generally established in the Latin. Church till the twelfth Age. Although we could not find the original of this Idolatry it were an impiety to attribute it to the Apostles There are certain Practices which are insensibly established by little and little the first point of whose original cannot be precisely observed It doth not follow therefore that we must ascribe the original to the Apostles We must attribute nothing to the Apostles but what is in their Writings 3. I observe that there is a faulty and shameful falseness in the application of the Rule Mr. Nicholas pretends that the Customs which are found generally established in certain Ages ought to be referred to the Apostles and that for this reason the custom of falling prostrate before Images must be referred to them because this custom is found generally established in the eighth Age. I do maintain that Mr. Nicholas does basely betray his conscience in this example for he is perswaded as well as I and all those Roman Catholicks in France which are men of knowledge and understanding do know that the Apostles did not establish Image-worship and these Gentlemen do not refuse to confess it when they are not in dispute Fourthly I say that this reasoning supposes a thing which is altogether false 't is that we are not able to find the original of those Customs which are generally established in certain Ages this is false the custom of praying to Saints is found established in the fifth Age. In our preceding Letters we have shewn the original and birth thereof In like manner we find in all the following Ages the birth of the Worship of Images of Purgatory the Sacrifice of the Mass the Real Presence and Transubstantiation They make a wrangling with us about it unworthy of honest men Shew us say they who was the first Heretick that taught either the Invocation of Saints or the Worship of Images or those other false Worships which you condemn I answer that I have no need to name their Author seeing I have shewn the Age of their birth I prove for example after a manner invincible that they did