can it be but wonderfull to consider that this Church being dilated throughout the world in so many diverse remote Kingdomes Provinces Countreys of different languages Customs worldly interests and some of these being enemies to others in worldly affaires should all agree in the Vnity of the same Catholique faith as if they were one man Whereas all other Churches which go out from this vnder pretext of greater purity although they do not fill the earth but are comprized in small bounds fall into such horrible dissensions and divisions that they never rest till like generations of vipers they destroy one an other and oftentimes the later destroies the former as we have seen in our time The Church in Communion with the sea of Rome may be known to be the true Church by this admirable Vnity for which Christ prayed and Christ by it may be known to have been sent from heaven who had establish't vpon earth so large a Kingdome of such admirable Vnity If the Vnity of the Catholique Church were not a special blissing of God how could it fall out to her alone How could it have continued so long among such great multitudes of people as have been and are of her Communion How comes it to passe that Vnity could never be conserved among heretiques who although but few and new could never shun the curse of Division which ever destruction followes at the heels For my part I cannot resist vnto this clear reason As this Vnity in the Catholique Church proceeds principally from the blissing of God so secondarly it flowes from the ordinary means which his divine wisdome has appointed and whereof all false Churches are destitute As first from this principle that she beleeves nothing but what has descended vnto her by the constant testimony of her forefathers in all ages from the time of Christ his Apostles By which means it has been shown that she cannot but keep Vnity in faith Secondly She receives the Decrees of all General Councils which in all reason ought to be believed to preserve that which was delivered by the Apostles and if any doubt arise about the sense of the Scriptures are more able to interpret them then any other persons To which therefore all the members of the Catholique Church do modestly wisey submit their iudgments they never ransack any matter of faith once defined but it remaines ever inviolable And lastly All Catholiques submit themselves to one Supreme Pastor whom they acknowledge to be establish't by Christ over the whole Church From whom the holy Fathers do affirm that the Vnity of the Church doth much depend This person appoynted by Christ they shew out of the Scriptures to have been S. Peter to whom Christ said Math. 16.19 Iohn 21 16.18 Cypr. in tract de simplicite Praelator I will give thee the keys of the Kingdome of Heaven c. and again Feed my sheep feed my Lambs Vpon which S. Cyprian saith That Christ might shew Vnity he establish't one Chaire and he disposed by his authority the Origin of that Vnity to proceed from One c. The Primacy is given to Peter that one Church of Christ and one Chaire might be shown S. Hierom seeing the necessity of One head Hieron lib. 1. cont Iovinian for keeping Vnity saith excellently One is chosen that a head being appoynted Occasion of schisme might be taken away And that the Bishop of Rome is successor to S. Peter in that same Dignity Primacy and that the Vnity of the Church depends vpon his authority all the holy Fathers do affirm The same S. Hierom writing to S. Damasus Bishop of Rome saith Hier ep ad Damasum With the Successor of the Fisher with the Disciple of the Crosse I speak c. I am ioyn'd in Communion with thy Holynesse that is with the Chaire of Peter vpon that rock I know the Church is built who gathereth not with thee scattereth S. Augustin affirmes Aug. cont epist fundament c. 4. that the Succession of Priests from the seat of Peter to whom our Lord after his resurrection commended his sheep to be fed vntill the present Bishop held him within the lap of the Church There is nothing more ordinary with the Fathers then to reckon out the succession of the Roman Bishops from S. Peter vnto their time Aug. epist 166. Cypr. epist 73. 45. S. Augustin tearmeth the sea of their residence the Chair of Vnity and S. Cyprian calls it the beginning of Vnity the roote of the Catholique Church As by these means the Vnity of the true Church is preserved so for want of them there can be no constant Vnity in false Churches For they all reiecting the infallible testimony authority of the Catholique Church by which we are certified of our Saviours doctrine as has been shewed put their own election and private iudgment in place of it and their iudgments being diverse they make diverse faiths having no Compasse to steer by but the Scriptures which they diversly interpret according to their pleasures Neither do they submit themselv's to the sentence of any Church for they beleeve that all Churches may erre neither is their own Church constant in her sentence for one Assembly ransacks and condemns as heresy and Anti-Christian what another has defined approved as Christian truths Neither have they any supreme Pastor to whom they obey And in a word they have no bond to ty them together except sometimes worldly interest or the hatred of another religion And when these interests faile when by mutual assistance ioyn't forces they have subdued or overturned that Church which they esteem their Common adversarie then they instantly begin to be miserably scattered divided as fresh experience sheweth how after the destructiō of the late English Church the brethren of Scotland and England became hugely divided notwithstanding the solemne League Covenant which had before so straitly tyed them together Yea it is impossible for the wit of man to make it otherwise For besides that it is impossible that many men can a long time adhere to the same falshoods as we suppose all heresies to be the nature of man being so strongly bent vpon truth this confusion division followes from the nature of their principal doctrin which is the ground work of all the rest to witt that every one should have liberty of reading interpreting Scripture and iudging the Preachers doctrin thereby From which ground there must needs arise variety of sects in religion according to the various conceipts and apprehensions of people Moreover God in his iust iudgment sends ever the curse of division among heretiques for according to their sin so are they punished They endeavoured to divide the Church and themselvs are divided and so at length destroied This God promised by the Prophet Esay when he said Esay 19.2 I will set the Aegyptians against the Aegyptians and they shall fight every one
really present in the Sacrament Although this be a most important question and is much agitated by the curiosity of carnal reason yet I was soone satisfyed in it because I was resolved by Gods grace to found my faith vpon no other ground but vpon the divine Scriptures as they were vnderstood by the ancient Church holy Fathers And therefore after a little diligence and some conference with a Catholique on this matter I found that the reall presence of Christs body in the Sacrament was conforme to the clear words of the Scriptures which were so vnderstood by the holy Fathers and which in right reason cannot be otherwise vnderstood and that God hath approved this truth by famous miracles And vpon the other part I found that the Presbyerian doctrin is against Scriptures Fathers Councels and right reason that it is an ancient heresy and so false that many Protestants do eagerly oppose it and lastly that such great confusion was in this matter among the first Apostles of this new religion that it is no wonder to see it so much multiplied among their children All which points I will briefly touch 1. The Catholiques bring expresse Scripture for the reall presence to witt the words of Institution of this holy Sacrament related by three Evangelists and one Apostle where our Saviour alwayes saith This is my body This is my blood And to know that he mean'd of his true reall body he adioyneth my body which shall be given for you and my blood which shall be shed for you Now it was his reall body which was given for them and his reall blood which was shed for them S. Iohn ch 6. Therefore it was his reall body reall blood which they received in the Sacrament Moreover S. Iohn relateth along discourse which our Saviour had to the Iewes in which he affirmes that he was the bread of life that came down from heaven And the bread which he was to give was his flesh for the life of the world and vnlesse they eate his flesh and drink his blood they should have no life in them And notwitstanding that the Iewes murmured at all these things saying How can this man give vs his flesh to eate and this is a hard saying who can heare it Yet our Saviour did with many asseverations affirm it over and over again yea and the suffered them to depart from him because they would not believe this divine mystery Now Christ is not a mocker or deceiver of men to speak one thing yea and to averre it with asseverations which are equivalent to oaths and to intend the contrary Christ is not ignorant of the vsual manner of speech Therefore since he tells the Apostles plainly that the Eucharist is his body delivered for them it must be his body as the Catholiques beleeve and cannot be not his body as the Presbyterians imagine If the Scripture be Iudge of controversies then this controversie is decyded for that Iudge to which Protestants make ordinarly their appeales hath so determined the cause against them that they dare not stand to the clear words of their Iudge in so much that some learned Protestants do confesse that the Scripture taken in the native proper and literal sense is plainly for the Catholiques against themselves and namely Morton when he speaks thus to the Catholiques If the words he certainly true in a proper and literal sense Morton deinstit Sacrament lib. 2. c. 1. then we are to yeeld to you the whole cause And therefore they are enforced to runne to their tropes figures But I found the holy Fathers making no such glosses on our Saviours clear words taking them in their proper sense S. Augustin citing these words of our Saviour this is my body Aug. in ps 33. speaks thus A man may be carried by the hands of others no man is carried in his own hands but Christ was carried in his own hands when recomeÌ„ding his body he himself said this is my body For he carried himself in his own haÌ„ds And again We receive with a faithfull heart and month Idem contr adversar legis lib. 2. c. 9. Ambros lib. 4. de Sacram cap. 4. Chrys lib. 2. de Sacerdotio Cypr. de Coena Domini the Mediator of God and man the man Iesus Christ who giveth vs his flesh to eate S. Ambrose saith clearly Before consecration it is bread but when the words of consecration come it is the body of Christ Heare him saying take eate This is my body c. S. Chrysostom saith He who sitteth above with the father in that same instant of time O miracle O the bounty of God! is touched by the hands of all and he gives himself to those who will receive and embrace him S. Cyprian The bread which our Lord gave to his Disciples being changed not in shape but in nature by the omnipotency of the word is made flesh Many more testimonies of these and of the other holy Fathers in all the first ages even vntill the time of the Apostles Concil Nicen. apud Bellar. lib. 2 de Euch. aristi c. 10. Concil Ephes apud eund lib. 2. cap. 25. may be seen collected by Coccius and Gualterus So that I found both the Scriptures Fathers giving sentence against the Presbyterians The first for the letter and the other for the sense This same truth is also confirmed by the testimonie and authority of the vniuersal Church in general Councels as the first Nicen Councel whose words Bellarmin cites The third generall Councel of Ephesus to which S. Cyrill of Alexandria did preside by which Synod the epistle of S. Cyrill to Nestorius where the real presence of Christs body in the Eucharist is contain'd was approved as it was thereafter by the fourth and fift generall Councels to speak nothing of other more late Councels Besides all these authorities it was also made evident vnto me by the light of reason that our Saviours words concerning the institution of this Sacrament cannot be but literally vnderstood For 1. the principall articles or points of our faith are not delivered in the Scriptures but in proper and clear words But this by all mens Confession is a principall mystery of our faith Therefore it is delivered in clear and plaine tearmes 2. That cannot be ascrybed to Christ without blasphemy which no reasonable or prudent man would do But no reasonable or prudent man would make his testament in obscure and figurative words for that were the high way to deceive his children heires and put them at variance Therefore since Christ at the institution of this Sacrament a little before his death was making his Testament as is manifest by his words when he calleth the Chalice Luke 20.22 the new Testament in his blood by which he left vnto his children the most precious legacie of his body for their comfort nourishment he spake properly clearly and not figuratively 3. Chrâ—st promised the Iewes
the bond but also the Sacrament of Marriage is commended By which few Testimonies these 5. Sacraments which you reiect are as clearly proved out of the Scripture as these two which you admit Yea although they had not been mentioned in the Scripture yet they are all with reverence to be received seing they are demonstrated by divine Tradition which is of no lesse infallible authority then the Scripture it self as has been proved above and this Tradition is evident both by the consent of the holy Fathers and by the constant beleef practice of the whole Church which has vsed these Sacraments in all ages according to the ends for which they were instituted And thefore the Catholique doctrine concerning the number of the Sacraments which flowes from such pure fountains is pure true not corrupted as you do calumniate Whereas indeed your doctrine and that of your first Reformers in this matter is not only full of corruption but also of confusion For Luthers followers admit three Sacraments to witt Ap. Becan in Man lib. 1. c. 8. Baptism Eucharist Penance as may be seen in their Catechismes Zuinglius receives also three but not all the same for in place of Penance he puts Matrimonie And Calvin reckons also three for to Baptism the Supper Cal. lib. 4. Instit c. 19. par 32. he adds Order So full of confusion even at the beginning were these builders of Babylon following neither Scriptures nor Fathers but their own fancies Wherein you are not behind with them swarving from the doctrin of your Master Calvin and according to your own imaginations admitting only 2. Sacraments which two also in effect you destroy by robbing them of all vertue and efficacy as has been shewed above chap. 21. in fine You accuse next the Catholique Church of corruptions concerning the vse of the Sacraments But it is sufficient against your accusations that these vses of the Sacraments which you most blame as private Baptism private Communion c. are known to have been observed by the holy Primitive Church are in themselvs laudable and tend much to the devotion comfort of the faithfull and are also approved by diverse learned moderate Protestants Whereas your doctrines practises make your Sacraments altogether gracelesse and almost Vselesse and Comfortlesse for which you are blamed by diverse Protestants Moreover you are enemies also to the very Ceremonies with which the Sacraments are administrated in the Catholique Church It is not sufficient for you to have taken away the fruite of Grace from these heavenly Trees planted by God in the Garden of his Church as in a heavenly Paradise vnlesse you pull away also the Ceremonies which serve as leaves and Ornaments to them You detest all Ceremonies not contain'd in the word of God By which you lay down a most false deceitfull principle as if no Ceremonies were to be vsed which were not expresly there For first the Scriptures containes not expresly all doctrines but referres vs to the Church and to Traditions as we have seen above How much lesse then doth it contain all Ceremonies Secondly As our Saviour when he did institute the Sacraments did not prescribe the particular forme by which they should be celebrated but left that to the wisdome of his Apostles so his Apostles did not set down that manner in writing S. Augustin expresly affirmes the first part Aug. ep 118. ad Ianuar. saying Christ did not command in what order thereafter the Sacrament should be taken that he might leave that place to the Apostles by whom hs was to order his Church The second part is also evident For we never read where S. Paul who writing to the Corinthians concerning the holy Eucharist said 1. Cor. 11. ver vlt. The rest I will dispose when I come did expresse that manner or order in the Scripture And the same may be said of the other Apostles Thirdly Some Rites and Ceremonies vsed by Christ himself recorded in Scripture were changed by the holy Apostles according to the instinct of the holy Ghost for the greater honour of the blessed Sacrament and have been from the Apostles times observed throughout the whole Church without Scripture Aug. ep 118. c. 6. This S. Augustin doth testify Neither saith he because Christ gave the Sacrament after meat ought we having dyn'd or sup't assemble to receive that Sacrament or as these whom the Apostle reproves and corrects mingle it with their Tables c. For it seem'd good to the holy Ghost that for the honour of so great a Sacrament our Lords body before all other meat should first enter into the mouth of a Christian and therefore this custom is observed throughout the whole world Fourthly the Church can institute ceremonies for greater decency and Order and for the more honour of God For if Iacob a private man vsed a new Ceremonie by erecting a stone by powring oyle vpon it and giving it the title of Bethel Genes 28. If the Synagogue of the Iewes made a new feast by the advice of Mardocheus Ester 9. why not also shall the Church of Christ have the same authority If such was the power of a private man and of the Handmaid How much more ought the power be of the Free-woman the holy Church the immaculate Spouse of Iesus-Christ Or what can be more ridiculous and profane then to grant that power to these and deny it to this Or to think that the Catholique Church which is governed by the Holy Ghost in all truth according to Christs promise should not have so much wisdom as to ordain aright some few Ceremonies Therefore your former principle is very false for many reasons yea it is so false that yourselves doe not observe it For where have you Scripture for the Godfathers God-Mothers which you require at Baptism Where have you scripture for taking your Communion fasting from the hands of one another not from the hands of your Minister and for many such rites customes besides your stoole of Repentance When did your Ministers observe that ceremony of washing the feet of others which was vsed by Christ Iohn 13.5 before the celebration of the Eucharist When did either they or their Elders anoint the sick according to S. Iames precept Whereby it is evident that you observe some Rites which are not contain'd in the scriptures and others you neglect which are there particularly recommended As then it is clear that the Church of Christ may vse ceremonies which are not expressed in Scripture so these Ceremonies which she observeth are most commendable because they are most auncient and were vsed in the primitive times as Coccius shewes by the testimonies of the holy Fathers they are most observeable because they were instituted by the holy Apostles and Pastors of the Church who had both authority and wisdom to institute those which are most convenient And lastly they have been confirmed by the long
first Reformation and to restore Episcopacy So that it 's very evident that the Presbyterians do falsly pretend that Episcopacy or Superiority of Pastors is against the purity of their first Reformation and that parity of Ministers or Presbyterian governement is conform to it the contrary being most certaine out of their owne Records Next I found they came as little speed of their pretence of the word of God which is so far from condemning Episcopacy as evil and Anti-Christian that it rather commends it as good and Christian 3. Tim. ch 3. v. 1. S Paul writing to Timothee saith This is a true or faithfull saying If a man desire a Bishops office he desireth a good worke And that we may not contend about names I find the same S. Paul acknowledging in Timothee the power of iudging and ordaining Presbyters in which the power and Svperiority of Bishops principally consists For in the 5. chap. of the same epistle he saith Against a Presbyter receive not an accusation but vnder two or three witnesses And ver 22. Lay not thy hands suddenly on no man He sheweth also that he had left Titus in the isle of Crete to ordaine Priests by cities Tit. ch 1. v. 5. By this I saw as I conceived clearly enough that all Pastors are not equall but some are Superiour to others and that a Bishop and a Minister is not the same as the Presbyterians do pretend since the one hath power to iudge and ordaine which the other hath not Therevpon I made this observation If it be a true or faithfull saying as the Apostle speaks to call the office of Bishop good Then it is neither a true nor faithfull saying to call it evil as the Presbyterians speaks If the office of Bishop be a good worke then it was no good worke in the Presbyterians to condemn it as Anti-Christian For that is not only to contradict the Scripture but also to incurre the curse threatned by the Prophet Esay 5.20 Wo vnto them who call's evil good and good evil More over Christ himself did institute diverse degrees of Pastors in his Church when he choosed 12. Apostles Luce c. 6. and thereafter 72. Disciples Now it appear'd very evident vnto me that as the Apostles were distinguished from the Disciples by their diverse institution Luce c. 10. number and more intire familiarity with Christ by whom they were privily instructed so they were in a higher degree and dignity above the other Disciples which truth is much illustrated and confirmed by the solemn assumption of Matthias who was before one of the Disciples vnto the Apostle ship Act. 1. or as S. Peter sheweth out of the Psalmes the Bishoprike of Iudas Lastly God did institute in the old Testament diverse degrees of the high Priests the other Priests and Levits as Calvin himself confesseth Therefore it seem'd vnto me there was no repugnancy Cal. lib. 4. Inst c. 6. §. 2. why the like goodly Order and Subordination of Pastors might not also be in the new Testament yea rather all reason doth require that these things ought to be in the Church of Christ and that more excellently and perfectly then in the Synagogue of the Iewes since this is but a shaddow and type of the other But although the Scriptures being duely considered seemed clear enough in this matter yet for more security and to take away endlesse ianglings and wranglings which some contentious heads makes vpon the clearest words of Scripture I had my next recours vnto the interpretation of the holy Fathers practise of the Primitive Church And I found that they did not only vnderstand the Scriptures for the Superiority of Bishops over other Pastours but also they condemned the contrary opinion as a wicked heresy in Aerius S. Augustin Aug. lib. 19. de Ciu. c. 19. explaining these words of S. Paul above cited who desireth a Bishops Office desireth a good worke saith the Apostle would shew what the Office of a Bishop is for it 's a name of of labour and not of honour that he may know himself not to be a Bishop Who delights to preside not to profite Hier. ap Cornel in hunc loc S. Hierom sheweth that in the primitive Church the Office of a Bishop was the next degree to Martyrdome for Bishops being the chiefe Leaders of Christians were most diligently searched out persecuted by the Pagans Therefore the Office of a Bishop being so high and excellent so hard dangerous it was no wonder that the Apostle did require so many excellent vertues and qualities in any Dion lib. de Eccles hier c. 5. who desireth that office which he call's a good worke I will only adde to these two most ancient Fathers for confirmation of this truth S. Denys Arcopagita the disciple of S. Paul describing the Hierarchy instituted by God in the Church putteth the Bishops in the first place the Priests in the second and the Ministers or Deacons in the third And S. Ignatius the disciple also of the Apostles and Bishop of Antioch doth shew this excellent subordination of Pastours in the Church for thus he writes in one of his epistles Priests be subiect vnto your Bishop Deacons vnto Priests Ignat. epist ad Taâ—sens and you people vnto Priests and Deacons Who shall observe this comelinesse of Order I would willingly change my Soule with theirs and our Lord be with them for ever The Presbyterians have not only not observed that comelinesse of Order but they have condemn'd it and brought in the vglinesse of confusion and therefore they want this holy Martyrs benediction The holy Fathers also do constantly teach that the Bishops do succeed vnto the Apostles and the Priests vnto the 70. Disciples and therefore the Bishops are greater then the Priests Yea the most eminent among all the holy Fathers were Bishops although diverse of them were advanced to that dignity much against their will And besids all these testimonies I found the practice of the whole primitive Church which was alwayes governed by B shops from the beginning I must professe that considering all these things I was fully satisfyed and resolved not to abandon all these authorities of Scriptures Fathers and the whole ancient Church for the Ministers strong cry's and bare words which they only bring against them all I was much confirmed in this resolution when I found the contrary opinion concerning parity of Pastours which is now maintayn'd by the Presbyterians to be condemned as an ancient heresy by the holy Fathers S. Epiphanius writes thus of Aerius His speech was more furious then became any man for he said what differs a Bishop from a Priest there is no difference the order is one the honour one and the dignity is the same And confuting it a little after Epiph. haeres 75. he saith That this matter is full of fully is manifest to all wise men For that a Bishop and a Priest are not
that it brought in confusion in the Church and Tyranny over mens consciences that it was condemned as an ancient heresy by the holy Fathers and that as an evil tree it had lately produced much evil fruite Therefore I could not abandon all these divine and humane authorities these manifest reasons and experiences which I found in confirmation of Episcopacy and in condemnation of Presbytery for the strong cry's of some few passionat Ministers who as they are destitute of all divine and humane authority so they scarcely professe to satisfy men in reason They will haue their bare words accompanyed with a sigh or a grone to be sufficient to oblige all men to swear and believe all that they say or can invent albeit you find never so great authotity yea and reason it self to the contrary It 's knowen how a great Apostle of the Covenant cry'd out against some Ministers who shortly after the beginning of these troubles came to reason for Episcopacy or to demand reason for the abolishing it and setting vp of Presbytery Away Away said he with your reason you must quite all reason and help poore Christ a lift Which he said truly in a part For any man who would believe them must quite reason and more too I found at lenth this matter concerning Episcopacy or the governement of the Church to be of greater consequence then many thinks or I was at first aware of For what can be more fundamental to the Church then the Order and governement which Christ hath established in it What can be a more dangerous fundamental errour then to overthrow yea and accurse that order and governement which Christ had setled in it If it be Treason in any Kingdome or Commonwealth for any private faction to overthrow the fuÌ„damental Governement which is established in them by law What high treason is it against Christ to abrogate and accurse that order and Governement which he with so great wisdome had setled in his heavenly Kingdome Therefore if Episcopacy be ordain'd by Christ and so be iure diuino as it appear'd sufficiently to me for the reasons lately touched In Antidot by S. N. 3. part p. 134. Then as the Puritan Authour of the tuelue general arguments reasoneth well and acknowledgeth ingenuosly The Churches of Scotland France Low Countries and other places cannot be a true Church but the Synagogue of Satan contradicting therein both Christ his Gospel Moreover if there can be no true Church without lawfull Pastours and no lawfull Pastours can be without lawfull ordination and none hath power of ordination except Bishops alone as the doctrin and practise of the ancient Church do shew Then the destruction of Episcopacy brings aloÌ„g with it the destructioÌ„ of all lawfull Pastours and so consequently of a true Church and Sacraments which is a most desperat errour as it was a most cruel Tyranny to enforce others to swear and believe it against their Consciences CHAP. VIII Of our Lords Prayer neglected to be said by the Presbyterians AFTER I had tried the Presbyterians abrogation of the Apostolique governement which Christ had established in his Church I proceeded next to consider brieflly their innovation concerning the most excellent of all prayers which himself had made and recommended to his Church We were taught from our infancy to â—ay our Lords prayer and the Ministers themselves did ordinarly conclude their prayers with it Christ made it and the Scriptures containe it So that we had not only the dignity of the Authour the authority of the Scriptures but also the practise of the Ministers and of the whole people to render the vse of this divine prayer laudable and profitable But after the Presbyterians tooke vpon them to be Reformers they abolished all set prayers and this also was worne out of vse as well as the rest Yea as they all neglected any more to say it so there were some who thought not that sufficient vnlesse they spoke also too boldly against the vse of it I could never see any probable pretence for this Presbyterian innovation which as I am informed seem's so strange and incredible to strangers that they can hardly believe it Therefore this alteration being so vnreasonable I did quickly discover the absurdity of it 1. I found it to be against the practise of our first Reformers 2. Against the Scriptures 3. Against the ancient Church and holy Fathers 4. That the Presbyterians by forbearing to say this prayer did rob themselves of the benefite of the most excellent and efficacious of all prayers 5. That they did not bring so good prayers in the place of it Because the Presbyterians pretended alwayes to reduce all things to the purity of our first Reformation I informed my self of the practise of our Reformers and I found they made publique vse of this prayer as may be seen in M. Knoxes Chronicle pag 288. where at the conclusion of the prayer for election of the Super-Intendents it is said We crave the encrease of thy grace as by thee our Lord King and only Bishop we are taughs to pray Our Father c. So that this Presbyterian innovation is clearly against the purity of the first reformation 2. It is also manifestly against the Scripture for after our Saviour had reproved the hypocritical prayers of the Pharisees and much speaking of the Heathen Math. 6.9 he saith vnto his disciples Be not you therefore like to them c. Thus therefore shall you pray Our Father c. And because some do very phantastically pretend that our Saviour did not prescribe this prayer to be said but only did shew it as a forme or model of prayer to be followed they are clearly convinced out of the 11. chap. of S. Luke where our Saviour said to his disciples when you pray say Luke 11.2 Father hallowed he thy name c. Our Saviour here saith not say thus or after this manner but say Our Fathers c. â— This Presbyterian innovation is also much against the practise of the holy Fathers and primitive Christians who vsed this divine prayer frequently and dayly S. Augustin beareth witnes of this when he saith Aug. in Enchir. c. 71. The dayly prayer of the faithfull doth satisfy for our dayly light offences for it s theirs to say our Father which art in heaven Where the holy Father call's this prayer for the dayly vse of it the dayly prayer of the faithfull And albeit Aug. l. de Magistro c. 1. in epist 121. ad Probam as the same S. Augustin testifyeth elswhere there be not an absolute necessity of saying the same words but to pray in the same or the like sense yet the Church of Christ in all ages did ever give such respect vnto this heavenly prayer that she hath continually vsed not only the sense and meaning but also the very words of Christ And although also she made vse of other prayers yet she never omitted this but vsed
Tim 3.13 what the first Reformers who could not on a suddaine deny all truths left vntouched your second Presbyterian Reformers haue abolished as they haue done here the hymne of Glory which was said in praise of the holy Trinity and for which you haue got the noble exchange of cōtinual praises of the Covenant Presbytery But as the great Councel of Nice did add vnto the ancient hymne of Glory to the Father c. that clause As it was in the beginning c. For confusion of the Arian heresy So also it hath by the same addition prophetically foretold the continuance of it for ever to the confusion of this new sect called Presbytery which is most consonant to that of S. Paul To God be glory in the Church and in Christ Iesus to all generations world without end Amen Ephes 3.21 That Church which hath triumphed over the Arians who corrupted this glorious hymne will also triumph over the Presbyterians who have abolished it Yea this hymne shall not only continue to the worlds end in the Church Militant but it shall be also the exercise of the Church Triumphant which shall never cease for all eternity to sing praise glory vnto the most holy Trinity Thus ended my Catholique friend whose words I found to be more waighty a good space after then they appear'd to me at the time when he spoke them Moreover I remember he desired me to consider that these innovations against our Lords prayer and the hymne of Glory were such blacke actions that the prime Presbyterians who introduced them were ashamed to make acts to forbid them as they had done for abolishing of Episcopacy and some other points but only brought them in by a desuetude as they speake and so wore them out of vse Which sheweth said he that they would gladly haue some things done covertly which they are asham'd to avow publickly CHAP. X. Of the Apostles Creed denyed to be Apostolical by the Presbyterians THERE was hardly any thing that the Presbyterians did which made me stumble so much as their Innovation concerning the authority of the Apostles Creed They were not content with their Reformation or rather abrogation of the Apostolique governement vnlesse they also did deny the Creed to be made by the Apostles and so weare it out of vse as they had done our Lords prayer At the end of of their new Catechisme they speake thus of the Creed Shore Cat. Vvest in fine Albeit the substance of the doctrine comprised in the Abridgement commonly called the Apostles Creed be fully set forth in each of the Catechismes so as there is no necessity of inserting the Creed it self yet it is here annexed not as though it were composed by the Apostles c. In which words they reach covertly two things 1. That the Creed it self is not necessary if we have the substance of it as it is explain'd in the new Presbyterian Catechisme 2. that it needs not be esteemed to be composed by the Apostles But their practise did shew more evidently their meaning For they did not only declare it not to be Apostolical and therefore to be only a humane collection but also they did no more say it neither did they require it to be said any more of others as the custome was formerly at Baptismes And by these means they put it out both of estimation and vse This innovation gave great scandal to many who thought iustly they could thereafter be sure of nothing since their Creed was called in question This was vniversally esteem'd before the Covenant began the badge or mark of a Christian and the principal foundation of the Christian religion The authority of it was held so sacred that it was an ordinary proverbe in mens mouth 's when they would give great assurance of performing any thing they had promised that before they failed They would as soone deny their Creed As it was called the Apostles Creed so it was taught for such so it was believed and esteemed to be It was publickly said in the Church by parents at the Baptisme of their Children and it was required to be said by the people when they were Catechized But all these things were altered and overturned by the Presbyterians The authority and esteem of the Creed was dash't by their denying it to be Apostolicall and the custome of saying it both publikly privatly was taken away so that it was soone worne out both of vse and request If they did this so easily with our Lords prayer which is contain'd in Scripture how much more easily would they do it with the Creed which is not in Scripture and which they pretend to be a meer humane collection And so in a short time they would get it to be altogether slighted as a humane invention and banished out of the memories of men Wherefore being desirous to penetrat this matter more inwardly I found after some diligence that the same grounds which can be brought for the Apostolique authority of the Scriptures are also brought and that in an eminent degree for the like authority of the Creed And therefore if we receive the one we cannot reiect the other I shall briefly collect what I found or hath been shewed vnto me for the Apostolique authority great excellency frequent laudable vse of this diuine Symbol Baron tom 1. Annal. an 44. n. 15. seq Cardinal Baronius in the 1. tome of his Annals doth shew by the testimony of the holy ancient Fathers that the Creed was composed by the holy Apostles a little before they were to part and goe into several Countries to preach the Gospel vnto the Gentils to the end there might be a certaine short clear rule of faith in which they all agreed wherein they were to instruct all persons and by which as by a certaine badge all Christians might he knowen For this cause it was not committed to writing but was delivered by lively voice and imprinted in the hearts of Christians by the faithfull diligence of the Apostles This S. Hierom Hier. epist 61. and S. Augustin do testify The first saith The Symbol of our faith hope which was delivered by the Apostles is not written in paper or inke but in the fleshly tables of the heart The other affirmeth Aug. ser 119. de temp Idem ser 69. de expos Symb. that the Creed was not written that it might be retain'd in the hearts of the faithfull And againe he saith The holy Apostles did deliver a certaine rule of faith which being comprehended in tuelve articles according to the number of the Apostles they called a Symbol by which the faithfull may hold Catholique vnity and tread vnder feete heretical impiety To these two great Doctours Ambro. ser 38. epist 81. agrees also S. Ambrose who saith The holy faith is contain'd in the Symbol of the tuelve Apostles who as skiful Artificers meeting together haue made a key by common
counsel And againe Let vs believe saith he the Symbol of the Apostles which the Roman Church doth ever preserve and keep 's inviolate And if we will ascend higher S. Iren. lib. 1. c. 2. lib. 3. c. 4. S. Clement epist 1. ad frat Domini Basil de de Sp. S c. 27. S Ireneus Bishop of Lions and disciple of S. Polycarpus sheweth that diverse Nations believed without Scriptures by tradition which certainly was of the Apostles Creed S. Clement the disciple of S. Peter Coadiutor of S. Paul doth testify the same Diverse other Fathers may be seen cited in Cardinal Bellarmin tom 1. de verbo Dei non scripto lib. 4. cap. 4. S. Basil doth reckon the Apostles Creed as a principal Apostolique tradition And in a word I found that all Christian Nations and Ages have borne testimony of this truth Moreover I found that in the primitive times this Symbol was holden in so great reverence that in General Councels it vsed to be first recited Baron vbi su pra Aug. de Symb. and lay'd downe as the ground of the whole Ecclesiastique building as Baronius doth shew To this purpose S. Augustin calls it The foundation of the Catholique faith vpon which the edifice of the Church built by the hands of the Prophets and Apostles did rise ad Cat. lib. 3. c. 1. Leo ad Pul. Aug. ep 96. And S. Leo saith that this short and perfect Confession of the Catholique Symbol which is sealed by 12. sentences of the Apostles is so furnished with heavenly armour that by this sword alone all opinious of Heretiques may be cut of As I found such greet testimonies to prove the Apostolique authority of the creed so I did find that the holy Fathers did highly praise the excellency of it as of a worke worthy of such diuine Architects S. Augustin calls it Aug. ser 42. de trad Symb. The comprehension perfection of our faith It 's simple saith he short full That it's simplicity might serve the rudnesse it 's shortnesse the memory its fulnesse the instruction of the hearers Elswhere he calls it the Compend of the Scriptures lib. 1. ad Catech. Id. m ser in Vigil Pentecost And againe he saith This is a Symbol briefe in words but large in mysteries For whatsoever is prefigured in the Patriarchs whatsoever is declared in the Scriptures or foretold by the Prophets c. is contain'd and briefly confessed in it And in his Sermon above cited de Traditione Symboli speaking of the Creed he saith These are not humane words but heavenly mysteries of our Lord. But most notable and efficacious are the words of Rufinus to this purpose The Apostles Rufin in praef de expos Symb. saith he being to part from one an other to preach they lay'd downe this marke of their faith and agreement Not as the children of Noe being to part from each other rearing vp a tower of bricke and slime whose top should reach vnto the heauens but building the fortresses of faith of liuely stones and heavenly pearles which should stand stedfast against the face of the enemy which neither the winds should shake nor floodes subvert nor boysterous stormes or tempests move They therefore being to separate building the tower of Pride were deservedly punished with the Confusion of tongues that not one could vnderstand the speech of his neighbour but these who built the tower of Faith were endued with the skill and knowledge of all languages to the end that the one might be the marke of Sin and the other the monument of Faith Thus Ruffinus Lastly the same holy Fathers do shew the frequent laudable vse of the Apostles Creed in the primitive Church It was first taught and delivered vnto those who desired Baptisme and it was required to be publickly said by them immediatly before their baptisme This custome as Ruffinus sheweth was carefully observed in the Roman Church Ruffin ibid vt supra S. Augustin also doth witnesse how the God-fathers did say it in name of the Infants whom they presented to Baptisme and therefor he earnestly exhorts every Christian when he comes to the yeares of discretion to say frequently the Apostolique Creed which he professed by the mouths of those who presented him to Baptisme and call's it the Mirrour of a Christiā Render saith he your Symbol render it vnto the Lord Aug. homil 42. be not weary to rehearse it the repetition of it is good least forgetfulnesse creep on thee Do not say I said it yesternight I said it to day I say it every day I haue it well Remember thy faith behold thy self Let thy Creed be a Mirrour vnto thee there see thy self if thou believe all that thou confesses thy self to believe and reioyce dayly in thy faith Let it be thy riches the dayly Apparell of thy Soule Do you not cloath your self when you rise So by remembering thy Creed cloath thy Soule least peradventure forgetfulnesse make it naked S. Ambrose calls it the Seale of our heart which we ought dayly to review and the Watch-word of a Cristian Amb. lib. 3. de Virginib tom 4. which should be in readinesse in all dangers By all which irrefragable testimonies the sacred authority great excellency and frequent laudable vse both in publick and private of the Apostles Creed did appeare sufficiently vnto me So that I found for it the consent of peoples and Nations the testimonies of the holy Fathers the Martyrs Saints and Christians of all ages that is of the Vniuersal Church the piller ground of truth which are the greatest assurances that can be had vpon earth And therefore I rested fully satisfyed with them But I was much more confirmed in this resolution when I vnderstood by a serious conference with a friend that there was the same certainty for the Creed that there is for the Scriptures to witt the Tradition or testimony of the Church S. Augustin delivers clearly this truth concerning the Scriptures Aug. cont epist fund c. 5. I would not haue believed saith he the Euangel unlesse the authority of the Catholique Church had moved me c. and that authority being once weakned neither can I believe the Euangel This testimony authority of the Catholique Church was proved to me to be the most easy manifest and infallible ordinary way that can be had on earth to come vnto the certaine knowledge of what books are Scriptures yea it was clearly proved to be the only way so that if once this testimony be weakened there is nothing left but guessings wanderings after the manner of blind men as experience doth shew in the difference between the Lutheranists the Calvinists who agree in all their supposed wayes of knowing the Scripture and yet can never agree in the same Canon of the Scriptures But of this matter we shall haue occasion to speake more fitly hereafter in the question of the Church If then the
Scriptures cannot be certainly knowen but by the testimony authority of the Church and are to be believed for the samâ— as S. Augustin doth affirme the Creed also may be knowen and ought to be believed to be Apostolical for the same very reason since the same testimony authority are for both Yea the Tradition Testimony of the Church for the Apostles Creed hath in a certaine manner some preeminence above that which is for the Scripture For it is more ancieÌ„t more vniuersal more manifest More ancient because the holy Fathers and the whole Church do constantly affirme that the Symbol was composed by the Apostles before any part of the new Testament was written It was more vniversal because it was received every where at the very first plantation of Christianity whereas diverse parts of the Scripture being directed only to some particular Churches could not be communicated but after some space to the whole Church It was also more manifest because there were some bookes of the Scripture doubted of by some of the ancient Fathers till the Vniversal Church did determin the Canon of the Sciptures but there was never any ancient Christian who doubted of or denyed the Apostles Creed there was such a clear and Vniversal tradition for it And besides the Creed in it self is very clear as being a short rule of faith ordain'd for the capacity of the most simple according to which the Scriptures that are more obscure ought to be vnderstood Seing then the whole Church in the primitive times and in all ages hath professed that the Apostles made taught the Creed it remaines most certaine that the Apostles did teach it for greater certainty then this cannot be had If the Apostles taught and delivered it vnto the first Christians then they being so taught were obliged to receive it with the sâ—me reverence wherewith they did receive the Scriptures which were delivered or directed vnto them by the same Apostles And if the first ChristiaÌ„s were so obliged why not also their children their childreÌ„s children so downeward froÌ„ age to age vntill the end of the world shall haue the same obligation If this obligation held in the first age why not also in the second and in every succeeding age Or when should this obligation cease Or why more at one time then at an other since the same assurance remaines at all times Or why should it cease more for the Creed then for the Scripture since the same testimony is for both and if there be any preeminence in this matter the Creed hath it as has been shewed Wherefore as I was by these considerations fully satisfyed of the Apostolique authority laudable vse of the Creed in the primitive Church so I could in no wise approve the Presbyterians innovations against it but rather did much admire of their presumption For by their denying the Creed to be Apostolique I saw they denyed the clear rule and endeavoured to subvert the very foundation of the Christian faith By their taking away both the publick and private vse of it they would haue robbed Christians of the heavenly apparell and spiritual armour of their soules as the holy Fathers above call it And all this they do relying vpon no other grounds but their owne gesses which they oppose and would haue to be preferred to the constant testimony and irrefragable authority of the whole Christian world The Iewes brought at least Aug. in psal 63. v. 7. sleeping witnesses against the resurrection of Christ for which folly S. Augustin mocks theÌ„ and saith that they theÌ„selves were sleeping and failed in their search But the Presbyterians bring neither sleeping nor waking witnesses and yet they will blindly iudge in a matter done above 16. hundred yeares ago and boldly pronounce sentence against an ancient fundamental truth which had been received professed by the Christians of all ages But albeit the Presbyterians do reiect the authority testimony of the Church yet I saw if they followed their owne principles they might as easily discern the Creed to be Apostolique as they pretend they can know the Scriptures For the Maiesty of the style the harmony of the parts the purity of the doctrin and the like do concurre in the Creed in an eminent degree as we haue seen above out of the holy Fathers who do so highly praise it for its perfections as a worke Worthy of such heavenly Architects And the matter being considered in it self the Creed in all these qualities is equal if not Superiour by outward apparance vnto the Scriptures For in them there are many seeming contradictions hard to be explained but none in this Many things in Scripture not so full of Maiesty as about S. Pauls cloke c. 2. Tim. 4.13 but the creed is totally replenished with most sublime divine mysteries Therefore if the Presbyterians could by these marks discern the Scriptures they might as easily discern the Creed to haue been made by the Apostles Albeit I admired much how the Presbyterians could vpon so weake grounds deny the Apostles Creed against such invincible authorities yet I was much more stricken with admiration when I considered what they brought in place of it For in place of the Apostles Creed we got the Presbyterians Covenant As that was denyed to be Apostolical so this was cry'd vp to be Divine for it was called Gods Covenant the Confession of faith c. As parents were accustomed at the Baptisme of their children to say the Apostles Creed in which they promised to bring them vp so now they were made promise to breede them in the Covenant which was too long to haue by heart or to be repeated This was truly a rare exchange to deny the Creed to be Apostolique to cry vp the Covenant to be Divine To rob vs of a most ancient clear briefe positive Sacred Confession of faith made by the holy Apostles famous in all ages vniversally received troughout the whole world full of great mysteries divine expressions And to give vs in place of it a new long obscure negative Confession or rather Confossion of faith full of terrible oaths execrations combinations devised by some few discontented heads by cunning and force obtruded vpon this Nation much suspected at the beginning to be nothing but a meer pretence of religion as it was notoriously knowen to be a humane invention and as it 's now at lenth after all its disguises manifested for such vnto the world It 's good fame hath not lasted long neither at home nor abroad It got some footing in England by cunning and worldly interest but these soone failing it was quickly detected and reiected The Christlan Moderator saith to this purpose Christ Mod. p. 2. That the last Reformation setled with so solemn a Covenant and caried on with so furious a zeal is already by better lights discovered to be meerly humane therefore deservedly lay'd aside Therefore to
as flat blasphemy And yet Calvin esteem's so much this blasphemous fancy that he makes it the price of our Redemption For thus he writes Nothing had been done Cal lib. 2 instit vt sup if Christ had onely dyed a Corporal death but it was also requisite that he should feele the severity of the wrath of God And when this was obiected as a blasphemy by F. Campian Whitaker did second sustaine it Vvitak lib. ◠cont Dureum sect 18. saying that Calvin wrote most truly that nothing had been done if Iesus Christ had onely suffered a corporal death Yea he calls this a doctrin most full of comfort These doctrines are so fals against the Scriptures which shew nothing more frequently and clearly then that we are redeemed by the blood and death of Christ and they are in themselues so absurd and blasphemous that we neede spend no more time in refutation of them for they are of the same kind with those of which S. Hierome speaks when he saith that to discover them is to vanquish them Yea some Ptotestants have written against them as Doctor Bilson B. of Winchester in his booke Bilson in Apol. Prot. tract 3. sect 3. num 40. which he intitles The full redemptein of mankind by the death and blood of Christ And in the defence of the article that Christ descended into hell c. But notwithstanding all the grosse absurdities of this sense invented by Calvin yet it was generally followed by the Presbyterians and by many other Protestants who denyed the local descent of Christs soule to hell For although it sounded very ill yet it behooved to be kep't by the Presbyterians for want of a better vntill a new one more commodious was found out which now lately hath been performed by the new Reformers of these times who see further and more clearly then M. Calvin who although he was famous in his owne generation and was reputed to be an Apostle sent extraordinarly by God to reforme the Church yet did not so much as know his Catechisme nor the true sense of the articles of his Creed but invented such a sense as some of his disciples haue abandonned it as false and others as blasphemous As Beza in his version of the Scripture turned Hell into Grave so he vnderstood this article of the Creed he descended into Hell that is He descended into the grave Which errour together with the former coruption invented by M. Calvin a learned Minister in Edinburgh did publickly refute in divers Sermons a little before the troubles for which he was much persecuted by the Puritans He shew that Bezas corruption made a grosse Tautology in the Apostles Creed or it made an explication more obscure then the thing it explained The Tautology would be very grosse to say Crucifyed dead and buryed he descended into the grave that would be twice buryed Or if you make descending into hell the explication of burial that is a rare Commentary to explicate a matter which is cleare and needs no Cōmentary by that which is more obscure and cannot yet be rightly vnderstood by Protestants as appeares by their dissensions The same Minister shew that both these vices were against the end of the Creed and the wisdome of the holy Apostles who made it short and plaine that it might serve the capacity of all men and therefore it was to be free of idle Tautologies and obscure Commentaries But at that time this Minister did not know that the Presbyterians were to deny the Creed to haue been composed by the Apostles by which his arguments are answered although by falling into grosser absurdities The third sense devised by the Presbyterians at Westminster is subiect to the like inconveniences that is both of Tautologies and obscure glosses For they say by that article He descended into Hell is vnderstood that he continued in the state of the dead and vnder the power of death till the third day For first it would be a Tautology to say dead and buryed and then repeate againe he remained dead or in the power of death that is sufficiently knowen by the words that follow to witt The third day he arose from the dead For he behoved to remaine dead so long as he was dead and he was dead till the third day that he arose from the dead So that the addition of he descended into hell vnderstood in the Ministers new coyned sense would not be onely superfluous but also ridiculous Then if they will make Christs descent to hell an explication of Christs remaining dead the Commentary would be more obscure then the text which is clear of it self How would the Presbyterians be pleased if one would say of Iohn Calvin or Knox or of their late Apostle M. Henderson that they are dead buryed descended into hell And if this man being accused before the Presbytery would bring in his owne defence the Ministers new Commentary that he meaned only by these words that they remained in the power state of death because they are not as yet risen from the dead I am morally perswaded what ever Commentary could be brought either their owne or any other the Presbyterians would be ill pleased with such a Text and would thinke it was sufficient to haue said that they were dead and buryed without this addition They descended into Hell But of all the expositions that ever I found on this article that of the late Protestant Bishop Vsher is the rarest which D. Vane speaking of the Ministers iuglings describes thus D. Vane Lost sheep pag. 243 1. Edit O what Serpentine wriglings and windings to escape the assaulters do they make O what perverse ridiculous and contradicting answers and evasions do some of them make In which they shew at once both much wit and much folly For fooles could not speake as they do and wise men would not In so much that B. Vsher Primat of Armagh a very learned man to avoid the Confession of Christs descent into Hell according to the article of the Creed in the plaine sense thereof doth so turne it and wind it that he makes the sense of the words He descended into hell to be He ascended into Heaven To such pitifull refuges doth the weaknesse of a bad cause drive them c. Thus he And so by this Bishops Commentary for descend we haue ascend and for Hell Heaven But all these senses being nowayes satisfactory the Presbyterians tooke the cleanliest easiest way to deny the Creed it self to be Apostolique that so men might not care much or take great notice of the sense when all authority is taken from the text That shift might in some manner serve their turne if this truth were not as expresly in the Scripture as it is in the Creed Now I would inquire at any man of conscience or ordinary discretion who will consider impartially these things what I should do in this case should I believe the Presbyterians who haue
vpon his wisdome For as it 's certaine that God made these lawes so it 's no lesse evident in the Scriptures that God vseth admonitions exhortations propounds rewards and threatens punishements to induce men to observe his lawes Now what Magistrate would be esteemed to be in his right wits who would not only make lawes impossible to be kept but also spend time in making exhortations propounding rewards to perswade men to do impossibilities But the Presbyterian doctrine makes God who is not only wise but wisdome it self subiect to both these follies which are most grosse absurdities And therefore since his lawes admonitions exhortations cannot be but prudent reasonable they do ever suppose the possibility of that which they enioyne and wherevnto they exhorte 3. The Presbyterian doctrine is not only iniurious to God but also it is very preiudiciall to man for it would rob him of the most excel-cellent of all vertues to witt the love of God For none can love another vnlesse he be good iust or at least appeare to be so But how can God appeare to be so who is described by the Presbyterians as if he were the most cruel Tyrant in the world to command impossibilities then to punish man eternally for not doing them Therefore if the Prerbyterian doctrine were true no man could love God as good gratious but rather would hate him as vniust Tyrannous 4. The Presbyterian opinion is a great enemy to piety vertue For if the Commandements be impossible none will strive to keep them and by this meanes a wide gate is opened to all impiety This is acknowledged by the forementioned Minister M. Shelford who saith Were the law impossible to be kept then all the exhortations threatnings in Gods word should be idle then all mens labours would wax lazie then good life which is after the rule would be exiled for that no man will strive against the stream Wherefore great enemies are they to Christian growth reward in the way of Godlinesse who are against this doctrine to witt of the possibility to keep the Commandements Lastly if the law were impossible then all men would be freed from subiection obedience to it for who can be reasonably tyed to things meerly impossible And this was the vse that Islebius one of Luthers Schollers made of his doctrine wherevpon he began the sect of the Anti-nomians as Sleidan doth testify in the 12. book of his history Having therefore found such clear testimonies of Scriptures Fathers such weight of right reason for the ancient Catholique doctrine I could not either in reason or conscience reiect all these and follow the Presbyterians groundlesse fancies which are against the very ground of faith to witt the holy Scriptures For the Presbyterians do teach that the commandements are impossible even with Gods grace And the Scripture saith they are easy light not heavy which is more then if it had affirmed that they were meerly possible Againe the Presbyterians by affirming the commandements are impossible do averre that never any did keep them doth or shall keep them The Scripture shewes in expresse termes that Abraham Zachary Elizabeth and others did keep them and that God hath promised many should keep them S. Iohn affirmeth that he who saith he knoweth God keepeth not his commandements is a liar the truth is not in him The Presbyterians do professe that they know God and that they neither do nor can keep his commandments and yet they will not be esteemed liars but rather true Professours For my part I am not able to reconcile such manifest contradictions as are in this matter betwixt the Scriptures the Presbyterians And therefore seing I cannot adhere to both I choosed rather to abandon the Presbyterians in thiâ— matter then to forsake the Scriptures I was much confirmed in this resolution when I saw the Catholique doctrine and sense of the Scriptures to be so clearly in the holy Fathers that by no shifts their testimonies can be shunned But I will add to these testimonies already brought one or two more which seem'd to me very clear efficacious How I pray you saith Sainct Augustin is it impossible vnto man to love Aug. ser 47. de Sanc to love I say a bountifull Creator a most loving father and then also to love his own flesh in his brethren but he who loves has fulfilled the law as the Apostle teacheth Wherefore the same holy Father admiring the great goodnesse bounty of God Rom. 3. who requires nothing of vs but to love him who is so good in himself and so gracious to vs he speaks thus vnto him What is man that thou wilt haue thy self to be beloved by him Aug. lib. 1. Confes c. 5. and if he do not love thee thou threatens him with great punisments But is not this punishment great enough if I do not love thee S. Chrysostome to the like purpose saith God commanded nothing impossible in so much Chry. hom 19. in Heb. hom 18. de Poenit. that many go beyond the very commandments And then he sheweth who these were to witt S. Paul S. Peter even all the quire of Saints Lastly the holy Fathers do not only prove the Catholique doctrine by the Scriptures and most solid reason founded vpon the goodnesse iustice of God but they condemne also the contrary opinion as a flat blasphemy against God Which censure is approved likewise by some Protestants Truly I cannot resist these reasons authorities and follow the Presbyterians to make a doctrine which is against the Scriptures and is condemned as blasphemy by the holy Fathers by some Protestants a principal article of my faith CHAP. XIV A Consideration of the Presbyterians principall grounds against the Possibility of keeping the Divine Commandements HAVING received aboundant satifaction in this matter concerning the Catholique doctrin I will briefly run through the Presbyterians principal grounds against it which in this search I did not leave vnconsidered 1. I found they acknowledged the Novelty of their doctrine 2. They brought no pure Scripture to prove it notwithstanding they pretend to believe nothing but Scripture 3. The Scriptures they bring are privatly expounded by them against the holy Fathers ancient Church against the Scriptures themselves in other places 4. They lay down some false Maximes and weak reasons whereon they build their imaginary faith or rather most dangerous errour Calvin acknowledges the novelty singularity of his doctrine Cal. lib. 2. Instit cap. 7 sect 5. in these words That we said the observation of the law to be impossible is briefly to be explained confirmed for it was wont commonly to be esteemed a most absurd opinion in so much as Hierome did not doubt to denounce a curse to it but I care nothing what Hierome thought Cent. 2. â— cap. 4. The Centuriators also of Magdeburg do acknowledge
life so neither is it commanded Of this perfection S Paul speaks when he saith Philip. 1.12 Et ver 15. Not that I haue now received or now am perfect but I pursue if I may comprehend And yet immediatly thereafter he calleth himself and others perfect in another inferiour degree of perfection Let vs therefore saith he as many as are perfect be thus minded 2. They are called perfect who although they do not alwayes actually love God think vpon him yet they consecrate themselves totally to Gods service and leave willingly all worldly things to please him according to that of our Saviour If thou wilt be perfect go and sell all thow hast give to the poore c. This perfection is not commanded but onely counselled as the holy Fathers constantly teach and albeit it be not commanded yet many by Gods grace do attayne vnto it Lastly they are called perfect who are ready to foresake loose all before they loose the love friendship of God This last kind of perfection is required of all men as God said to Abraham Genes 17.1 Math. 5. Genes 6. 1. Cor. 2.6 walk before me and be thou perfect and Christ said to his disciples be ye perfect The Sripture calls some perfect in this sense for it saith that Noe was a iust and a perfect man And S. Paul saith we speak wisdome among the perfect To this state a proportionable degree of perfection in keeping the commandments is required which by Gods grace may be performed Of this perfection S. Augustin speaketh when he saith that the iustice by which the iust man liues Aug. cont duas epist Pelag. lib. 3. c. 7. albeit for the capacity of this life it be not vndeservedly called perfect yet it is little in regard of that great iustice which the equality of Angels doth containe Hence it may easily appeare in what sense the Commandments of God ought may be kept perfectly and in what not To wit they may be kept perfectly in all the parts not one excepted and in some degree of perfection although they cannot be kept perfectly during this life in the highest degree which is not commanded nor required of vs. If the Presbyterians followed this sense they were not to be reproved but they haue a quite contrary meaning For they deny all possibility of keeping the Commandments any wise perfectly either in parts or the lowest degree of perfection as may be seen in their new Catechisme where they say that no man is able by any grace received in this life to keep the Commandments perfectly but every one breakes them dayly in thought word deed c. So that their sense of the impossibility to keep the Commandments perfectly is most false if not blasphemous For either God commandeth that perfection which they say is above their force power or he commandeth it not If he commandeth it not then they may fulfill the law perfectly because it is a law no further then it commandeth and if so far it may be fulfilled then may it be fulfilled perfectly Therefore it is false which they say that it cannot be fulfilled perfectly If they say that overplus of perfection which is above their power is commanded as they do ordinarly then they make God to be a Prince vnreasonable in commanding vs to do that which is not in our power to do and to be Tyrannous cruell in punishing vs eternally for not doing that which was above our reach to perform All which do make against the wisdome goodnesse iustice of God and therefore these opinions are condemned by the holy Fathers by some Protestants as blasphemous Thus spake the Catholique Moreover I remember he shew me that there was a notable difference in this matter betwen the Catholiques the Presbyterians For the last said he do free themselves and put the blame of all their wickednesse and sluggishnesse vpon God alleadging that he hath given them a law impossible to be kept even with all the help grace that he gives them But the Catholiques do free God of all blame impute iustly their breaking of the law to their own wickednesse alone S. Hierome shewes the humour of the Presbyterians in these words Hier. epist ad Celant We cry against God and we say that we are oppressed with the difficulty or impossibility of his Commandments Neither is it sufficient that we do not keep his Commandments vnlesse We pronounce the Commander to be vniust whilst we complaine that the Authour of equity hath Commanded not only hard things but also impossibilities The Church of Christ said the same Catholique hath been troubled in this matter with two opposite heresies to witt of the Pelagians the Calvinists The first taught of old that the Commandments were possible to be kept without the grace of God and the others of late teach that the Commandments are impossible to be kept even with the grace of God The Church of Christ keeps the medium of truth between these opposite errours Against the first she teacheth that the Commandments may be kept but not without Gods grace and against the second that they may be kept with Gods grace And therefore against both these enemies as well to one another as to grace she defends the grace of God Against the first she shewes the necessity of grace and against the second she maintaines the power efficacy of it But there is this notable difference between Pelagius Calvin in their opposition of grace that the first is an open enemy to it and the second is a great friend in words but no lesse enemy in deeds For whilst he vndervalues all the faculties and natural powers of man he would seem to cry vp grace to give all the glory to God But when he teacheth again that grace is not able to purify our soules or make vs able to walk in the Commandments of God he quite overthrowes grace God who of his mercy delivered this Island from the first heresy may also in his own time deliver it from the second Thus he But I did oppose vnto him that which I heard some Ministers say that God might iustly command things impossible to man fallen because it is sufficient that they were possible to man before his fall and seing by his own fault they became vnpossible God may iustly exact them without the least imputation either to his iustice or goodnesse To this he answered that the authorities of the Scriptures holy Fathers are for the possibility of the law after the fall And the Fathers shew by most solid reasons that God could neither with his iustice or goodnesse impose impossible lawes after the fall punish the transgressours of them with eternal paines Therefore this reason or rather pretence of the Ministers being no Scripture but rather against Scripture the holy Fathers who knew found reason as well as the Ministers is not to be regarded 2.
iustice of Christ but it must be internal iustice flowing from his merits and iustice that can quicken vs. This raising of one from the death of sin to the life of Iustice is called by the Catholiliques the first Iustification by which one of a sinner is made the friend of God And it is altogether free proceeding meerly from the grace favour of God without all works and merits of man Of this S. Paul speaks to the Romans Aug. de Spir. lit c 4 when he saith We conclude that man is iustifyed by faith without the works of the law Where S. Augustin vnderstands by the works of the law not only the works of the Ceremonial and Iudicial law but also of the Moral law which are done by the force of nature or by the insight of the law without the help of grace in Christ which help is not given except one haue first faith in Christ which is the roote of salvatioÌ„ first effect of the divin grace in our soules Therefore if man could not be iustifyed by these works of the law albeit he did them much lesse can he be iustifyed by these works when he breaketh the law as S. Paul proveth in the same epistle that both Iewes and Gentiles haue sinned and therefore stand in need of the mercy of God and consequently must be iustifyed by the faith grace of Christ Besids this first Iustification there is another which the Catholiques call the second Iustification by which one is not of impious made iust but of iust he is made more iust and of a friend made yet more intimate with God according to that in the Apocalypse Apocal. 22.1 Eccles 18.22 He that is iust let him be iustifyed even vnto death Of this Iustification are vnderstood the words of S. Iames when he saith That a man is iustifyed by works and not by faith only That is by works following after faith flowing from it for such works are not the works of the law that is they are not works done meerly by the force of nature or by the only knowledge of the law but they are the works of grace as faith it self is and by these works we are iustifyed and not by faith only This second Iustification is acquired by doing all works of iustice and piety by which a man being in the state of grace purchaseth a further augmentation of it S. Augustin brings S. Paul Aug lib. de gra lib. aeâ—b c 6. as an example of both these Iustifications For before his conversion he was found with no good merits but rather with many evil merits who was persecuting the Church and yet he obtain'd mercy Therefore he was not iustifyed by his works or by the deeds of the law but by the faith or grace of Christ But after his conversion first Iustification the same Apostle reckons out the good works he had done 2. Timoth 4.6 by which he had advanced in piety iustice I am even now saith he to be sacrificed and the time of my resolution is at hand I have fought a good fight I have consummate my course I have kept the faith Concerning the rest there is laid vp for me a crown of iustice which our Lord will render to me in that day a iust iudge Vpon which S. Augustin saith He reckons out now his good merites that after his good merits he might obtaine the crown who after evil merits did obtaine grace Take heed what followes There remaines to me a crown of iustice c. To whom could the iust iudge render the crown if he had not first as a merciful father given him grace And how had that been a crown of iustice if grace had not gone before which iustifyes the impious How could that haue been rendered as due Aug. ibid vt supra if the first had not been freely bestowed Thus S. Augustin By these reasons many other testimonies which were showen vnto me I was brought to vnderstand the Catholique doctrin concerning the nature of Iustification and therby I was made more sensible of the errous which are against it CHAP. XVII Of the Presbyterians three principall Errours concerning Iustification HAVING thus seen the truth of the ancient and Catholique doctrin I was moved to take special notice of three principall and most grosse errours maintain'd by the Presbyterians against it The first is that they do not only place the whole nature of Iustification in remission of sins but they likwise teach that although our sins be forgiven in Iustification yet they are not taken away but that they really remaine in the person iystified and are only covered and not imputed The second errour is that a man iustified hath no internal nor inherent iustice in him as being altogether defiled inwardly with sin but that he is only iust by the external iustice of Christ with which he is covered and which is imputed vnto him The third and last errour consists in this that they teach this external iustice of Christ is applyed vnto man by faith only and that not by a Christian or Catholique faith wherby one believes the articles of the Creed or such things as God hath revealed in Scripture but by a special faith as they call it wherby every one believes for certaine that his sins are forgiven him and that he is one of the predestinate The first errour to witt that sins remaine and are not taken away from the person iustified maintain'd by Calvin and the Presbyterians I found to be against cripture the vertue of Christs passion the efficacy of Baptisme S. Iohn Baptist calleth Christ the lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world Iohn 1.29 Heb. 9.28 1 Iohn 1. ch 1. v 7. Acts 22.16 S. Paul saith that Christ was offered vp once to exhaust the sins of many And S. Iohn affirmeth that the blood of Christ cleanseth vs from all sins Ananias said to S. Paul Arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins If our sins be taken away as S. Iohn affirmeth how do they remaine as the Presbyterians believe If our sins be washed away and cleansed by the blood of Christ and by baptisme how can the filthinesse and blots of them remaine David saith to God Psalm 31.1 Wash me and I shall be whiter then snow But according to the Presbyterians he behoved to remaine as black as pitch and as filthie as the puddle even with all the washing that God would bestow vpon him Therefore this Presbyterian doctrin is against the Scriptures the vertue of Christs passion and the efficacy of baptisme and it is also clearly against the holy Fathers as we shall see shortly in the Triall of the Sacraments Against these clear authorities the Calvinists bring principally one place of Scripture whereon they found their errour and that is in the 31. Psalme where David saith Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven whose sins are covered I admired
When S. Gregorie was giving the Sacrament to the people he came to a woman who smiled when he said to her the body of our Lord Iesus Christ preserue thy soule wherevpon the Pope did withdraw his hand lay'd the SacrameÌ„t on the altar After the holy solemnities were ended he enquired at the woman why she had laughed in so dreadfull an action She in end confessed that she could not acknowledge that bread which she had made with her own hands to be the body of Christ Then S. Gregorie prayed God earnestly for her and obtain'd that the bread even in external forme should be turned into flesh by which miracle he both reduced the woman vnto the faith and confirmed the people in it The faith of S. Lowis King of France Bosius li 14 de signis Eccles p. 145. ex Villanaeo an 1258. concerning this Sacrament is much celebrated For when he being advertised that a most beavtifull child had appeard in the holy Sacrament was desired to come and see this miracle he refused to goe saying that these miracles were done for these who doubted but for himself he was most certaine that Christ Iesus was truly present in the Eucharist An other such apparition was seen at Doway in the yeare 1254. continueda good time Spond suppl anno 1254. n. 16. so that great numbers of people came from diverse parts to see it and the memory of it is every yeare celebrated in that town with great solemnity By all which considerations I was sufficiently satisfyed of the Catholique belief concerning the reall presence which I found to be containd in the holy Scriptures beleeved by the holy Fathers and by general Councels and to be confirmed by miracles And therefore I could not any longer believe the Presbyterian doctrin which against all these authorities makes the body of Christ to be as far distant from the Sacrament as the heavens are from the earth 1. I perceived that they scarcely pretend to have Scripture for them but are enforced to runne from the clear words of it to their tropes figures Aug. lib. 3. de doct Christ c. 10. which S. Augustin observed long ago to be the custom of erroneous persons So soone saith he as the opinion of any errour hath once prepossessed their minds they esteeme all to be figures which the Scripture saith to the contrarie And therefore albeit the Scripture saith not once but foure times that the Eucharist is the body and blood of Iesus Christ without ever saying in any one place that it is not his body but only a figure of it they beleeve the one which it saith not and not the other which it affirmes Against them S. Iohn Damascen saith efficaciously Damas lib. 4. Orthodo fidei The bread wine is not a figure of the body blood of Christ God forbid it were that but it is the divine body of our Lord he himself saying this is my body 2. They passe from the Scriptures Fathers and found their negative faith vpon their senses and some carnal reasons Chrys homil 60. ad popul Antioch Against which vaine pretences S. Chrysostom saith well Let vs beleeve God every where let vs not oppose him although that which he saith seem absurd to our sense vnderstanding Let his speech overcome our sense and reason which in all things we ought to do cheefly in the mysteries not only looking to that which lieth before vs but also holding fast his words For we cannot be deceived by his words our sense may be easily deceived these cannot be false this is often deceived Because therefore he hath said this is my body let vs not be holden by any doubt but let vs beleeve and comprehend it wiâ—h the ey 's of of our vnderstanding Cyrill Alex. lib. 4. in Ioan c. 13. S. Cyrill speaks no lesse efficaciously against those who pretend this mystery to be against reason and impossible compareing them to incredulous Iewes A malignant minde saith he doth presently reiect as frivolous false what it doth not vnderstand yeelding to none nor thinking any thing to be aboue it self as we shall find the Iewes to have been For when it became them who had seen the divine vertue the miracles of our Saviour to receive his speech willingly and if any thing seemed difficult to have asked the resolution of him they did the quit contrarie and cryed out together against God not without great impietie How can this man give vs his flesh neither did it come into their minde that there is nothing impossible with God for since they were sensual as S. Paul speaks they could not vnderstand spiritual things and so great a mystery seemed to them to be follie But let vs make great profit by other mens sins Let us have a firme faith in these mysteries Let vs neuer speak nor think that word How That 's meerly Iudaical and the cause of great punishment Thus S. Cyrill 3. The Presbyterians do wrest our Saviours words by a figurative interpretation against all reason as hath been shewed Then I found this Presbyterian doctrin Apud Bellar. lib. 1. de Euch. cap. 1. Gualt Chronolog saecul 1. cap. 1. Elien resp ad Apolog. Bellar. c. 1. Casaub ans to Card. Peron 1. instance fol. 32. English to have been an ancient heresie of Simon Magus and Menander and thereafter of Berengarius who at his death did recant of the Albigenses and of diverse others Yea Gualterus brings some testimonies of the holy Fathers to shew that Iudas the traitor denyed the reall presence and did not believe our Saviours words in the 6. chapter of S. Iohn Lastly diverse famous Protestants have abandoned that doctrin of Calvin As Bishop Andrews who writes thus against Bellarmin We agree faith he with yow of the matter all the contention is about the manner a presence I say we believe not lesse reall then yow Casaubon made the like profession in name of King Iames of the whole Church of England And whereas I heard so much cryed out against Transubstantiation as a thing impossible and a noveltie lately introduced into the Church I found both these allegations to be false For the holy Fathers do shew both the possibility and the verity of it out of the Scriptures Cyrill Hieros Catech. 4. Mystag Ambros l. 4. de Sacram c. 4. lib. de mysterijs initiand cap. 9. S. Cyrill saith Christ changed once water into wine which is near vnto blood and is he not worthy to be believed of vs that he hath changed wine into blood S. Ambrose having shewed the power of Christs speech how by it he gave a being to the world which had no being before saith How much more then operative is it that these things which were might have a being and be converted into another Again the same holy Father calls this change a conversion of nature substance bringing examples out of the old
by the Christians of the preceeding age makes the doctrin of every following age the same with the doctrin of the preceeding age and so makes the doctrin of all after ages the same with the doctrin of the first age For suppose that the Church now in this age relies vpon that principle to believe nothing as Christs doctrin but what her predecessors of the 15. age taught her to be his doctrin it is evident that the doctrin of these two ages will be the same And the Church of the 15. age relying vpon the same principle must hold the same doctrin which the Church of the 14. age held and so vpward the doctrin of the third age will be the same with that of the second and the doctrin of the second will be the same with that of the first and so if this principle has been carefully observed in all ages the doctrin of all ages will be the same with the doctrin of the first age which is the doctrin of Christ and of his Apostles The Maior then is evident The Minor is proved thus The Church now in Communion with the Roman sea holds in this age that principle For she professeth to believe nothing contrary to the doctrin of her immediat Ancestors and presumes to add nothing as Christs doctrin vnto the doctrin of her Ancestors Therefore she professeth to believe nothing as Christs doctrin but what she received as such from her immediat Ancestors If the Church of the present age professeth so as it is evident she doth then the Church of the fifteenth age behoved to make the like profession or else the Church of this age could not make it For so many persons as are now in Communion with the Roman Church cannot concurre to make so notorious sensible a lye as to say they professe nothing but what was profes't and taught by their immediat Ancestors if these of the 15. age had not made truly such a profession of the same doctrines And for the same reason these of the 15. age could not make that profession and teach it vnto this age vnlesse the 14. age had done the same and so you may ascend vpward even vnto the first age Therefore the Church professing to observe this principle now in this age hath profes't it alwayes If she has profes't it alwayes she has also observ'd it alwayes for the same reason because so many Nations as are in Commmunion of the Roman Church cannnot make so notorious a lye as to say they believe nothing but what they received from their immediat Ancestors if they believed any thing else as Christs doctrin which they had not received Therefore seing they affirm in all ages even vnto the first that they received all their doctrin from their Ancestors it must be true that they did receive it all and it must be also true that with the other doctrine they received and observed this principle To believe nothing but what has been delivered by their immediat Ancestors For this is as it were the rule ground of all particular doctrines So that by proving that the present Church in Communion with the sea of Rome professeth to observe this principle it 's proved she profes't it alwayes and by proving that she profest it alwayes it is shown she has observ'd it alwayes and this principle been alwayes profes't and observed it has been ever delivered with the rest of the doctrin as the main ground whereon the Church hath relyed by which men may come vnto the sure knowledge possession of the true doctrin which was taught by Christ his Apostles So that if the whole Church hath not made a notorious sensible lye in one age to damn themselves and their whole posterity she hath ever received all her doctrin from her immediat Ancestors and so it will be true that the doctrin of all ages is the same with the doctrin of the first age which is the true doctrin of Christ his Apostles Now it rests to be shown that this Church alone observes the former principle which is easily done For if there had been any other society of Christians which had constantly kept that principle it had also kep't the same doctrin which the Roman Church keeps as is evident by what hath been said Secondly No other Churches and especially the Protestant can so much as pretend to keep this principle For they are so far from professing to receive all their doctrines from their immediat Ancestors that at their first rising they accuse their Ancestors and the Church in their time of Errors whereof they professe themselves to be Reformers and that not by doctrin which they had received immediatly from others but what they had received or pick't out from the Scriptures by their private collections which has been the ordinary custom of all heretiques And this is evident in Protestants who do acknowledge that they have their doctrin not by the testimony of the age immediatly preceeding Luther but from him who opposed the whole Church in his time and for many ages before him which he pretended to reform by the Scriptures The whole strength of this proof is grounded vpon this manifest truth that a full report from whole worlds of fathers to whole worlds of Sons of such things as they heard and saw is altogether infallible since sensible evidence in a world of eye witnesses vnanimously concurring is altogether infallible And such is the test mony of the whole Church in every age for her doctrin that it is the very same which was delivered by Christ and his Apostles and therefore it was truly delivered by them For neither can the Church be mistaken in this testimonie since whole Nations cannot be deceived in what is told them not once or twice but what is dayly beaten into their ears what they are bred with and what they see dayly with their eyes or else we may say the whole world erres in iudging white from black Neither can all the Christians in the world dispersed through so many Nations malitiously conspire to make so notorious a lie as to say they heard this taught and saw it practised if they had not seen and heard it For that were to testify a lie in a matter subiect to sense against their greatest interest to witt the Salvation of themselvs of their posterity If it be impossible that all the persons of a great Citie and much more of a whole Nation should think affirm that they saw and heard such things which truly they neither saw nor heard How much more is it impossible that all Christians Cities Nations should think and affirm they were instructed in such doctrines saw such practices if it were not really true that they had received these doctrines seen these practices Hence it remaines evident that this continued testimony of so many Christian in every generation is a most sure infallible way to attayn vnto the certain knowledge of what
doctrin Christ his Apostles taught and that the Catholique Church by her constant treading this way has still held the same true doctrin which she first received and consequently has never changed her doctrin nor brought in corruption as the Ministers do caluminate And therefore their pretended Reformation having no other ground but this calumnie is a groundlesse imagination and a destruction of Christs true doctrin But that the truth of this whole matter may yet more fully appear I will shew you briefly that this constant testimony is the only sure infallible way to attayn vnto the certain knowledge possession of our Saviours true doctrin that it is also most easy vniuersal for all sorts of persons that the holy Fathers primitive Church did follow it and that all Errors heresies have been clearly confuted by it We have already show'n that this testimony is a sure infallible means now that it is only sure infallible Aug. cont ep fond c. 5. is shewed For if there were any other it would be the Scripture as Protestants pretend But that cannot be 1. Because we cannot beleeve the Scripture without the testimony of the Church as S. Augustin clearly avoucheth 2. Albeit we could know it without that testimony yet by the Scripture we cannot know the whole doctrin of Christ especially since the Scripture it self saith 2. Thessal 2.15 Hold fast the Tradition Thirdly principally Albeit the Scripture contain'd the whole doctrin of Christ yet how shall I know assuredly by the letter of the Scripture the true sense of it without which I have not the true doctrin of Christ Yea I may corrupt the Scripture or follow those who corrupt it as S. Peter shewes many do vnto their own perdition Here many if not all Protestants are perplexed to show how by the Scripture the true sense of it may be had Some say that the Scripture is clear in all things necessary to Salvation so that every man may easily vnderstand them Others think that the Scripture is not so clear but an Interpreter is necessary But they are divyded in assigning this Interpreter Some say the Scripture in one place expounds it self in another Others assign the private Spirit and last of all some assign for an Interpreter every mans natural reason But all these are false frivolous pretences For first they could never shew what these necessary points are Besides this is an open confession that by the Scripture we cannot know assuredly our Saviours doctrin in these points which they call not necessary Then is not the true belief of the Sacrament necessary for the Church and yet we see what contrary glosses the Lutherans Calvinists make on our Saviours clear words Lastly if there needed no Interpreter for things necessary every one although vnlearned who could but read might pick out what are necessary which troubles the most learned heads among them to find out and these who could not read behoved to pin their implicit faith at at other mens sleeves Now what confusion would this make what vncertainty would there be in this case of our Saviours doctrin And how contrary are these things to truth and experience to Protestants principles practices So it is evident that by the Scripture alone we cannot come to the sure and infallible knowledge of our Saviours doctrin Neither can we attayn to it by the Scripture assisted by any Interpreter which Protestāts assign For it is false that the Scripture expounds it self it being obscure in many places which are not interpreted by others more plaine as may appear besides other reasons by the Protestants dissenssions in many points The conference of places study and the like which some require to be ioyn'd with the Scripture are but humane helps subiect to error and not infallible Then for the private Spirit it can give vs as little assurance of the sense as it can of the letter of the Scripture We see what contrariety is among those who all equally lay claim to it Neither is the last Interpreter to witt every mans reason assigned by M. Chilingworth the last peaceable Refiner of the English Church any white better but rather worse For besids that this opinion makes humane reason not the divine authority the main ground of our faith which is a dangerous errour it is so far from bringing men vnto the sure knowledge of what our Saviour taught that it professeth no more but a moral certainty for the truth of the whole Christian religion and leaves all particular doctrines to be pickt out of the Scriptures according to the diversity of mens particular reasons And so diuerse men according to the diversity of their reasons collect from the Scriptures opposite doctrines For what some think reasonable accept others esteem vnreasonable and reiect as is evident in the Socinians who deny the divinity of Christ principally vpon this ground because it chokes their reason as the Calvinists also chiefly for the same reason deny the reall presence So that this Interpreter brings as great vncertainty to know our Saviours doctrin as any other And therefore it remaines evident that the Scripture even assisted by any Interpreter which Protestants can assigne much more the Scripture alone is not a sure infallible means for this end and consequently the testimony of the Church is the only sure infallible means But here I did enquire of the Catholique If the Scriptures were as cleer every where as S. Augustin affirmes they are concerning the Church where he saith they need no Interpreter might they not then give vs vndoubted assurance of our Saviours doctrin To which he answered That although the Scripture were never so clear and as evident in every sentence as words can be written Yet because these words may be diversly vnderstood taken indifferent senses they cannot be so sure infallible away to certifie vs what was our Saviours doctrin as the living words testimony of the whole Church which received the true doctrin and the sense together with the letter of the Scriptures which she hath constantly transmitted vnto posterity This is evident in a very principal point of the Christian religiō to witt the holy Sacrament What words can be more clear then these of our Saviour This is my body which shall be given for you c And yet vpon these clear words there are reckoned about two hundred diverse interpretations since Protestāts arose How then should a man amōg such variety of senses come vnto the true sense be sure that he has attayn'd vnto it in which only Christs true doctrin consists Therefore it is evident in this case that the written word cannot do it and this only the Church can perform which has conserved both the letter and sense of the Scriptures from corruptions If then the Scriptures although they were written in most cleer words cannot certifie vs fully of the true sense of our Saviours doctrin
S. Ambrose Let vs therefore keep the precepts of our Elders and not with temerity of rude presumption violate those seals descending to vs by inheritance To the same purpose Origen writeth In our vnderstanding saith he of the Scriptures Orig. tract 27. 〈◊〉 we must not depart from the first Ecclesiasticall Tradition nor believe otherwise but as the Church of God has by succession delivered vnto vs. By this way also all heresies have been clearly discovered condemned Theodoret l. 1. hist c. 8. Theodoret expresly witnesseth that the heresy of Arius was condemned by the doctrin not written which had been always profest in the Church For there was no end by Scripture the Arians pretending that as well as the Catholiques Tertullian saith There is no good got by disputing out of the texts of Scripture But either to make a man sick or mad And the reason is because albeit you would bring never so clear Scriptures the heretiques will expound all according to their pleasures and they never faile also to bring Scriptures for themselvs so that the victory is vncertain or not so evident but by the constant belief of the Church all heretiques are clearly confounded S. Athanasius by this means confounds the Arians Behold saith he we have proved the succession of our doctrin delivered from hand to hand from father to son But as for yov ô new Iewes and Sons of Caiphas Athanas lib. 1. de decret Niceni CoÌ„ what progenitors can you name for your selvs By this means also the Error of rebaptizing those who had been baptized by heretiques was refuted and the custom of the Church to the contrary prevailed over all S. Cyprians reasons and many authorities collected from the Scriptures Aug. lib. 2 de bapt c. 9. As yet saith S. Augustin there had been no General Councell assembled in that behalf but the world was held in by the strength of Custom which was opposed to those who would bring in that novelty S. Stephen Pope and Martyr wrote to S. Cyprian in these words Nihil innovetur nisi quod traditum est Let nothing be changed nothing received but what has been delivered Herevpon I proposed this difficulty that some things were believed after the definition of a General Councel which were not believed before Therefore it would seem that the Church has not always relied on that principle to believe nothing but what was delivered by the constant testimony of their immediat Ancestors To which the Catholique answered that the clearing of this difficulty would manifest the strength evidence of the former proof First said he it is evident that the principal if not all the points maintain'd by Catholiques and now questioned by Protestants did ever appear externally in the profession practise of the whole Church and were not defined by anterior Councils Therefore according to S. Augustins rule they are Apostolical Aug. lib. 4. de baptis c. 24. For that saith he which the vniversal Church doth hold and was not instituted by Councels but has been still retayn'd in the Church is most iustly believed to have descended from no other authority than from the Apostles Therefore this obiection makes nothing for the benefit of Protestants who condemn many things which were publickly vniversally profest and practised in the Church before they were by any Councils authorized Secondly These points of faith which were determined by General Councels were not defin'd as new doctrines For either they were generally constantly believed by the whole Church till some heretiques began violently to oppose them or there were some points not so generally believed practised throughout the whole Church but some Catholiques did with submission to the iudgmeÌ„t of the Church doubt of them Now it is evident that the Church in the points of the first kind believed the same thing after the definition of a General Council which she believed before as we haue seen out of S. Athanasius concerning the Divinity of Christ which was believed as well before the great Councell of Nice as after it Neither were these other points of which some Catholiques doubted defin'd as new doctrines but the whole Church assembled in a General Council after due examination having found these points to have descended by sufficient approued testimony or tradition and being assisted by Christ the head of his body which is the Church the holy Ghost the Guide of it according to our Sauiours promise special necessary providence over his Church proposeth them to be vniversally believed without any more doubt And whosoever after this definition of the vniversal Church of her supreme authority call these things any more in question become heretiques are cast out of the Church But all good Christians who had any doubt before for want of the Churches proposeall having now got that do acquiesce and are put out of all doubt for to oppose the whole Church Aug. epist 118. ad â—anuar as S. Augustin observes would be most insolent madnesse This whole matter is clear in the question of rebaptization For it was decided by a General Council according to the custom or Tradition which was opposed before the Council to S. Cyprian Therefore the same thing was a matter of faith was believed before the Council although some did not know it to be such till the Church did interpose her supreme authority declare it to be so S. Augustin shewes how much himself relies on this iudgment and that S. Cyprian would have yielded to it if in his time it had been interposed Aug lib. â— de bapt c. 4. Neither durst we saith he affirm any such thing if we were not well grounded vpon the most vniforme authority of the vniversal Church vnto which vndoubtedly S. Cyprian also would have yielded if in his time the truth of the question had been cleared declared by a General Council established Vpon the other part these who after the determination of the Council maintaynd the same error of rebaptization were esteemed Heretiques Vincent cont he es c. 9. which made S. Vincentius cry out thus O admirable change the Authors of one self opinion are called Catholiques and the followers of it Heretiques And the reason of the difference is because as S. Augustin observes An erring disputer may be suffered in other questions not diligently tried not as yet strengthned by the full authority of the Church Aug. serm 14 de verbis Apostol in these matters an error may be suffered But after the iudgment of the Vniversal Church which is the highest authority on earth has past and condemned any error then it is no more to be suffered then these who will not hear the Church are by our Sauiours command to be esteem'd as Heathens Publicans By which the difficulty proposed is clearly answered the proof stands good That the Church has alwayes believed that which from father to son has been delivered
and amongst all doctrines which have been delivered there is none descended more clearly then the irrefragable testimony of the Catholique Church either as she is dilated throughout the whole world or as she is assembled in a General Council whereof the continual practice of the Church from the beginning is a superabvndant evidence From this truth we will briefly deduce some Corollaries 1. Since we neither ought nor can arrive vnto the certain knowledge of our Saviours and his Apostles doctrin but by the testimony of the Catholique Church this Testimony is not only necessary for the knowledge of the doctrines not written but also of these which are written because the true sense of these cannot be infallibly known but by this lively rule of faith 2. The doctrines not written which have been still believed and profest in the Church are truly Apostolical divine as well as these doctrines which are contain'd in Scripture because we have the same infallible assurance for them that we have for these 3. Since the Testimony and authority of the Vniversal Church is the only means by which we can be fully assured what was the doctrin of Christ and therefore is the formal motive of our belief it followes that what ever the Church testifieth to be revealed by God has been truly revealed and ought to be beleeued whither the matters themselvs be great or small And hereby the Protestants distinction of points fundamental not fundamental is quite overturned and shewed to be impertinent Because neither of these points are beleeved for themselv's but for the divine authority revealing them and this cannot be known but by the testimony of the Church by her authority proposing them Therefor the formal motive being the same for all points they are all alike to be beleeved when they are by the same authority of the Church sufficiently proposed and in that case to deny any thing albeit never so small for the matter is a fundamental error and clearly opposite to the formal motive of our faith for which all the points of faith are beleeved and whosoever disbeleeves any thing at all so proposed denies faith to God reiects his authority 4. He who contemnes or neglects the testimony of the Catholique Church in the time wherein he lives which is a testimony beyond all exception most worthie of credit can never come to the full certain knowledge of our Saviours doctrin For that is as it were the first step of the ladder vpon which if one set not first his foote he cannot arrive vnto the top that is vnto the first age wherein Christ his Apostles lived 5. From this principle flow all the notes of the Church As first her Vnity in all points of faith For if she has alway's beleeved nothing but what was received from hand to hand from father to son by the testimony of the Christian world and all persons within her submit to the same supreme authority of one chief Pastor of General Councels the Church cannot but have Vnity in all points of faith Secondly the holynesse of the Church flowes also from the foresaid principle For if the doctrin of the Church was holy at the beginning as all Christians must confesse and the doctrin by this continual testimony remaines ever the same as hath been proved Then the Church is still holy in all her doctrines which all tend to holynesse Thirdly the Church is also Catholique For it is by the testimony of Christians in all Nations that the doctrin of Christ is infallibly conueighed vnto vs. Lastly the Church is Apostolique For it is by her continued testimony that the doctrin of Christ is known in all generations and therefore she must have a continued succession from the Apostles Wherefore to conclude I hope that I have proved now sufficiently the Church in Communion with the Sea of Rome by receiving all her doctrines in all ages from her forefathers has ever kept the same doctrin which she first received from Christ his Apostles never changed it and therefore as she was so she still is the spouse of Christ being a fruitefull Mother yet a chast Virgin never parting from Christ for she could never be drawn from the doctrin which she once received from him neither by the bloody persecutions of the Pagans nor by the deceitfull pretexts and allurements of heretiques yea she never did dissemble the least Error in her deerest children Iude v. 3. but as S. Iude exhorts has ever contended earnestly for the faith once delivered to the Saints She has indeed been ever falsly accused as an Adulteresse by all heresies which are themselvs as we have seen before harlots and strumpets But she remaines pure chast Adulterari non potest Cypr. in tract de simplicitate Prelator Osee 2.19 saith S. Cyprian Sponsa Christi c. The Spouse of Christ cannot become an adulteresse she is chast incorrupt What she once knew of Christ she still holds and never at all parts from him as he never parts from his Church to which he said I will espouse thee to my self for ever S. Paul speaking of the great love of Christ to his Church saith that he delivered himself for it Ephes 5.25 c. that he might sanctifie it and present it vnto himself a glorious Church not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing c. And of the indissolvible coniunction between Christ and his Church he saith This is a great Sacrament Ibid. v. 32. but I say in Christ his Church As the Iewes did loaden our Saviour with lies calumnies so all heretiques strive to defame oppresse his Spouse by the same means but all in Vain For as the innocency of Christ did appear and the whole earth was filled with his praises whereas his enemies were cloathed with shame confusion were scattered through the earth had their Temple destroyed and their Nation ruined So within a short time the vnspotted innocency purity of his spouse is manifested to the shame confusion of all heresies which being accursed by the Church with all their lies calumnies are ever at length destroyed from the face of the earth for as the Wiseman has observed Ecclesiastic c. 3. v. 11 the Mothers curse rooteth vp the foundation If it was a great sin in the Iewes that they not only refused to hear and obey Christ but also falsly accused him and many wayes lyed and blasphemed against him It cannot be a small sin in heretiques that they do not only refuse to hear the Church for which crime alone they are by Christs command to be holden as Heathens Publicans but also they falsly accuse his Spouse which he loves so deerly for an Adulteresse and charge her with Idolatry Superstition all sorts of abomination These calumnies if not blasphemies are the ground of all their new doctrines pretended Reformations By which we may know the rare fabrick
against his brother and every one against his neighbour citie against citie and Kingdome against Kingdome S. Augustin saith it is the iust iudgment of God Aug lib. de agone Christi c 29. lib 1. de bapt c 6. that those who seek nothing else but to divide the Church should themselves be miserably divided And so he shewes how the Donatists were cut into small threds S. Chrysostom affirmes that the sin of dividing the Church is so great that nothing doth so provoke the anger of God So that when we have done all other manner of good Chrysâ—st hom 11. in ep ad Ephes we deserve no lesse severe punishment for dividing the Vnity fulnesse of the Church then those who pierced divided Christs own body Salomon saith that there are six things which our Lord hates Proverb 6.16.19 and the seventh is abomination to him which is He who soweth discord among brethren How much then must he hate and abhorre those who sow discord in his Church which is his body and his spouse for which he died and for the Vnity whereof he so ardently prayed And therefore it 's no wonder to see the curse of division fall ever among them And as this division and contrariety ariseth naturally from their principall doctrin the ground of all the rest besides Gods iudgment on them so they have no way to take it away when it doth arise For albeit they pretend the word of God to be their Iugde of Controversies to which they promise all obedience yet this Iudge could never hitherto end any controversy among them and indeed it is not the word but the sword which decides all their Controversies The iust contrary is in the Catholique Church For albeit all heresies and sects do first arise out from her 1. Cor. 11.19 as the Apostle saith There must be heresies and S. Iohn affirmeth They went out from vs but were not of vs yet they do not arise from the nature of the Churches doctrin or from her principles which are constant immoveable all tending to Vnity but from the malice of the Devil And when they arise the Church loseth not her Vnity thereby For if these coyners or followers of new doctrines do not submit themselvs to the iudgment of the Church they are iudicially cutt off from that body from which they first cut themselvs by misbeleef and by this means the rest of the body is preserved entire and at Vnity within it self So that when any question ariseth the Church has a solid way to take away all Controversie and to preserve Vnity But the Protestants principles tend to division and they have no means to take it away as has been shewed Since then it is so evident by the Scripture that the Church of Christ must have Vnity it is no lesse evident that that cannot be the true Church which wants Vnity and is full of Dissensions Divisions as the Protestant Church appeares now evidently to be even to the weakest vnderstandings by her great Schismes and divisions both in doctrin government And therefore he who believes a Church of so great division or confusion to be the true Church cannot be said to follow the Scriptures but rather to controul them and to follow his own fancies Whereas the Church in Communion with the Sea of Rome by her admirable Vnity both in doctrin disciplin all the world over even to the least article or point of faith may be easily seen to be the true Church of Christ which was founded by him and he by the same Vnity may be known to be the true Messias who was sent from heaven CHAP. XXXIII The true Church proved by her holynesse THE second mark whereby the true Church is described in the Nicen Creed is Holynesse I beleeve One holy c. Church which property is also assign'd to her in the Apostles Creed I beleeve the holy Catholique Church Besides these authorities the very light of Nature and the Scripture show that the true Church ought to be holy For this being a society of people ordain'd by God for a most holy end to witt to enioy himself who is the Holy of Holies for all eternity must have holynesse of doctrin to direct them and holynesse of life to bring them to so holy an end This the Prophet David sheweth Psal 92 vers vlt saying Holynesse becometh thine house O Lord for ever S. Paul saith that Christ delivered himself fâ—r his Church that he might sanctifie it c. that he might present it to himself Ephes 5.26.27 a glorious Church not hauing spot or wrinkle or any such thing but that it may be holy and vnspotted It is evident then by the â—reed by the light of Nature and by the Scriptures that the true Church must be Holy And the holynesse of it for our present purpose consists principally in two things to wit in holynesse of doctrine holynesse of life Therefore that Church which teacheth impious doctrin and wherein there is little or no holynesse of life cannot be the true Church Let vs then briefly see to which Church whither to the Protestant or to the Church in Communion with the sea of Rome this mark of Holynesse doth best agree First concerning doctrin I find that the first Apostles of Protestants teach doctrin directly repugnant to the goodnesse of God to the Nature of man to the holynesse of the Christian Sacraments to the observation of Gods commandments besides many other particulars Calvin the great Foundatour of Pressbytery teaches that God is the Author of sin for thus he writeth Cal lib. 1. instit cap. 18 par 3. Now I have clearly enough shewed that God is called the Author of all these things which these Controwlers to witt the Papists will have to fall forth by his idle permission onely And such things which according to Catholiques God willeth not but only permits are sins of which Calvin there speaks as of the blindnesse and tyranny of Achab of the incest of Absalon and the like of which he calls God the Author Again he saith Man by the iust impulsion of God Ibid par 4. doth that which is not lawfull for him to do And of Pharao he saith Deus voluit vtique illum iussui suo non obtemperare immo vt ei repugnaret In Rom. pc 454. ipse in eo effecit God willed him not to obey his Commandment yea he himself wrought that in him that he might disobey it Many more places are collected by Becan in a Treatise which he wrote on this subiect de Authore peccati Where he cites diverse testimonies of Beza and other Protestant Authors to the same purpose Now that this is an impious opinion and against the very clear light of nature is evident For all men conceive by natural instinct that God is not only good in himself but also goodnesse it self the Author and fountain of all goodnesse But
evidēt marks of the Synagogue of Anti-Christ Neither indeed can any new sects with any probability call themselvs Catholiques For what would be more ridiculous then if the Independents or Quakers who are of so late standing and of so litle extension would stile themselvs Catholiques this word signifying Vniversality both of time place which they evidently want The same may be as iustly said of the Presbyterians or of any other Protestant Congregation And if any of these sects were so vnwise as to call themselvs so they would not be vnderstood but taken for Papists I remember that my Catholique friend shew me that it has been an ordinary custom of those who separat themselv's from the Catholique Church when they see that they neither have the thing signifyed by the word Catholique nor can obtain the title of it to shew themselvs enemies to both This the old Donatists did who pretended that it was not necessary Aug. cont Crescon l. 3. c. 66. the true Church should have communion of Nations or be Vniversal that truth is often among a few and that it was the fault of many to erre This same some Protestants do pretend Against which may be opposed the words of S. Augustin Aug. epist 48 who saith As he shall be Anathema or accursed who preacheth that neither Christ suffered nor rose again because we learned by the Gospel that it behoved Christ to suffer and to rise again the third day so he shall also be anathema whosoever preacheth the Church to be elswhere then in the Communion of all Nations because by the self same Gospel we learn in the words next following pennance to be preached in his name and remission of sins throughout all Nations Then for the word Catholique Luther was so great an enemy to it that he tooke it out of the Apostles Creed putting the word Christian in place of it Our Presbyterians ordinarly abstain from the word Catholique turning it Vniversal Beza in praefat novi Testam Beza calls it the vain tearme Catholique A great Apostle of the Covenant shew both his envie anger at this word For when a Gentlemā in the North who had been summoned not long ago to give an account of his faith before the Presbytery of Aberdeen had profest himself to be a Catholique the said Apostle was offended with that title and willed him to call himself a Papist which he neglecting to do the Min̄ister thē enquired of him If the women of his religion called themselvs Catholiques also Which question had such an vncivil sense as he proposed it that some of his more modest brethren sitting in iudgment with him shew both by their Countenance and words their dislike of his vncivility S. Augustin relates how the Donatists also were great Enemies to the word Catholique calling it a humane forgerie or fiction Aug. lib. 1. cont Gaudent c. 33. which the holy Father calls words of blasphemie To conclude therefore this point As it is evident both by the Creed and by the Scripture that the true Church must be Catholique so it 's very clear certain that the Protestant Church before Luther was not Catholique that as yet it is not Catholique and by all appearance never will be For according to the nature of heresie it gote all what it possesseth at the first hurle and these 80. years it hath made no progresse but rather by its own divisions hath gone backward and has been still on the loosing hand Therefore the Protestant Church not being Catholique cannot be the true Church Vpon the other part it is no lesse evident that of all Christian societies the Church in Communion with the sea of Rome was the Catholique Church in the time of the Apostles as it was also in the time of S. Augustin and of the holy Fathers and ever since it has had the Communion of Nations kept all General Councels made decrees condemned all Errors heresies And in a word what the holy Scriptures have so clearly fore-tould of the Vniversality of Christs Church and of the conversion of Gentils from infidelity to Christianity hath been accomplished in this Church alone and performed by her members Therefore this Church and no other is the holy Catholique and true Church of Christ CHAP. XXXV The true Church proved by her continued succession lawfull vocation of her Pastors for which she is called Apostolique BY this note or property of Apostolique the holy Fathers and auncient Councels would have the true Church clearly known and distinguished from all new sects heresies The Church is called Apostolique principally for two reasons First because it was founded by the Apostles and from their time must continue vnto the end of the world Secondly because the Pastors thereof derive their Mission from the Apostles by ordinary calling personal succession In the first sense the true Church is clearly distinguished from all sects and false Churches because they were not founded by the Apostles but by some new pretended Reformers who arose after the Apostles in their several generations and therefore these new Churches founded and erected by them are not called Apostolique but have their denomination from their founders such as the Arians Pelagians Lutherans Calvinists In the second sense she is also clearly distinguished from false Churches because they have not lawful Pastors deriving their vocation from the Apostles by a continued and vninterrupted succession but intrude themselvs into the office of Pastors without any lawfull calling Of the first sense of the word Apostolique we have spoken sufficiently above when we proved the true Church by her perpetuity and continued succession and disproved all false Churches for want of it which proofes need not to be here repeated Of the second sense of the word Apostolique we shall here briefly speak Besids the authority of the Creed it is evident by the Scriptures that there must be alwayes Pastors in the Church lawfully called to that charge God saith by the Prophet Esay vpon thy walls Esay 62.6 ô Ierusalem I have appointed watchmen all the day and all the night They shall not hold their peace for ever Ephes 4.11 The Apostle S. Paul sheweth how our Saviour performed this promise by appoynting Pastors and Teachers To the consummation of the Saints for the work of the Ministerie for the edifying of the body of Christ till we all meet in the Vnity of faith Our Saviour also has promised his continual assistance vnto the Pastors of his Church Behold Math. vlt. I am with you always even vnto the consummation of the world As there must be always Pastors in the Church so they must be lawfully called to that charge or else they are not Pastors but Theeves and Robbers S. Paul saith Heb. 5.4 Rom. 10 15. no man takes vpon him that honour but he who is called of God as Aaron And again how shall they preach vnlesse they be sent◠God in the old Testament reproved
pretend Vniversality when you say that your faith is beleeved received and defended by many Notable Kirks and Realmes but chiefly by the Kirk of Scotland Next you lay claime to a certain kind of Antiquity when you say that it hath been of a long time openly professed Such is the evidence of Truth that Enemies to it are sometimes enforced to make vse or rather a shew of it But to speak first of the vniversality of your faith where are all these many notable Realmes and Kirks which you affirm do professe your religion In Europe no such Kingdomes can be found For Swedland Denmark are known to be Lutherians who have neither Vnity of faith with you nor Communion in Sacraments and abhorre the very name of Calvin of all Sacramentaries The Realme late Church of England maintaind the Hierarchy of the Church abhorring very much the Anarchy of your Presbytery and now since England became a Commonwealth it hates nothing more then the Soule-Tyranny as it is commonly called there of your Presbytery The other famous Kingdomes of Europe are either totally or for the much greater part Roman Catholiques So that the many Notable Realmes of your religion are as yet invisible vnlesse you would count all those to be of your religion who are not Papists or who go vnder the general name of Protestants But that cannot be done for the Vniversality of a Church requires Vnity in faith Communion in Sacraments which you evidently want with a great part of Protestant Churches And therefore knowing that you want this Vnity you wisely pretend that this faith which you so much praise is chiefly professed by the Kirk of Scotland For every one of you pretends to be chief and will not yeeld to another Then yow come as little speed of your Antiquitie For all the long time that your faith was profest from the beginning of your Reformation to the first making of the Covenant is but about 20. years and as yet to this day it has not past the bounds of one Age. If you had the Vniversality Antiquity of the Catholique Church how would you glory when you make such a stirre with your fewnesse and Novelty For your one Kingdome and your one hundred years in which your religion has been professed we can show you the same Kingdome professing the Catholique religion above 14. hundred years and all the famous Christian Kingdomes and Countries of the world making the same profession even to the first time of their Conversion from Infidelity to Christianity And for your one King mentioned in your Covenant which he took in his younger years disproveing it when he became more ripe as appears in the Conference at Hampton-Court we can show you 80. Kings of the same Nation diverse of which are glorious Saints in heaven who lived and dyed in the Catholique Profession To whom we may add all the famous Christian Kings Emperours that have been in the world But albeit you were more spread then you are you would find no great advantage by it S. Augustin compareing you with good reason to smoake Aug. serm 2. in Psal 36. which doth vanish so much the sooner by how much it is greater more dilated abroad This we have seen verifyed in our time For the late Church of England intending to dilate her self in Scotland did shortly thereafter vanish like smoake in England Again the Scottish Presbytery indeavouring with great zeal to propagate it self in England lost soone much of its fyrie force in Scotland Secondly Antiquity of your religion would tend no lesse to your ruine for as S. Hierom hath observed all heresies please only men for a time and when they grow old they weare out of request as may be known by the many alterations of religion that have happened in Scotland but especially in England since their publique fall from the Catholique religion Then for Acts of Parlament whereby you say your faith is confirmed they cannot be very many seing the religion is so late neither can they give great confirmation to a religion because they are very changeable We see one Protestant Parliament has ransacted the Kings Suâ—remacy which many Protestant Parliaments had enacted and that which was before declared Heresy if not Treason to deny is now iudged both great follie and Treason to affirme The true religion is warranted by a higher authority then by earthly Courts But the Protestant religions are made and vnmade by Protestant Parliaments The last point here proposed containes three vntruths linked together as where you say that you all willingly agree in all points All the Horologes of the world will sooner agree then your wills When coercive power is now taken out of your hands you see how many do willingly freely disagree from you Then you call all the points of your faith Gods vndoubted truth which they cannot be besides other reasons because many Protestants doubt of diverse of them yea they think them vndoubted falshoods and besides yourselves are often changeing them which shewes that many articles of your faith are doubtsome and your faith of them is nothing but meer opinion Lastly it is most false that all your faith is grounded only vpon the written word because you beleeve some things without the word of God as the changeing of the Sabboth into Sunday the baptizing of infants and which is more you beleeve some points against the expresse word of God as your article of Iustification by faith only to speak nothing of diverse others And moreover you lay down a false ground when you professe to beleeve nothing 2. Thes 2.15 but what is containd in the Scriptures whereas they expresly bid you Hold fast the Traditions Thus we have seen all your pretences as about the word Spirit of God the Vniversality Antiquity of your faith by which you would make it more commendable to be false groundlesse Now we shall see how bitterly you renounce accurse the Catholique faith SECTION IV. Of the Popes Supremacy where it is shewed that the Pope is not Anti-Christ nor an Vsurper as the Covenanters do calumniate AFTER the former Preface follow these words of the Covenant And therefore we abhorre and detest all contrary Religion Doctrin but chiefly all kind of Papistry in generall and particular heads even as they are now damned confuted by the word of God and Kirk of Scotland But in special we detest and refuse the Vsurped Authority of the Roman Anti Christ vpon the Scriptures of God vpon the kirk the Civil Magistrate and Consciences of men c. Here you ingenuously confesse your selves to have one quality which all heretiques have ever had to hate and detest most the Catholique religion And your practice sheweth this your Confession to be true For albeit any person become a Socinian Anabaptist or Atheist you take no great notice of him but if you heare of any that is become a Papist he is sure to
get no more rest Next as you falsly pretended your faith to be contain'd in the word of God so now as groundlesly you pretend the Catholique faith to be condemned by the same word which as yet you could never make good in any one point It is true indeed that the Catholique Church is condemned by the Church of Scotland But it is as true that the Church of Scotland is condemned by the Catholique Church which is of far greater authority and which has iudged condemned all former Heresies and Triumphed over them Now followes your dismall song with your abiurations detestations of the Faith Order Disciplin of the Catholique Church and first you strick at the Visible head and Governour of it vnder Christ whom you call Anti-Christ detesting his Authority which you call vsurped The principal reason for which you beleeve this strange article of your faith to witt that the Pope is Anti-Christ is because he claimes Primacy over other Bishops and extends his care over the whole Church which he affirmes to be committed to his charge as vnto S. Peters Successor If your reason were good then S. Peter himself had been the first Anti-Christ For both the Scriptures and Fathers show that he received from Christ the primacy over the other Apostles and that the care of the whole Church was entrusted to him S. Mathew shewes that Peter was the first of the Apostles The names saith he Math. 10 2. of the Apostles are these the first Sâ—mon who is called Peter Now Peter was not first in calling but in preeminence For as S. Ambrose saith in 2. Cor. 12. Andrew first followed our Saviour before Peter and yet the Primacy Andrew received not but Peter The same is showed by the change of his name which Christ promised in the 1. of S. Iohn and thereafter performed Math. 16. in S Mathew where he said Thou art Peter or a Rock and vpon this Rock will I build my Church c. And I will give vnto thee the keyes of the Kingdome of heaven c. This change of the name of Simon into Peter foretold by Christ and thereafter performed by him is not without great mystery and these excellent privileges which our Saviour promised to him of the keyes of the Kingdome of heaven of binding and loosing do show that he was particularly to grace and advance him above others which he performed after his resurrection when he said to him Feed my sheep feed my Lambs giving him thereby the charge of his whole flock 5. Iohn 21.16 The same Supremacy of S. Peter may be showed by many other preeminences recorded in Scripture as how Christ prayed particularly for him that his faith might not faile and payed Tribut for him but for brevities sake they are omitted Now we shall briefly see how the holy Fathers vnderstood these Scriptures S. Gregory the great saith Greg. lib â— â—pâ—st 7 â— It is manifest to all persons who know the Gospell that from our Lords own mouth the â—â—re of the whole Church was 〈◊〉 to S. Peter the Prince of the Apostles for to For what end saith he did Christ shed his blood Chrysost lib. 2. de Sacerdotio Aug. epist 86. but that he might purchase these sheep the care of which he committed to S. Peter and his successors S. Augustin calls S. Peter the Head of the Apostles the Gate-keeper of heaven and the Foundation of the Church S. Cyprian saith Cypr. epist ad Iulian. We hold Peter the Head and Roote of the Church And in a word all the holy Fathers affirm the same They do likwise acknowledge that the Bishops of Rome are S. Peter successors in that supreame Authority S. Athanasius writing to Pope Liberius saith Athanas epist ad liber Ep. ad Felicem For this cause the Vniversal Church is committed to you by our Lord Iesus that you should labour for all men And again writing to Pope Felix he saith Thou art Peter and vpon thy foundation the Pillars of the Church that is the Bishops are fortified S. Augustin saith Aug. ep 165. in the Romaâ— Church the Principality of the Apostolique Chair did ever flourish And elswhere Number the Priests from the Sea of Peter Aug. in psal cont part Donati and in that order of Fathers see who succeeded to another This is the Rock which the proud gates of hell do not overcome To which we shall only add the testimony of S. Bernard who writes thus to Eugenius Thou art he to whom the keies of heaven are delivered â—ern l. 2. de consid c. 8. and to whom the sheep are committed there be other Porters of heaven other Pastor of flocks but thou â—â—st â—â—â—erited in more glorious and different sort For they have every 〈◊〉 their particular sâ—ock but to thee all Vniver-â—â—◠〈…〉 of all the Pastors themselvs But thou wilt ask me how I prove that even by our Lords word For to whom of all I say not only Bishops but Apostles were the sheep so absolutely and without limitation committed If thou lovest me Peter feed my sheep He saith not the people of this kingdome or that Citie but my sheep without all distinction So S. Bernard By which Authorities Testimonies both of the Scriptures and Fathers you see what solid ground the Popes authority hath that it was confer'd by Christ on S. Peter and that it has been acknowledged by the holy Fathers Christian world in the Bishops of Rome his Successors Therefore you very rashly have reiected this authority which has been established confirmed by Christs special providence vnto this day but more wickedly do you call it an vsurped Tyranny and beleeve the Pope for vindicating and exercising the same authority to be the great Anti-Christ whereas you ought to acknowledge him to be the Vicar of Christ These who honour reverence the Authority of the Bishops of Rome of the Apostolique Sea follow the example of all the holy Fathers and auncient good Christians but these who now a dayes endeavour to dishonour and revile them have the Heretiques for their Predecessors who never caried good-will to them S. Augustin shewes that the Donatists called the Apostolique Sea the Chair of Pestilence but that is nothing to the Epithets of the Covenanting Ministers Who exâ—eed in railings and blasphemies all that ever spoke when they fall vpon this point making thereby the simple people beleeve that Anti-Christian article of their faith that the Pope is Anti-Christ But the holy Fathers tooke it for an vndoubted mark that these who did not acknowledge the Popes authority and were not of his Communion belonged not to Christ but to Anti-Christ S. Hierom writing to S Damasus saith who gathereth not with thee scattereth that is who it not Christs is Anti-Christs Having now seen that the Pope whom the Covenanters call malitiously Anti-Christ is the Vicar of Christ it remaines evident that his Authority is lawfull
not vsurped For he who is a iust Possessor is no Vsurper Yea he has been so far from vsurping over the Scriptures the Church c. that he has chiefly preserved them from the Vsurpations and corruptions of Heretiques And first it is shewed that he doth not vsurp over the Scriptures as the Covenanters do calumniate For he neither Vsurps over the letter nor the sense of them Not the first For both the Pope whole Catholique Church professe that they only declare that to be Scripture which they received for such from the holy Apostles and it 's by their care diligence that the letter of the Scripture has descended pure free from corruptions vnto our hands whereas it might have been altogether corrupted or totally perished for Protestants Neither do the Pope or Catholique Church vsurp over the sense of the Scriptures but they preserve that sense which is conforme to the Vanimous consent of the auncient fathers of the Primitive Church Secondly the Pope doth not vsurp over the Church because the care and charge of it was committed by Christ to S. Peter and to his Successors as we have seen and he preserves the Church from the Vsurpation of Heretiques Thirdly He doth not vsurp over the Civil Magistrate The experience of many ages in all Christians Kingdomes Common-wealths is more then sufficient to make this good to manifest the impudent falshood of the Presbyterian calumnie to the contrary Fourthly The Pope doth not vsurp over the Consciences of men but as chief Governor of the Church has lawfull authority to make Ecclesiastical Lawes which bind in Conscience as also all the iust Lawes of Kings other Civil Magistrats do bind in Conscience to which their subiects ought to obey according to that of S. Paul Be subiect not only for wrath but also for Conscience sake Rom. 13.5 And the contrary doctrin of Protestants which affirmeth that neither the Lawes of Church Kings or other Magistrates do bind in conscience is much detested by the Catholique Church and opens a broad way to all disobedience But now it will not be amisse to show how yow are destitute of all lawfull authority and deeply guilty of the same Vsurpations which yow falsly impose on others First all heretiques who go out of the Church and having no lawfull calling or authority take vpon them to be Pastors and impose their new doctrines Lawes vpon the Church are truly Vsurpers and are called Theeves by our Saviour who enter not by the doore but climb vp another way So S. Optatus speaks to the Donatists How comes it to passe Opt. lib. 2. cont Parmen saith he that you who are fighting against the Chair of Peter by your presumptions and Sacrilegious boldnesse contend to Vsurp the keies of the Kingdome to your selves Thus Luther Calvin the two chief Apostles of Protestants were Vsurpers who being private men without any lawfull calling or authority would bring in new doctrines and prescribe lawes to the whole Catholique Church And in this the Covenanting Ministers do imitate them Secondly they vsurped in particular over both the letter and sense of the Scriptures For Luther added the word Only to them in the matter of Iustification and tooke the whole Epistle of S. Iames and the Apocalypse from them Calvin also by his private Spirit made vp a new Canon not known before his time expunging many bookes avnciently received out of the Scriptures which new Rule the Covenanters follow Then for the sense they transgressed the bounds set by the Fathers reiecting the auncient sense preserved by the Catholique Church and invented new senses of their own imaginations which they enforced vpon others as divine Truths In this also you Covenanting Ministers have followed closely their footsteps For you have been no lesse fertile in inventing such new senses then active in enforceing them vpon others Thirdly your pretended Reformers were Vsurpers over the Church who having no lawfull calling nor authority tooke vpon them to be Reformers of the Church who would impose their own fancies as lawes divine Oracles on the Church who insolently would take vpon them to iudge and condemn the whole Catholique Church and who vnder pretext of Reformation have destroyed almost all that is sacred in the Church barbarously destroying many excellent Churches and Sacrilegiously vsurping and plundering the riches Ornaments of them This Luther and Calvin did at the beginning and this you have compleated in a great measure above all their progenie Fourthly you are also very guilty of Vsurpation over the Civil Magistrate The late riseing of your religion cannot furnish vs old histories but for your short time you have been prettie bussie and afford vs a good store For in our Countrey there have been only 3. or 4. Princes since your religion Began and none of them has been exempt from your Vsurpation First The Queen Regent was deposed by you from her Regency and died shortly thereafter for grief Secondly How you vsed her daughter Queen Mary Stewart it is notoriously known to the world For after you had imprisonned her enforced her to renounce her Crowne you never desisted till by persecuting of her vnto death you made her purchase a more glorious Crown and yet by your calumnies after her death augment her glory in heaven Thirdly Basili con Doron How you Vsurped over King Iames her Son he himself hath registred to your no small infamy And albeit you did not prevaile against him yet you have payed home that deficiency with Vsury to his Son the late King Charles By this may be seen whither the Pope or yow do Vsurp more over the Civil Magistrate Lastly you have been great Vsurpers over mens Consciences as may be known to passe by all other instances by your furious vrgeing this same Covenant vpon many Protestants against their Consciences for which they give you the Title of Soule-Tyrants By all which may be seen that you are very guilty of the same Vsurpations which you falsly obiect to others SECTION V. That the Lawes of the Catholique Church are not Tyrannous nor her doctrin concerning the Scriptures and office of Christ erroneous AFTER you have renounced the Popes authority as vnlawfull then yow renounce his Lawes as Tyrannous and the doctrin of the Catholique Church concerning the Scriptures the office of Christ as Erroneous For thus you speak in your Covenant We detest all his Tyrannous Lawes made vpon indifferent things against our Christian libertie His Erroneous doctrin against the sufficiency of the written word the perfection of the Law the office of Christ and his blessed Evangel If you renounce all lawes made vpon indifferent things pretending that they are against your Christian libertie then you renounce the most part of all Lawes both Civil and Ecclesiastical which are ordinarly vpon such matters and in a certain manner restrain libertie Then you may renounce also the Lawes of the Apostles Acts 15. for
they made some vpon indifferent things as to abstaine from things strangled and from blood giving them out in the name of the holy Ghost and commanding them to be kept by the first Christians which Lawes albeit they restrain'd libertie yet they were not against Christian libertie which cōsists principally in three things to witt in freedome from the slavery of sin in freedome from the fear servitude of the Moral Law by receiving the gift of Charity through Christs grace whereby we willingly and ioyfully-fullfill the Law and lastly in freedome from the bondage of the Iewish Ceremonial Law which S. Peter calls a heavie yoak These are the liberties wherewith Christ has made vs free as was shown me at more length and are not as the Covenanters do imagine a libertie to do what every man lists or to be vnder no obedience of Spiritual or Temporal Lawes Against which licentious libertie S. Peter gives warning in these words Be subiect vnto every humane Creature for God 1. Pet. 2.13 c. as free and not as having freedome for a cloke of malice And S. Paul to the Galatians You are called brethren into libertie Gal. 5.13 only make not this libertie an occasion to the flesh c. Now all the Lawes of the Catholique Church against which the Ministers make heaviest complaints as about lentfasting abstinence from flesh on frydayes the single life of Church men and the like may be easily shown to have been observed in the primitive times to be most iust nowayes Tyrannous or against our Christian libertie but that they rather tend vnto Christian perfection which is the greatest libertie of a Christian and that the Ministers who speak so much against these holy Lawes make their libertie as S. Paul speaks an occasion to the flesh or as S. Peter saith a cloke of malice But it would indeed seem very strange if it were not so ordinary among you that yourselves do such things without all authority which you blame in the Catholique Church vnto which Christ has given so great authority For have not you dureing the space of some few years heaped vp more Lawes and decrees in your Assemblies then exceed all the body of the Canon Law And yet you cannot deny but the most part of these Lawes is made vpon indifferent things and some of them in the Iudgment of many Protestants vpon false things as your Lawes for swearing subscribing the Covenant You pretend much Christian libertie which you promised to the people but indeed you kept them in more then Iewish slaverie For to passe by many other instances you would not suffer the people vpon Sundayes after they had been much wearied hearing both your long some Sermons prayers to be seen on the streets or to go and recreat themselves in the fields which truly was greater then a Iudaïcal servitude The Catholiques find the yoak of Christ sweet and the Lawes of his Church their loving Mother not heavie But many Protestants find the yoak of your Presbytery which they esteem a cruel step-mother to be very bitter and think your Lawes not only against their Christian libertie but also insupportable Now we come to your other heavy accusations against the Catholique Church which for brevities sake we must only touch Yow accuse her doctrin as Erroneous against the sufficiency of the written word But without all reason For she teacheth that the written word is sufficient in this sense that it containes immediatly the substance of our faith all the articles necessary necessitate medij for mans Salvation and also it containes mediatly all that we are to beleeve in that it remits vs to the Church which it assureth vs is governed by the holy Ghost in all truth Whence it evidently followeth that we draw that truth out of the scriptures which we draw out of the mouth of the Church for whosoever deputes an other to speak for him speaks mediatly by his mouth So S. Augustin reasoneth Aug. lib. 1. cont Cres c. 33. Albeit saith he we can produce no example of Scripture concerning this matter yet hold we the truth of the same Scripture seing we do that which is conformable to the Vniversal Church which the authority of the same Scripture commends vnto vs. And in this sense the written word is most sufficient But it is not sufficient in the common sense of heretiques who will have the dead letter of the Scripture to be sufficient without having recourse to the Catholique Church for the true sense of it and who will have nothing to be beleeved but what is formally expresly containd in it For that is directly against the Scriptures themselvs which referre vs to the Church and bid vs stand fast and hold the Traditions That is also against the doctrin of the auncient Fathers S. Chrysostome saith Chrys on 2. Thess 2. It is evident that the Apostles did not deliver all things by writing but many things without and those be as worthy credit as the others Epiphanius saith to the same purpose We must vse Traditions Epiph. hares 61. for the Scriptures have not all things That is contrary to the practice of the Covenanters who beleeve somethings without Scripture and diverse points against it as we have seen above And lastly it has furnished weapons to the Socinians and Anabaptists to fight against the Presbyterians who now by experience are become more wise then at the beginning For in their new Confession of faith at Westminster Confess West 6.1 art 6. they say That the whole Counsel of God concerning all things necessary to Salvation is either expresly set down in Scripture or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture So that the Scripture which was before sufficient without Church and Traditions is now not sufficient to Salvation without Logique and Consequences which doctrin makes them fall into another grosse folly to quite the Church the pillar and ground of Truth and have recourse to Philosophie and fallible consequences wherein these new sects are not behind with them but by the same principle do vndermine them You next accuse the Catholique Church of erroneous doctrin against the perfection of the Law the office of Christ and of his Evangel But you do not make good your accusations neither show yow wherein these pretended Errors do consist Yet it may be easily shown that your accusations are false and that your selves are guilty of the same crimes For the Catholique Church teacheth that the Law of Christ is most perfect and that the very substance of perfection consists in keeping it and that none can be perfect without fulfilling it And albeit it be true that she teacheth there be some Evangelical Counsels which make a man more perfect then the precise keeping of the Law yet that doctrin is nothing against the perfection of the Law For this was the doctrin of Christ of S. Paul and of the holy Fathers Our Saviour having said