explication oâ— their Doctrine so fully as it was afterwards thought fitting to do and thâ— they did not judge it necessary to descend to all those particulars which were examined and looked into in afteâ— Ages It was possible also that the would not deduce all those particular sequels which were inclosed or shut up as it were in those Principles which they established as our Blessed Saviour himself had formerly dealt with theâ— It is also very likely that men oâ— of neglect not preserving those Truth in memory as they ought to have done they came insensibly to â—e forgotten or that whilest mens wits were wholly taken up in defending some part oâ— them against Hereticks who opposed them there was not so much heed taken of those others which never came into Controversy However it be this iâ— indubitably certain that a time there was when many things were not clearly and distinctly known nor at such time obligatory as to exercise of faith which the Church has since placed in the number of such things as are belonging to Faith For although all those things were comprehended in Holy Scripture and in the Doctrine of the Apostles and that there alwayes were the same marks to know them by yet they were not alwayes taken notice of with the same reflexion or application But now by occasion of Disputes which have been raised at certain times the Church having set her self to examine them legally and according to form and making reflexions upon Holy Scripture and looking back upon the neighbouring times of the Apostles making up by such means unto the Fountain-head of true Apostolical Tradition she has declared them to be of faith as being exactly conformable to the Rule of Belief 6. I do not say therefore what some haply of our Adversaries who are not so well acquainted with our Tenets may reproach me with that the Church has Authority to frame new Articles of Faith No I do acknowledge together with them that she cannot act but according to Rule which is the holy Scripture and Tradition truely and purely Apostolical from which also we have received the holy Scripture it self She holds forth nothing new but she proposes unto us Antiquity which we knew not before She does not give new birth to Scars which never were before but she makes them appear in that Instre which formerly they had done by removing those clouds which did obscure them She has no new revelations she onely publishes those antient ones of which we had no formeâ— assurance Finally she settles no other Principles but such as she receiveâ— from our Saviour himself out of which by force of her light and certain necessary sequels she makes those Veritieâ— appear which were hidden and as 〈◊〉 were Quid est Depositum Id est quod tibi creditum est non à te inventum quod acceptisti non quod excogitasti 〈◊〉 rem non ingenii sed doctrinae non usurpationiâ— privatae publicae traditionis rem ad te perductam non a te prolatam in quae â—on author debes esse sed custos non instituâ—or sed sectator non ducens sed sequens Comment 1. c. 27. shut up in those Principles This is that which Vincentius Lirineâ— sis expresses most admirably applying unto the Church those words of S. Paâ— to his Disciple Timothy Depositum câ—stodi keep well the Depositum which 〈◊〉 put into your hands What is the meaning of this Depositum saith he speaking of matters of Faith It is that which you are intrusted with and by no means that which your self have invented It is that which you have received and in no wise that which your self have found out it is not the result of your own Wit or understanding but it is what you learn from that Doctrine which has been taught you It is not any thing which you have established in the World by your own private Authority it is a Point of Tradition which you have been trusted with for the publick good It is a Treasure of which there was no Mine in your own Land You are not the Author â—ut the conserver of this Doctrine You are not here the Guide but he that follows the Guide What Guide The Word of God which is this Guide and the true Rule of Holy Church Vald. l. 2. Doct. fid c. 22. Can. l. 2. de Com. 7. à castro de Luâ— go valentia alii Videte quid dicat qui fuerunt non qui sunt ut exceptis Apostolis quodcunque aliud postèa dicetur abscindatur Hier. in Ps 86. All our Divines agree in this Doctrine which they have taken from the Holy Fathers For St. Hierome has it in exâ—ess terms upon the 86. Psalm where he Psalmist sayes that Our Lord will delare in Scriptures of People and of Prinoes and of those that have been in her He makes use sayes St. Hierome of a word signifying time past fuerunt that have been because we are to hold nothing for a Point of Faith in the Church but what we find in the Prophers and in the Apostles who are the Princes of the Church And upon this ground it is that St. Irenaeus and after him S. Augustine saith That the faith of our Ancestors and ours makes but one and the same Faith because we believe nothing at this day which was not contained in the whole Body of their Faith The Church therefore never did make Iren. l. 3. c. 2 lib. 4. c. 13 Aug. Ep. 51 and undoubtedly never will make any new Articles of Faith since it is not in her power to define any thing but according to the Word of God which she is alwayes to consult with as with her Oracle and the Rule she is bound to follow But there is no question also but upon occasion of Differences from time to time in mens judgements and opinions she has often declared for and defined some Points which were antecedently by some questioned and that without offence or at least were not known before unless in general and by a confused kind of knowledge There is nothing more certain nor more common in the History of the Church and Councils where you shall frequently see defined and proposed as a Point or Principle of Faith that which before Conteâ—â—s did arise and before that violent clashing which has been in almost every Age of the Church about some Point or other in Controversy which was neither defined nor so much as thought of For example concerning the authentickness of some Canonical Books concerning the validity of Baptisme conferred by Hereticks concerning one or two Wills and operations in our Blessed Saviour concerning the Procession of the Holy Ghost and many such like All which are now no more to be called in question although before the definition of the Church it might have been done without offence For if it be true that it belongs unto her to propose that as matter of Faith which was not before
these dayes ought to stick to the decisions of their Church in matters contested between them and us because they own her for the True Church But I think it is not at all hard to discover a great difference For making up to the head or source of the decision we shall find those who first raised the doubt and brought these Points into debate were of the same Church which was accordingly the True because the onely Church and owned for such by both Parties before she declared her self upon the matter in dispute which without trouble we are agreed upon with Monsieur Claude The case is not here so Because we who are at Dispute with Protestants are not of the same Church with them and so are not within the limits of thy maxime which has with mutual corsent been established and received Again they having taken part with those who at that time revolted from the True Church because they would not obey her Decrees made by Canonical Judgement it is manifest that their Community is but a false and Schismatical Church according to the Principles received from them in the Synod of Dort 3. Secondly the Church before she gives Sentence upon any Point proposed examining it by Scripture and real Tradition and for the better understanding them searching into the Sentences of the Ancient Holy Fathers endeavouring thus to reascend unto the Apostles themselves we are from hence to conclude that she being inspir'd by the Holy Ghost who has promised to teach her all Truths as occasions require what she defines is alwayes conformable both to Scripture and Tradition Thus it is that we are to learn by her definitions what is the true meaning or sence of Scripture when there is place for doubting thereof Before the Council of Nice there were most desperate Disputes concerning certain passages of Scripture which the followers of Arius alledged for the upholding their upstart doctrine As for example about that in the fifth of St. Iohn where our Blessed Saviour says that his Father is greater than he Quia Pater major me est Joh. 5. from whence they inferred that he was not of the same Substance The others on the contrary maintained that this passage was to be understood of the Son of God considered according to Humane nature which places him infinitely below the Father and makes him submit even to the death of the Cross but not according to his Divine nature which renders him equal and makes them both to be of one and the same Substance These two sence were hotly maintained by the two Parries each of them challenging the true sence or meaning of Scripture on their side But when the Council having throughly examined this important question had defined the Consubstantiality of The Word making use of a terme which is not found in Holy Writ for the clearer expressing that Truth which she discovered there then was there no more time nor place to doubt what was the lawful sence thereof and there arose an obligation through this definition of believing that that was the true one which was given by the Divines vvho opposed the faction of the Arians The same is certainly to be said upon this occasion especially our present cause being upon much better termy and more strongly provided for by the evidence of the Texts alledged for it When at first the poposition vvas made concerning the Real Presence in the time of Pascasius as Mr. Claude pretends and presently opposition was made as he is pleased to say for at present we will assume nothing but of his free gift there happened a great Contest which grew yet much greater after some time concerning the true sence of those words This is my Body One side maintaining that they did express a Real Presence and the other pretending that they onely signified that that which our Blessed Saviour gave unto his Apostles represented his Body Both parties as we have often taken notice were of the same Church which they acknowledged and owned to be the True Church This Church having throughly examined the business in her General Councils defines a Real Presence and substantial change even to the making use of the word Transubstantiation which is not literally found in the Gospel for the expressing more clearly that verity which she discovered therein and for the efficacious obstructing any other sence which might be given to those words This is my Body From that time forward it was no longer lawful to doubt of the sence of them And by this definition men stood obliged to believe that they were to be understood plainly and literally not metaphorically When there is really place of doubt it is not for particular persons who are at strife to determine the sence of the Text in Dispute but this belongs properly to the Church which is Judge in the case For else there could never be any end of Disputes and God should not have furnished us with any certain means for the finding out Truth when doubts do arise concerning Holy Scripture nor consequently for the clearing those debates which may arise in matters of Religion Which certainly would be the same as to say that he had not provided for the Government quiet and peace of his Church Non quia Canon solus non sibi ad universa sufficiat sed quia verba divina pro suo quique arbitratu interpretantes varias opiniones errorèsque concipiant Atque ideo necesse fit ut ad unam Ecclesiastici sensus regulam scriptueae caelestis intelligentiae dirigatur Common 2. c. antep Cap. Penul It is not as Vincentius Lirientius sayes that the Word of God does not contain all the Verities which we believe but because many presuming to interpret the Holy Text according to their fancy mishape their errors accordingly Thus it becomes necessary upon such occurences to regulate the sence we are to give to Holy Scripture by that meaning which the holy Church gives it And from hence it was that he took occasion some three years after the Council of Ephesus to enveigh so sharply against that desperate presumption of wicked Nestorius who had the impudence to maintain that he alone had the gift of Understanding those Texts of Scripture which he alledged for the authorising his impious blasphemies and that the whole Church represented in that Council had erred grosly for want of understanding them Thus when Disputes arise we ought not to judge of the Doctrine of the Church by that sence which our selves give of Holy Scripture but we must iudge of the true sence of Holy Scripture by the Doctrine of the Church The same in proportion is to be said of the passages of Holy Fathers For it being the custome and order of the Church to advise with them concerning the Judgement she is to give regularly speaking we ought to understand them according to her Doctrine whenever these arises a controversy concerning the meaning of their words which do not alwayes
of our Blessed Lady It is certain that in former times men did not set themselves to search into that particular subject because they did not so much as reflect upon it There was onely a confused kind of knowledge and a general Idâ—â— of the priviledges and Prerogatives of the Blessed Virgin above the rest of Mankind without descending to particulars People were wholly taken up with opposing those Hereticks who drew up against the Honour of the Blessed Virgin who would have deprived her of the glory of her admirable and perpetual Virginity even after Child-bearing and above all those who so violently pleaded against thâ— glorious title of Mother of God which is the ground of all her other Priviledges They were satisfied to ascertain that true source or fountain of all her greatness fortifying it by Scripture and Apostolick Tradition without regarding to penetrate further into that suite or train of other priviledges which did accompany that one great prerogative or examining particularly whether it were to be concluded by a legall ensequence flowing from that Principle that she was preserved at the first instant of her being from Original sin It was not at that time positively believed that she was exempt from that stain neither was the contrary in their Creed And this because it was not so much as thought upon At another time it has been thought good to employ many serious-thoughts upon this subject and to search more narrowly into the business Great Contests have risen about it Whole Volames have been written by Learned men who have produced strong and clear testimonies out of the Holy Scriprures for it and have endeavoured to derive it from the very Fountain of Apostolical Doctrine by the way of Tradition Whole Universities and especially that of Sorbon have spoken loud in favour of that Opinion and engaged themselves by solemn Oath to maintain it And yet notwithstanding the Church has not thought fit absolutely to determine any thing concerning this matter of so great importance But leaves us at liberty to believe what we please concerning it She has not proceeded in the same manner concerning her exemption from all guilt even of venial sin For this she has decided and resolved upon as a matter of Faith not that she had any new revelation thereof since the time of the Apostles but that before the proposing this verity to the world 〈◊〉 be believed she consulted with the holy Scriptures Apostolical Tradition and the opinions of holy Fathers coâ—cerning the preeminence and qualition of the Mother of God for the finding out the whole extent of them An having discovered by this means thâ— her being exempted from venial sin wâ— comprehended in that Supreme Dignty as a necessary consequence is â—â—cluded in its Principle she has defined as a Point of faith revealed in the We of God in which it is contained Thâ— is the reflexion of the most eminent as Learned Cardinal de Lugo in his excâ—lent Treatise of Faith Disp 3. Sect. 5. n. 7. Let us now imagine the Churd should do the same concerning the 〈◊〉 emption of the Blessed Virgin from Original sin Let us suppose that she hâ—ving examined the passages of Host Writ and the Testimonies of Tradâ—â— on which are alledged upon this subject should find this also included as in necestary consequence as she did the other as it is not unlikely she would If she should think fit to proceed to a further examin of the business then all we who are Catholicks and agreed in this that the Church is Judge of Controversies and that we are bound to submit to her Decrees should quickly lay aside all difference of opinions â—â—d although we had not hitherto held seas matter of Faith should then believe it to be so not because there had been any new Revelation concerning it â—â—t because the Church should have declared it to have been alwayes revealed although there was not a general Agreement concerning that Revelation 16. Behold then us and Protestants agreed as I take it upon this Principle that the true Church of Christ has power to decide and propose that as an Article of Faith which antecedently to that decision and proposal was not of obligation to be believed From whence is easily concluded that for the franing an exact rational discourse in matters of Faith it is necessary to avoid these two extremes which a loose kind of reasoning is apt enough to fall into The first is That this has not alwayes been believed therefore it is not now to be believed The second This is 〈◊〉 believed ergo it has alwayes and in aâ— Ages of the Church been distinctly believed It is evident by our Principleâ— that this way of reasoning is very salk and erroneous Here then is the reason why when there happens a Contest between two Parties of the same Church supposed alwayes the true Church as we shall by and by shew it is not alwayes necessary that we search narrowly into the doctrine of Antiquity for the discovering what was held in those dayes concerning the matter in Dispute It suffices for ending all debates that we know what the Church having taken full cognisance of the matter shall have determined by a solemn judgement and Sentence according to the usuall form and method What she resolves in such occurrences according to the Word of God the true meaning whereof she faithfully gives us is to be received as matter of Faith whether it were beforehand known or not known to be so And the contrary is an Error which we are obliged with her to condemn and anathematise unless we intend to become Infidel and Schismaticks Here is the Principle we are agreed upon on all sides as I have made appear both by the Doctrine and proceedings of our Adversanes themselves It imports now very much to apply this to the particular subject we have in hand and it shall be my endeavour to effect it CHAP. III. The applying this agreed-on Principle to the Subject of the Holy Eucharist TO make a due Application of this general Principle to the subject of the Holy Eucharist with the same peaceableness and quiet we have hither to endeavoured to maintain and together with the consent of Parties we must needs step a little aside but still in such order and measure that we may go friendly on in the same path hand in hand together without justling one another still laying all Disputes aside The first step therefore that I make of this kind is to produce what is agreed upon on all sides to have been in all Ages believed concerning the Holy Eucharist to wit that it is a Sacrament which is a Memorial of the Death of our Lord Jesus Christ who is there present and wherein his blessed Body and precious Blood are truely received by the Faithful according to the express words of the Son of God himself who says Take and eat this is my Body do this in memory of me This is what
have a Rule and a Law which he is to follow in giving Judgement that his Sentence may be just and secure This Rule is the Word of God which rightly applyed renders Judgement highly equitable Now the Synod of Dort acknowledges that an Assembly of lawful Pastors representing the Body of the true Church is this Judge to whom it appertains to judge of the true sence of the Word of God and afterwards to resolve according to this Rule any cause depending 12. I do now earnestly beseech our Brethren of the Reformed Churches to reflect seriously upon these two Propositions I am now about to make The first is That as the Word of God is infallible in it self so certainly the Judgement of him who truely judges according to this Rule is also Infallible and consequently they are obliged to believe that the Church when she Judges according to this Rule or the Word of God does not onely not err but that she also cannot err The second is that they are bound as well as we to believe that the Church of God deciding controversies of Faith does judge according to the true sence of the Word of God because upon the matter it is concerning this very sence that she gives Judgement between the Parties who give it a different sence and who are obligâ— in Conscience to submit to her Judgement under pain of being Schismaticks and Hereticks as their Synod of Dort has positively declared From hence follows by necessary consequence according to their own Principles that they are bound to believe with us that the True Church of Jesus Christ is infallible in the Judgement she judicially pronounces touching matters of Faith 13. I think there can now be no 〈◊〉 but they are obliged according to their own grounds to acknowledge the infallibility of the Church of Christ But I am contented for the present not to press them so far nor to make use of that right which I might justly challange It is sufficient that the Synod which in these Gentlemens opinion represents the True Church is lawful judge in this case as the Synod is self declares obliging them in Confidence to adhere to and obey the Decisions made therein It is not then lawful for them who are of that Church and are at Difference amongst themselves to condeman the Synod of Error then judgement â—s given in order to the clearing Points of Faith confessed among them They have no power to frame a different Judgement from that of the Synod and adhering to it to seporâ—are themselves from communion with the rest They are bound to acknowledge the Authority of the Synod which is lawfull Judge and submit unto it believing that what is there desined 〈◊〉 Truth it self stand this without any necessity of entring upon the question of its Infallibility I demand nothing more for the preseâ—s I will content my 〈◊〉 with what themselves do grant That Church of which the Partins Contesting are members be she fallible or infallible has full Power to Debide differentes and 〈…〉 oblige under the penâ—ry of being Schismaticks And now having as I make my self believe give Monsient Claude all the satisfaction he can in 〈◊〉 require concerning this Point I 〈◊〉 on my course perceably and quietly and make bold to give him notice that 14. Here is that the Prescription that 〈◊〉 Point anâ—â—oisputable Pâ—â—ciple to which a receisary adhfione required when there arise Disputes between Parties for the discovering whether an Opinion be or be not contrary to the true Rule of Faith which is the Word of God and whether we stand bound to believe it as a Point of Faith Were it antecedently distinctly believed as such or no. Disputation will only serve to render the Debate eternal Both Parties will go on challenging the true sence of Scripture and Tradiuon on their sides Books shall be written without number for the asserting of it and that without any hopes or appearance of any end of these learned indeed but redious Contests which prove many times so intricate and confused that every one standing his ground and being strongly and willfully resolved not to yield reproaches his Adversary with affected Obstinacy against known Truth We must then make up to that unquestionable Point in which both Parties meet and which Tertullian so boldly establishes as the principal Rule or Prescription for the ending all differences which may arise about the agreeing or conformity with the Word of God which every one is so ready to challenge to himself This Learned Father having said in his twentieth Chapter A quibus traducem fidei semina doctrinae caeterae deinde Ecclesiae mutuatae sunt quotidie mutuontur ut Ecclesiae fiant Ataque tot ac tantae Ecclesiae una est illa ab Apostolis prima ex qua ommes Quid autem praedicavevint id est quid eis Christus revelaverit hÃc praescriham non alite pâ—obari debere nisi per easdem Ecclesias quas ipsi condiderunt ipsi eis praedicando tam vivâ quâ—d â—iunt voce quà m per epistolas postea de Praes c. 21. that the Apostles who were sent by our Blessed Saviour Founded many Churches in several places and that many others came from these by communication of the same Doctrine and that they all of them together make but one true Catholick and Apostolick Church he adde in the next Chapter that true Prescription is that nothing be received but what he revealed unto his Apostles whom he sent to Preach his Doctrine unto the world But in case there does arise any Contest concerning any particular Point and that we be in some trouble or doubt whether they Preacâ—â—ed it or no and by consequence whether they learned it of their Master or no behold here his solid Rule or Prescription in this great maxime that this is not to be made out or cleared by any other means but by those Churches which they founded either by Preaching or by Writing and which as we lately touched all of them make but one only Church To this Church then it does belong to determine what our Blessed Saviour did reveale in his Holy Word whensoever there is any cause of doubt in such Contests as do arise and what she defines what she declares in the case whatever former times did believe it now to be held as matter of Faith 15. As Protestants do acknowledge this Verity as I have made it appear so do we also most willingly submit unto it and intirely profess that the holy Church is lawful Judge of Controversies and that as Tertullian sayes addresses are to be made to her upon difference of Opinions that we may learn what the Son of God revealed unto his Apostles that is what is the true meaning of Holy Scripture and what Consequences are to be drawn from those Principles We have a very pregnant example of this in that famous Contest which has been for some Ages past between Catholicks concerning the Immaculate Conception