appear to be so in this that we were mistaken that we were over-nice and curious in refusing to worship Saints and Angels yet ours is a much more innocent and pardonable mistake then that which the church of Rome is guilty of if they should prove to be mistaken We are only wanting in some Religious courtship which we might innocently have given to Saints and Angels but which we were not bound to give as the Church of Rome will not say that we are by any express Divine Law and therefore it is no sin against GOD not to do it and when this neglect is not owing to any designed contempt and dis-regard of those excellent Spirits but to a great reverence for GOD and jealousie for his incommunicable glory if it were a fault we need not doubt but that GOD would pardon it and that all good spirits who have such profound veneration for GOD will easily excuse the neglect of some ceremonies to themselves upon so great a reason But if the Church of Rome be mistaken and gives that worship to creatures which is due only to the Supreme God they have nothing to pretend in excuse of it neither any positive Law of God which expresly forbids all Creature-worship as I doubt not to prove to the satisfaction of all impartial Readers nor the principles of Natural Reason which whatever Apologies it may make for the worship of Saints and Angels can never prove the necessity of it and it highly concerns the Church of Rome and all of her communion to consider whither if their distinctions and little appearances of reason cannot justifie their worship of creatures they will be able to excuse them from the guilt of so great a sin But not to insist on these things now I shall divide this discourse into three parts 1. I shall prove from the plain evidence of Scripture That God alone is to be worshipped 2. I shall examine what that worship is which is proper and particular to the Supreme God 3. I shall consider those distinctions whereby the Church of Rome justifies her worship of Saints and Angels and Images c. SECTION I. That GOD alone must be Worshipped TO make good the first point that we must worship Sect. 1. no other being but only GOD I shall principally confine my self to Scripture evidence which is the most certain authority to determine this matter For though I confess it seems to me a self evident and fundamental principle in natural Religion that we must worship none but that Supreme Beeing who made and who governs the World yet I find men reason very differently about these matters The Heathen Philosophers who generally acknowledge one Supreme and Soveraign Deity did not think it incongruous nor any affront or dimimition to the Supreme God to ascribe an inferiour kind of Divinity nor to pay an inferiour degree of Religious Worship to those excellent Spirits which are so much above us and have so great a share in the government of this lower world no more then it is an affront to a Soveraign Monarch to honour and reverence his great Ministers of State or peculiar Favourites And the Church of Rome as she has corrupted Christianity with the worship of Angels and Saints departed so she defends her self with the same Arguments and reasons which were long since alledged by Celsus and Porphyrie and other Heathen Philosophers in defence of their Pagan Idolatry And it must be confest that these Arguments are very popular and have something so agreeable in them to the natural notions of Civil Honour and respect which admits of great variety of degrees that I do not wonder that such vast numbers of men both wise and unwise have been imposed on by them For there is certainly a proportionable reverence and respect due even to created excellencies and every degree of power challenges and commands a just regard and we are bound to be very thankful not only to GOD who is the first cause and the supreme giver of all good things but to our immediate Benefactors also And therefore if there be a sort of middle Beeings as the Heathens believed and as the Church of Rome asserts between us and the Supreme God who take particular care of us and either by their power and interest in the government of the world or by their Intercessions with the Supreme GOD can and do bestow a great many Blessings on us it eems as natural and necessary to fear and reverence to honour and worship them and to give them thanks for their care and patronage of us as it is to court a powerful Favourite who by his interest and authority can obtain any request we make to our Prince and the first seems to be no greater injury to God then the second 2. Col. 18. to a Prince Thus St. Paul observes that there is a shew of humility in worshipping Angels that men dare not immediately approach so glorious a Majesty as God is but make their addresses to those excellent spirits which attend the Throne of God and are the Ministers of his Providence But then every one who believes that there is one Supreme God who made all other Beeings though never so perfect and excellent must acknowledge that as there is nothing common to God and Creatures so there must be a particular Worship due to God which no Creatures can challenge any share in It is no affront to a Prince to pay some inferiour degrees of civil honour and respect to his Ministers and Favourites because as the difference between a Prince and his subjects is not founded in nature but in civil order so there are different degrees of civil respect proportioned to the different ranks and degrees of men in the Common-wealth There is a degree of preheminency which is sacred and peculiar to the Person of the Prince and no Prince will suffer his greatest Favourite to usurp the Prerogative honours which belong to the Crown but while they are contented with such respects as are due to their rank and station this is no injury to the Prince for all civil honour is not peculiar to the Prince but only a supereminent degree of it and therefore inferiour degrees of honour may be given to other persons But though there are different degrees of civil honour proper to different ranks and degrees of men who all partake in the same nature and are distinguisht only by their different places in the Common-wealth yet in this sense there are no different degrees of Religious Worship All Religious Worship is peculiar to the Divine Nature which is but one and common only to three Divine Persons Father Son and Holy Ghost one God blessed for ever Amen Civil honor and Religious Worship differ in the whole kind and species of actions and have as different objects as God and Creatures and we may as well argue from those different degrees of civil honour among men to prove that there is an inferiour degree
of civil honour due to beasts as that there is an inferiour degree of Religious Worship due to some men For all degrees of Religious Worship are as peculiar and appropriate to God as civil respects are to men and as the highest degree of civil honour is to a Soveraign Prince However should we grant that some excellent Creatures might be capable of some inferiour degrees of Religious Worship yet as the Prince is the fountain of civil honour which no subject must presume to usurp without a grant from his Prince so no creature how excellent soever has any natural and inherent right to any degree of Religious Worship and therefore we must not presume to worship any Creature without Gods command nor to pay any other degree of worship to them but what God hath prescribed and instituted and the only way to know this is to examine the Scriptures which is the only external revelation we have of the will of God Let us then inquire what the sense of Scripture is in this controversie and I shall distinctly examine the testimonies both of the Old and New Testament concerning the object of Religious Worship SECT II. The Testimonies of the Mosaical Law considered TO begin with the Old Testament and nothing is Sect 3. 1. more plain in all the Scripture then that the Laws of Moses confine â— Religious worship to that one Supreme God the Lord Jehovah who Created the Heavens and the Earth For 1. The Israelites were expresly commanded to worship the Lord Jehovah and to worship no other Beeing as our Saviour himself assures us who I suppose will be allowed for a very good Expositor of the Laws of Moses It is written Matth. 4. 10. Deut. 6. 13. Deutr 10. 10. thou shalt worship the Lord they God and him only shalt thou serve In the Hebrew Text from whence our Saviour cites this Law it is only said Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God and serve him without that addition of him only And yet both the Septuagint and the vulgar Latine read the words as our Saviour doth him only shalt thou serve and the authority of our Saviour is sufficient to justifie this Interpretation and withal gives us a general rule which puts an end to this controversie that as often as we are commanded in Scripture to worship God we are commanded also to worship none besides him For indeed the first Commandment is very express in this matter and all other Laws which concern the obiect of Worship must in all reason be expounded by that Thou shalt have none other Gods before me The Septuagint 20 Exod. 3. renders it plen emu besides me so does the Chaldee Syriack and Arabick to the same sense And it is universally concluded by all Expositors that I have seen that the true interpretation of this Commandment is that we must worship no other God but the Lord Jehovah To pay Religious Worship to any Beeing does in the Scriptures notion make that Beeing our God which is the only reason why they are commanded not to have any other Gods For there is but one true God and therefore in a strict sense they can have no other GODS because there are no other Gods to be had but whatever Beeings they worship they make that their God by worshiping it and so the Heathens had a great many Gods but the Jews are commanded to have but one GOD that is to worship none else besides him In other places GOD expresly forbids them to worship any strange Gods or the Gods of the people or those Nations Deut. 6. 14 that were round about them And least we should suspect that they were forbid to worship the Gods of the people only because those Heathen Idolaters worship Devils and wicked Spirits the Prophet Jeremiah gives us a general notion who are to be reputed false GODS and not to be worshipped Thus shall ye say unto them the Gods that have not made the Heavens and the Jer. 10. 11. Earth even they shall perish from the Earth and from under these Heavens So that whatever Beeing is worshipped whither it be a good or a bad Spirit which did not make the Heavens and the Earth is a false GOD to such Worshippers and I suppose the Church of Rome will not say that Saints or Angels or the Virgin Mary as much as they magnifie her made the Heavens and the Earth And then according to this rule they ought not to be worshipped But to put this past doubt that the true meaning of these Laws is to forbid the worship of any other Beeing besides the Supreme GOD I shall observe two or three things in our Saviours answer to the Devils temptation which will give great light and strength to it 1. That our Saviour absolutely rejects the worship of any other Beeing together with the Supreme GOD. The thing our Saviour condemns is not the renouncing the worship of God for the worship of Creatures for the Devil never tempted him to his but the worship of any other being besides GOD though we still continue to worship the Supreme GOD. It is written thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve Which is a plain demonstration that men may believe and worship the Supreme God and yet be Idolaters if they worship any thing else besides him The Devil did not desire our Saviour to renounce the worship of the supreme God but was contented that he should worship God still so he would but worship him also And therefore it is no reason to excuse the Church of Rome from Idolatry because they worship the supreme God as well as Saints and Angels this they may do and be Idolaters still for Idolatry does not consist meerly in renouncing the worship of the supreme God but in worshipping any thing else though we continue to worship him When the Jews worship'd their Baalims and false gods they did not wholly renounce the worship of the God of Israel and the Heathens themselves especially the wisest men amongst them did acknowledge one supreme God though they worshiped a great many inferiour Deities with him 2. Our Saviour in his answer to the Devils temptation does not urge his being a wicked and Apostate Spirit an enemy and a rebel against God but gives such a reason why he could not worship him as equally excludes all Creatures whither good or bad Spirits from any right to Divine Worship Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve Him and none else whither they be good or bad spirits for our Saviour does not confine his answer to either and therefore includes them both When we charge the church of Rome with too plain an imitation of the Pagan Idolatry in that worship they paid to their inferiour Daemons which was nothing more then what the Church of Rome now gives to Saints and Angels they think it a sufficient answer that the Heathens worshiped Devils and Apostate Spirits
worship to inferiour Deities or does not this Law forbid the worship of those Gods whom the Heathens worshipped as inferiour Daemons but only the worship of those Gods whom they accounted Supreme and Soveraign If this Law forbids the worship of all Heathen Gods and it is certain that they worshipped a great many Gods whom they did not account Supreme then there can be no place for this distinction here for such an inferiour worship as makes an inferiour God is as well forbid as supreme and soveraign worship The Law says Thou shalt have none other Gods before me or besides me which as I observed before does not exclude the worship of the supreme God but forbids the worship of any other Beeing together with him The meaning is not Thou shalt not renounce my worship for the worship of any other Gods but thou shalt worship me and no other God besides me now I would only ask this question whither a Jew who worshipped the God of Israel who declared himself to be the Supreme God could give supreme worship to any other God this is contrary to the sense of all mankind to worship him as Supreme whom they do not believe to be Supreme And therefore when God forbad them to joyn the worship of any other Gods with the worship of himself he must forbid all kinds and degrees of worship even the most inferiour worship which the Heathens paid to their inferiour Deities If you say that God did indeed forbid all kinds and degrees of worship to be paid to the Heathen Gods which were impure and wicked spirits but still it is lawful to pay inferiour worship to Saints and Angels who are the friends of God I answer the Law makes no distinction between the worship of good and bad Spirits and therefore as far as this Law is concerned we must either deny this inferiour degrees of Worship to all or grant it to all If this Law does not forbid giving inferiour degrees of worship to other Beeings then it does not forbid the inferiour worship of Heathen Gods that may be faulty upon other accounts but is no breach of this law and then the Heathens were not guilty of Idolatry in worshipping their inferiour Dâ—â—mons with an inferiour worship If this Law does forbid even this inferiour degree of worship then it forbids the worship of good Spirits too though with an inferiour worship which transforms true Saints and Angels into false and fictitious Deities But I have another argument to prove that this Law can have no respect to the different degrees of worship The Roman Doctors themselves grant that the difference between supreme and subordinate or inferiour worship does not consist in the outward Act that all or most of the external Acts of worship may belong to both kinds they except indeed Sacrifice but contrary to the sense of all men for the Heathens offered Sacrifice to their inferiour Deities as well as to the supreme and there is no imaginable reason to be assigned why Sacrifice as well as Prayer may not be an act of inferiour as well as of supreme worship The difference then between supreme and inferiour worship is only in the intention and devotion of the worshippers and no man can by the external act know whither this be supreme or inferiour worship Now from hence I thus argue if the worship forbidden by this Law be such as can be known by the external act then this Law can have no regard to the degrees of worship for the degrees of worship are not in the external acts but in the mind of the worshipper which cannot be known by external acts Now that the Law did forbid the external acts of worship without any regard to the intention of the worshipper appears in this that this Idolatrous worship was to be punished with death and therefore it must be such external Idolatry as falls under the cognizance of humane Judicatures Had there been Deutr. 13. 6 7. c. any regard to the degrees of worship no man could have been convicted of Idolatry by the external act and could not have been liable to punishment unless he had confessed his intention of giving supreme worship to a false God and so this Law of putting such Idolaters to death had signified nothing because it had been impossible for them to convict any man of Idolatry but by his own confession but when the external act which is visible to all men is sufficient to convict any man of Idolatry it is next to a demonstration that the Law had no respect to the degrees but to the acts of worship And that our Saviour in that Law thou shalt Worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve had no regard to the different degrees of worship I have already proved at large for allowing that distinction he had not given a good answer to the Devils temptation Thus as for their distinction between absolute and relative worship that though we must not worship any Creature the most excellent Saints and Angels for themselves yet we may worship them upon account of that relation they have to God that is we may worship them for Gods sake though not for their own I find no intimation of any such distinction in the Law We are there commanded to have no other Gods to worship God and him only which excludes Saints and Angels from being the object of our worship as well as Devils 2. But possibly it may be said that though the Law takes no notice of such distinctions yet the Scripture in the explication of this Law may make allowances for it Now in answer to this I only desire to know where the Scripture has made any such distinction between worshipping good and evil Spirits the enemies and Rivals or the Friends of God between supreme and subordinate absolute or relative worshâ—p I can find no such distinctions in Scripture and I have a material reason to believe no such can be found viz because there was no occasion for them The Scripture no where allows us to give any kind of worship to any Creature and therefore there was no need to distinguish between the kind and degrees of worship The most material thing that can be said in this cause is this that when the Scripture mentions this Law of worshipping One God it opposes it to the worship of the false Gods of the Heathens from whence some may conclude that God Deut 6. 13. 14 Deut 13. 7. forbade the worship only of these false Gods But we must consider that the Law is conceived in such general terms as to exclude the worship of all Beeings besides the Supreme God but it could not be thought that God should at that time immediately apply this Law against the worship of any other Beeings but those which were at that time worshipped in the world If God gives a Law which forbids the worship of any Beeings besides himself and particularly applies this Law to
prohibite the worship of all those Gods which were then worshipped in the world will any one in theirs wits hence conclude that if the folly and superstition of men should set up a new race and generation of Gods in after ages that the worship of these new Gods is not as well forbidden by this general Law as the worship of those gods which were worship'd at that time when this Law was given If this were true possibly Pagan Rome it self was not guilty of Idolatry for most if not all of their Gods might be of a later date then the giving the Law 3. Now since no such distinctions as these appear in Scripture it is impossible they should justifie the worship of Saints and Angels which is so expresly forbidden by the Law if we will acknowledge them to be distinct Beeings from the Supreme God for if they are not the Supreme GOD we must not worship them for we must worship none but God No distinctions can justifie us in this case but such as GOD himself makes for otherwise it were easie to distinguish away any Law of God Humane Laws will admit of no distinctions but such as they make themselves for a distinction does either confine and streighten or enlarge the Law and he who has power to distinguish upon a Law has so far power to make it If the Law says that we shall worship no other Beeing besides God and we have power if we have but wit enough to invent some new distinctions between the worship of good and bad spirits between Supreme and Subordinate absolute and relative worship this makes a new Law of it for it is one thing to say thou shalt worship GOD only and quite contrary to say thou shalt worship God only and good Spirits God with a supreme and absolute good Spirits with a subordinate and relative worship This I think is sufficient to shew that we must admit of no distinctions upon a Divine Law but what the Scripture it self owns and therefore since those distinctions with which the Church of Rome justifies her worship of Saints and Angels are no where to be found in Scripture they have no authority against an express Law 3. The next course the Papists take to justifie their Creature-worship in contradiction to that Law which expresly commands us to worship none but God is an appeal to such authorities as they think sufficient to decide this matter Now I shall not say much to this for I believe all Mankind will acknowledge that no Authority less then Divine can repeal a Divine Law and therefore unless God himself or such persons as act by a Divine Authority have repealed this Law no other Authority can do it That Christ and his Apostles have not repealed this Law I have already proved that the whole Church in after Ages had any Authority to repeal this Law I desire them to prove For the authority of the Church as to the essentials of Faith and Worship is not the authority of Law-givers but of Witnesses The Church never pretended in former Ages to make or to repeal any Divine Laws but to declare and testifie what the belief and practice of the Primitive and Apostolick Churches was and it is unreasonable to think that they should have any such Authority for then Christ and his Apostles preached the Gospel to little purpose if it were in the power of the Church to make a new Gospel of it when they pleased But indeed could it appear that the Apostles did teach the Christians of that Age and the Church in those Ages which immediately succeeded the Apostles did practise the worship of Saints and Angels we should have reason to suspect that we and not they are mistaken in the sense of that Law which commands us to worship none but God But then none can be admitted as competent witnesses of this matter but those who did immediately succeed the Apostles or conversed with Apostolical men and Churches And thanks be to God there is no appearance of creature-worship in those Ages we dare appeal to the testimony of Fathers and Councils for above three hundred years and those who come after come a little too late to be witnesses of what was done in the Apostolick Churches especially when all the intermediate Ages knew nothing of it I shall not fill up this discourse with particular â—itations which learned men know where to find since the Roman Doctors can find nothing in the Writings of the first Fathers to justifie the worship of Saints and Angels and the Protestant Writeâ—s find a great deal in those Ages against it Indeed at the latter end of the fourth Century some of the Fathers used some Rhetorical Apostrophes to the Saints and Martyrs in in their Orations which the Church of Rome interprets to be Prayers to them but though other See Bishops Ushers Answer to the Jesuits Challenge Learned men have vindicated those passages so far as to shew the vast difference between them and solemn and formal Invocation which is not my business at this time yet there are several things very well worth our observation towards the true stating of this matter As 1. That these Fathers came too late to be witnesses of the Apostolical practice which they could know no otherwise then we might know it if there had been any such thing viz. by the testimony and practice of the Church from the Apostles till that time This was no where pretended by them that the Invocation of Saints had been the practice of the Catholick Church in all ages and they could have no proof of this unless they had better Records of former times then we have at this day and such as contradicted all the Records which we now have of the Apostolick and Primitive Churches and I believe few men will be so hardy as to assert this and me thinks there should be as few who are so credulous as to believe it and I am sure there is no man living who is able to prove it 2. Nay the particular sayings of these Fathers by which the Romanists prove the Invocation of Saints do not prove that it was the Judgement and practice of the Church of that age They no where say that it was and it does not appear to be so by any other Records Let them shew me any Council before or in those times when these Fathers lived that is in the fourth Century which decreed the worship of Saints and Angels Let them produce any publick offices of Religion in in those dayes which allows this worship and if no such thing appears those men must be very well prepared to believe this who will without any other evidence judge of the practice of the Church only from some extravagant slights of Poets and Orators and if even in those dayes the worship of Saints was not received into the publick offices of the Church methinks we may as well live without it still and they must either grant
one Lord Mediatour the Heathens had many Soveraign Gods betwixt whom and Men they supposed there was no immediate intercourse they had also many under Gods or Doemons by whose Agency and Mediatourship they addrest themselves to their Soveraign Gods this the Apostle confutes and shews that Christians are taught to believe and profess but one God Maker of all things to whom they ought to Pray and but one Lord Mediatour and Advocate by whom they offer their Petitions to him 2. That there needed no other besides this one he being a Mediator of Redemption too and on that account had not only an Authority and Commission from God to shew for that office but an infinite worth and invaluable merits of his own to plead in behalf of Mankind and to procure the granâ—ing of their requests he hath purchast what he begs for and atoned for what he Praâ—s for having no Sin of his own to answer for he was excellently qualified to interceed for Pardon for our Sins and having perfectly fulfilled all righteousness and shed his most precious Blood for us he highly merited of God both for us and for himself for us the several blessings he interceeds for for himself the God like Honour and Royalty to be the Donour and Dispenser of them Hence it is that the Apostle here makes his Mediation â—â—â—â—pend on his Propitiation and after he had told there is but one Mediatour presently subjoins Who gave himself a Ransom for all to the same purpose is that of St. John Ver. 6. 1. Joh. 21. 2. If any Man Sin we have an Advocate with the Father that is the same with a Mediatour of Intercession and that we might be fully assured of the greatness of his John 2. 1 2. Authority and Power he adds Jesus Christ the Righteous and he is the Propitiation for our Sins A third Scripture against Saint-Invocation are those words of our Saviour Mat. 4. 10. Taken out of Deut. 6. 13. Thou shalt Worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve Now if Prayer be a necessary and chief part of God's Worship as all are agreed it is we are bound by this Scripture to Pray only to God But to this they say there are several degrees of Religious Worship and that it is only an inferiour kind wherewith they Worship the Saints departed called by them Duleia when it 's applied to ordinary Saints and hyperduleia when to the blessed Virgin and that they never Worship them as they do God with Latreia the highest kind of Worship if it be asked How does this appear since the same Signs and outward Acts of Worship are performed to the one as well as to the other They answer that they have higher conceptions and intentions of Honour to God in the exercise of their officâ—â— to him then when they perform the like to any Angel or Saint deparâ—ed To this several things may be said 1. If these words him only shalt thou serve are to be understood only of the highest degree of Religious worship as a part of the whole and distinguish'd from a lower kind they had not been a sufficient answer to the Devils demand he might thus have answered I acknowledge the Soveraign and Almighty Power of God as well as you That it is he alone can command Ver. 3 Stones to become Bread and this Power I have over the Kingdoms of the World I own to have received from him for it was delivered to me And therefore I do not Luke 4. 6. desire that thou shouldest Worship me as thou doest God with Latreia with the highest degree of worship but only with Duleia a lower kind thy Heart the highest and most elevated thoughts and conceptions of thy mind may be given to God 't is only the outward Act that I challenge of thee that thou wouldest only fall down and Worship me or by falling down worship Me. 2. That the Scriptures often use these two words Latreia and Duleia promiscuously to signify the same thing and as sometimes Latreia is set to signify that Civil Honour and Service that 's due to Men in Eminency and Authority so is Duleia to express that Religious worship that 's only due to God As to the first God Deut. 28. 48. Latreuseis thus threatens the Isralites therefore thou shalt serve thine Enemies as to the other many places may be instanced in thus when Samuel exhorted the House of Isarel to prepare their Hearts unto the Lord and to serve him only and when the Apostles urged Christians to be fervent in Spirit serving the Lord and when our Saviour said ye cannot 1. Sam 7. 3. duleusate Rom. 10. 11. duleuontes Matt. 6. 24. u dunasthe Theo dulein serve God and Mammon Duleuein is the word made use of 3. That there is no such distinction in Religious worship as an higher and lower kind because whatever is Religious worship is such with respect to God only as the Object and therefore can be but one and that in the highest degree as God is one and infinitely exalted above all Religion say the School-Men is a Moral Vertue which exhibits due Worship to God as the L. 4 Inst c. 28. de ver Rel. c. 55. Principal of all things Lactantius therefore derives it a Religando because it ties Man to God and St. Austin à Religendo because Men choose God again whom they had forsaken 'T is not therefore whatsoever is excellent but whatsoever is Divine and as it is Divine that is the Object of Religion now Angels and Holy Men although there be some kind of Honour due to those excellencies that are found in them an Honour Commensurate to those excellencies yet falling infinitely short of Divinity must be excluded from having any share of that worship which either by God himself or the universal consent of Mankind is made Religious that is appropriate to God Neither 4. Will it help the matter to say that though the outward Acts and Expressions of worship to both are the same there is a vast differrence in the inward Devotions of their minds and Souls and that which they Pray to Saints and Angels they must not be thought to do it with that height of Affection and trust and resignation wherewith they call upon God For when all is done words and outward Acts will be reckon'd to signify according to that sense and meaning Custom and Institution hath stamp'd upon them and let the inward thoughts of the Votary be what they will if he apply to Saints and Angels in such expressions and offices or with such Rites and Ceremonies as according to the usual acceptation of them naturally import that Hope and Confidence that Love and Duty that is due to God alone he will be deem'd to ascribe unto them naturally import that Hope and Confidence that Love and Duty that is due to God alone he will be deem'd to ascribe unto them the Honour which he owes to
Idolol l. â— c. 1. and Omnipresent God they did not worship them purely for themselves but as God was in them and they were as St. Austin speaks Aut partes ejus aut membra ejus aut aliquid substantiae ipâ—ius c August l. 24. contra Faustum Either parts of him or Members of him or something of his substance as the Papists believe the Sacrament to be his body Thus they Deified the things of Nature tho' they thought there was but one Supreme GOD whom they worship'd in them as â—usebius sayes of them they believe a that c Hena gar onia theon pantoiais dymamesi ta panta plerun kai dia panta diekein kai iu ton dia ton dedelomenon sebein Euseb Praepar Evangel l. 3. c. 13. one GOD fills all things with his various power and pervades all things and that he is to be worshipped in and by all visible things but yet they denied that those visible things were to be worship'd for them selves but for the sake of God and those invisible powers of God whichwere in them as appears from the same place b Me ta horamena samata heliu kai selenes kai astron medege ta aistheta mere tu kosmu phesusi the opoiein alla tas en tutois aoratus dunameis autu de tu epi pasin They do not they say make Gods of the visible bodies of the Sun Moon and Stars or the other sensible parts of the World but they worship those invisible powers that are in them of that God who is GOD over all Nay the Egyptians themselves did not as Celsus pleads even for those Idolaters worship their bruit Animals but only as they were Symbols of God c einai auta kai theu symbola Orig. contra cels l. 3. 4. Yet notwithstanding this Plea of Idolaters they may justly be charged with worshipping those material Objects which they say as the Papists when we charge them with bread-Bread-worship that they do not worship So the Egyptians might be charged with brut-brut-worship the Heathens with the worship of the Sun and Moon and the Scripture d Isa 44. 17. expresly Reproaches and Accuses the Idolaters with worshipping a Stock or Stone or a piece of Wood tho' it was the constant Plea and pretence of the Heathens that they did no more worship those material Objects then the Papists do Bread e Non ego illum lapidem colo nec illud simulachrum quod est sine sensu Aug. in Psal 69. I do not Worship the sensless Stone or Image which has Eyes and sees not Ears and hears not sayes the Heathen in St. Austin and in Arnobius We do not worship the Brass or the Gold or Silver or any of the matter of which our Images are made a Nos neque aera neque auri argentique materias neque alias quibus signa Conficiunt eas esse per se Religiosa decernimus numina sed eos in his colimus eosque veneramur quos dedicatio infert Sacra Arnobius contra Gentes and in St. Austin again Do ye think we or our Forefathers were such Fools as to take those for Gods b Vsque adeone Majores nostros insipientes fuisse credendum est ut Does No they would disown it as much as Boileau does With his who shall say we adore the bread or Wine c Quis nos adorare panem vinum Boileau p. 160. or T. G's pretending that we run upon that false ground that Catholicks believe the bread to be God And yet I see not why there may not be good reason to charge the one as well as the other 5. If those other Idolaters had been so foolish and absurd as to believe and think that those things which they worship'd were their very Gods themselves substantially present and that the visible substance of their Idols had been converted and turned into the substance of their Gods this would have made their Idolatry only more horribly sottish and ridiculous but would not in the least have made it more excusable If the Jews had thought that by the powerful words of Consecration pronounced by Aaron their High Priest the Calf had been turned into the very substance of GOD and that tho' the Figure and Shape of the Calf had remained and the Accidents and Species of Gold which appeared to their sight yet that the substance of it had been perfectly done away and that only God himself had been there under those appearing Species of a golden Calf would this have mended the matter or better excused their Idolatry because they had been so extremely sottish That they conceived the Gold not to be there at all but in the place thereof the only true and eternal God and so altho' the Object or rather subject materially present in such a case would have been the golden Calf yet their Act of Adoration would not have been terminated formally upon that but only upou God as T. G. sayes of the bread p. 339. Or if the Manichees had thought the Body of the Sun had been converted into the glorious Body of JESUS CHRIST would this have signified any thing to bring them off if their mistake had been as T G. sayes p. 327. Theirs is concerning the Bread that they believed the Sun not to be there at all and therefore what they would have in their minds would not or could not be the Sun but the only true and eternal Son of God Indeed they had as it appears from St. Austin a Eum sc Christum naâ—im quandam esse dicitis eum triangulum esse perhibetis id est per quandam triangulam caeli Fenestram lucem istam mundo terrisque radiare August contra Faustum Manichaeum l. 30. c. 6. Nescio quam navim per foramem Triangulum micantem atque lucentem quam confictam cogitatis adoretis Ibid. some such absurd Imagination they did think that it was not the material Sun which appeared to their senses but a certain Navis which was the substance of CHRIST that did radiate through the triangular Fenestra in the Heavens to the World and to the Earth These wretched Figments of theirs whereby they made the Father of the Light that was inaccessible and placed CHRIST in the Sun and Moon and the Holy Ghost in the Air b Trinitati loca tria datis patri unumâ— e. lumen in accessibile filio duo Solem Lunam spiritui sancto rursus unum Aris hunc omuem ambitum Ibid c. 7. and called these the Seals of their substance c Sedes ejusdem substantiae dicatis Ibid. c. 8. these made them indeed as he sayes worship only the Figments of their own crazy heads and things thâ—t were not d In iis non quod sunt sed quod vobis dementissime fingit is adoratis Ib. c. 9. Vos auâ—em colitis ea quae nec dii nec aliquid sunt quoniam prorsus nulla sunt Ib. c. 9. but yet this
the Fire So great an honour and regard had the Primitive Church for the Sacrament that as they accounted it the highest Mystery and solemnest part of their Worship so they would not admit any of the Penitents who had been guilty of any great and notorious sin nâ—â— the Catechumeni nor the Possest and Energumeni so much as to the sight of it the eposia and the Participation of this Mystery used alwayes in those times to go together as Cassander * Consult de Circumgest Sacram. owns and Albaspinaeus †L'ancienna Police de l'Eglise sur l'administration dâ— l'Eucharistie liure prem c. 15. 16. 17. proves in his Book of the Eucharist And therefore as it is plainly contrary to the Primitive practice to carry the Sacrament up and down and expose it to the Eyes of all Persons so the reason of doing it that it may be worship'd by all and that those who do not partake of it may yet adore it was it is plain never thought of in the primitive Church for then they would have seen and worshipped it tho' they had not thought fit that they should have partaken of it But he that will see how widely the Church of Rome differs from the ancient Church in this and other matters relating to the Eucharist let â—im read the learned Dallee his two Books of the Object of religious worship I shall now give an Answer to the Authorities which they produce out of the Fathers and which Monsieur Boileau has he tells us been a whole year a gleaning out of them ‡ Annuae vellicationis litirariae ratiocinium reddo Praef. ad Lect. Boileau de Adorat Euchar. if he has not rather pickt from the sheaves of Bellarmine and Perrone But all their Evidences out of Antiquity as they are produced by him and bound up together in one Bundle in his Book I shall Examine and Answer too I doubt not in a much less time They are the only Argument he preâ—â—nds to for this Adoration and when Scripture and all other Reasons fail them as they generally do then they fly to the Fathers as those who are sensible their forces are too weak to keep the open Field fly to the Woods or the Mountains where they know but very few can â—ollow them I take it to be sufficient that in any necessary Article of Faith or Essential part of Christian worship which this of the Sacrament must be if it be any part at all it is sufficient that we have the Scripture for us or that the Scripture is silent and speaks of no more then what we own and admit In other external and indifferent Matters relating meerly to the circumstances of worship the Church may for outward Order and Decency appoint what the Scripture does not But as to what we are to believe and what we are to worship the most positive Argument from any humane Authority is of no weight where there is but a Negative from Scripture But we have such a due regard to Antiquity and are sâ— well assured of our cause were it to be tryed only by that and not by Scripture which the Church of Rome generally deâ—â—â—s to that we shall not fear to allow â—â—em to bâ—ing all the Fathers they can for ther Witnesses in this matter and we shall not in the least decline their Testimony Boileau Musters up a great many some of which are wholly impertinent and insignisicant to the matter in hand and none of them speak home to the business he brings them for He was to prove that they Taught that the Sacrament was to be adored as it is in the Church of Rome but they only Teach as we do That it is to be had in great reverence and respect as all other things relating to the Divine worship that it is to be received with great Devotion both of body and soul and in such a Posture as is to exprese this A Posture of Adoration that Christ is then to be worshipped by us in this Office especially as well as he is in all other Offices of our Religion that his Body and his Flesh which is united to his Divinity and which he offered up to his Father as a sacrifice for all Mankind and by which we are Redeemed and which we do spiritually partake of in the Sacrament that this is to be adored by us but not as being corporally present there or that the Sacrament is to be worship'd with that or for the sake of that or that which the Priest holds up in his Hands or lyes upon the Altar is to be the Object of our Adoration but only Christ and his blessed Body which is in Heaven To these four Heads I shall reduce the Authorities which Boileau produces for the Adoration of the Host and which seem to speak any thing to his purpose and no wonder that among so many Devout Persons that speak as great things as can be of the Sacrament and used and perswaded the greatest Devotion as is certainly our Duty in the receiving it there should be something that may seem to look that way to those who are very willing it should or that may by a little stretching be drawn farther then their true and genuine meaning which was not to Worship the Sacrament it self or the consecrated Elements but either 1. To Worship Christ who is to be adored by us in all places and at all times but especially in the places set apart for his worship and at those times we are performing them in the Church and upon the Altar in Mysteriis as St. Ambrose speaks * Despir St. l. 3. c. 12. in the Mystesteries both of Baptism and the Lords Supper and in all the Offices of Christian Worship as Nazianzen †Orat. 11. de de Gorgon ToÌ„ thysiasterioÌ„ prâ—spiptei me ta tes pisteoÌ„s kai ton ep ' autoÌ„ timon non anakalumene said of his sister Gorgonia that she called upon him who is honoured upon the Altar That Christ is to be honoured upon the Altar where we see the great and honourable work of mans Redemption as 't was performed by his Death represented to us is not at all strange if it had been another and more full word that he was to be worship'd there 't is no more then what is very allowable tho' it had not been in a Rhetorical Oration 't is no more then to say That the God of Israel was worship'd upon the Jewish Altar or upon this Mountain For 't is plain she did not mean to worshâ—p the Sacrament as if that were Christ or God for she made an ointment of it and mixt it with her tears and anointed her Body with it as a Medicine to recover her Health which she did miraculously upon it Now sure 't is a very strange thing that she should use that as a Plaister which she thought to be a God but she still took for Bread and Wine that had extradinary Vertue in it and
that any other speculative scientifical Doctrine doth little or nothing conduce to a happy and blessed life but that on This our everlasting happiness doth depend and that we cannot reject This without certain Ruine Therefore we ought to take head that cunning Men do not deceive us that we do not hearken to the teachers of New Doctrineâ— which have no foundation in the Scripture their pretences to infallibility and demonstration in matters of Faith are false and unreasonable for they assume these great and unwarrantable privileges only to deceive the Ignorant and to obtrude fictitious articles of Faith upon Mankind Wherefore all that now remains is to make some short Reflections upon the Authours of Purgatory and other new-invented Doctrinâ—â— in the Church of Rome First They may be charged for imposing upon our belief things contrary to reason self-inconsistent and incongruous of this I will give but one instance which is their asserting that the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament is changed into the real and substantial Body and Blood of Christ For this is the hardest thing that ever was put upon men in any Religion because they cannot admit it unless their reason be laid aside as no competent Judge in the matter unless also they give the lye to the report of their senses And if they do this how shall we think that GOD made our Faculties true which if he did not do we are absolutely discharged from all duty to him because we have no faculty that can resolve us that this is of GOD for if our reason must not be trusted we must cease to be Men if our senses are not to be believed the chiefest proof of Christians falls to the ground which was the sight of those who saw our Saviour after he was risen from the Dead Now if I may not believe the reason of my â—â—nd in conjunction with three or four of my senses how shâ—ll I know 〈…〉 that any thing is this or that therefore I say that this Doctrine is a gross invention of Men contrary both to reason and sense Secondly The Truths they do acknowledge are made void by subtile distinctions or equivocations as for example their Doctrine of Probability and of directing the intention if a Man can find any Doctour among them that held such an opinion it makes that Doctrine probable and there is nothing so contrary to the rules of Vertue and Conscience but what some Romish Casuistical Doctour hath resolved to be good and practicable just as Tully sayes there is nothing so absurd or ridiculous which some Philosopher or other hath not maintained and asserted So by directing their intention they may declare that which is false and deny that which is true because they intend the credit of their Church and Religion this mere intention shall excuse them from the guilt of downright falshood and lying They are so well practised in equivocations that you cannot confide in any words they speak they are so ambiguous and of such doubtfull meaning in their evasions their Speech shall bear a double sense whereas no Man ought to use wit and parts to impose upon another or to make a Man believe That which he doth not mean For the Christian Law is plain and obvious void of all ambiguity or ensnaring speeches free from all Sophistications and windings of Language never flies to words of a dubious or uncertain signification but plainly declares the truth to Men therefore these practices are contrary to that simplicity and plain heartedness which ought to be in the conversation of every Christian Thirdly They super-add to Religion things altogether unlikely to be true and dishonorable to GOD which will appear in these following particulars I. The use of Images in the Worship of God an Idolatry they are too guilty of otherwise they would never leave out the second Commandment and divide the Tenth into two to conceal iâ— from the People We find better Doctrine then this among the Philosopeers who say God is to be Worshipped by Purity of Mind for this is a rational service and a worshâ—p most suitable to an immaâ—erial Beeing it being the use of that in us which is the highest and noblest of our Faculties II. The veneration of Reliques a very vain and foolâ—sh thing for there can be no certainty at this distance of time what they are and if they were indeed what they are taken for what veneration is or can be due to them For inanimate â—hings are far inâ—eriour to those that have life and for the living to worshâ—p things that are dead is unaccountable and irrational III. The Invocation or worship of Angels and Saints our Fellâ—w creatures particularly of the Virgin Mary to whom they make more Prayers then to our Saviâ—uâ— himself alâ—hâ—ugh her Name be not mentioned in aâ—l the Epâ—stles of the Apostles altâ—ough Christ himself as foreseeing the degeneracy of the Church in this thing did ever restrain all exâ—ravagant imaginations of honour due to her yet the adoration of her is the most considerable part of their Religion But why should a Man so prostâ—ue himself as to Worship those I am sure God would not have me Worship for he would not have us adore any Creature as the Apostle argues Col. 2. 18. It is but a shew of humility to worship Angels who are placed in the highest order of Creatures and if they are not to be Worshipped sure none below them are and God hath declared there is but one supreme self-existent Beeing and one Mediatour between God and Man the Man Jesus Christ IV. They withhold the use of Scripture from the People because they say Knowledge of the very Oracles of God will make them contentious and disobedient to Authority if this be true then the blame of all this must be laid upon our blessed Saviour for revealing such a Doctrine to the World as this is and thereby we should condemn the Apostles for making known such a Doctrine to Men in a Tongue they understand but I suppose the Papists are not willing to lay all the miscarriages of the World upon Christ and his Apostles Although Men may abuse the Knowledge of the Scripture yet the abuse of a thing that is usefull was never accounted a sufficient reason for the taking it away therefore Men are not to be hindred from the Know-of the Scriptures for fear they should become proud or rebellious for this would be as if one should put out a Man's Eyes that he might the better follow him or that he might not loose his way for there is nothing in the whole Doctrine of out blessed Saviour which is unfite for any Man to know but what is plainly designed to promote holiness and the practice of a good life the Romanists do indeed pretend that the unity and peace of the Church cannot be maintained unless the People be kept in ignorance then the mischief will be that for the end of keeping Peace and Unity in the Church
Imprimatur February 15th 1686. Jo. Edinburgh A COLLECTION OF DISCOURSES Lately Written by some DIVINES of the CHURCH OF ENGLAND AGAINST THE ERROURS and CORRUPTIONS OF THE Church OF Rome To which is prefix'd a Catalogue of the several Discourses EDINBVRGH Re-Printed by John Reid for Thomas Brown Gideon Schaw Alexander Ogston and George Mosman Stationers to be sold at their Shops Anno DOM. 1687 THE CATALOGUE Of the DISCOURSES contained in this Book I. A Discourse concerning the Guide in Matters of Faith with Respect especially to the Romish pretence of the necessity of such an One as is infallible Page 1 II. The Protestants Resolution of Faith being an Answer to three Questions First How far we must depend on the Authority of the Church for the true sense of the Scripture Secondly Whither a visible Succession from Christ to this day makes a Church which has this Succession an Infallible Interpreter of Scripture And whither no Church which has not this Succession can teach the true sense of Scripture Thirdly Whither the Church of England can make out such a Visible Succession Page 31 III. A Discourse about the Charge of Novelty upon the Reformed Church of England made by the Papists asking of us the Question Where was our Religion before Luther Page 57 IV. A Discourse about Tradition shewing what is mean'd by it and what Tradition is to be Received and what Tradition is to be rejected Page 82 V. A Discourse concerning the Vnity of the Catholick Church maintained in the Church of England Page 117 VI. A Discourse concerning the Object of Religious Worship or a Scripture proof of the unlawfulness of givng any Religious Worship to any other Beeing besides the One supreme GOD. Page 158 VII A Discourse concerning the Celebration of Divine Service in an unknown Tongue Page 212 VIII A Discourse concerning the Devotions of the Church of Rome especially as compared with those of the Church of England in which is shewn that what ever the Romanists pretend there is not so true Devotion amongst them nor such a Rational Provision for it nor encouragement to it as in the Church established by Law among Vs Page 250 IX A Discourse concerning Invocation of Saints Page 295 X. A Discourse against Transubstantiation Page 345 XI A Discourse concerning the Adoration of the Host as it is taught and practised in the Church of Rome wherein an Answer is given to T. G. on that subject and to Monsuer Boileau's late Book de Adoratione Eucharistiae Paris 1685. Page 375 XII A Discourse against Purgatory Page 421 XIII A Discourse concerning Auricular Confession as it is prescribed by the Council of Trent and practised in the Church of Rome With a Postscript on occasion of a Book lately Printed in France called Historia Confessionis Auricularis Page 447. FINIS A DISCOURSE CONCERNING A GUIDE IN MATTERS OF FAITH THE design of this Discourse is the Resolution of the following Query Whither a Man who liveth where Christianity is The Question professed and refuseth to submit his judgment to the Infallibility of any Guide on Earth and particularly to the Church or Bishop of Rome hath notwithstanding that refusal sufficient means still left him whereby he may arrive at certainty in those Doctrines which are generally necessary to the Salvation of a Christian Man Satisfaction in this Inquiry is of great Moment For The moment of this Question it relateth to our great end and to the way which leads to it And it nearly concerneth both the Romanists and the Reformed If there be not such a Guide the Estate of the Romanists is extreamly dangerous For then the Blind take the Blind for their unerring Leaders and being once misled they wander on without correcting their Error having taken up this first as their fixed Principle that their Guide cannot mistake the way On the other hand If God hath set up in his Church a Light so very clear and steddy as is pretended the Reformed are guilty of great presumption and expose themselves to great uncertainty by shutting their Eyes against it Now there lyes before Men a double Temptation to a belief The Temptations to believe the Affirmative part of this Question of the being of such a Guide in the Christian Church Sloth and Vitious Humility of mind Sloth inclineth Men rather to take up in an Implicit Faith then to give themselves the trouble of a strict Examination of things For there is less Pain in Credâ—lity then in bending of the Head by long and strict Attention and severe Study Also there is a Shew of Humility in the deference which our understandings pay unto Authority especially to that which pretends to be under Christ Supreme on Earth Although in the paying of it without good reason fiâ—st understood Men are not Humble but Slavish But these Temptations prevail not upon honest and considerate Minds which inquire without prejudice The true Resolution of the Query after Truth and submit to the Powerful Evidence of it Such will resolve the Question in the Affirmative and they may reasonably so do by considering these propositions which I shall treat of in their order First The Christian Church never yet wanted nor shall it ever want either the Doctrines of necessary Faith or the Belief and Profession of them Secondly Wheresoever GOD requireth the Belief of them he giveth means sufficient for Information and unerring Assâ—nt Thirdly Whatsoever thâ—se means are every Man 's Personal reason giveth to the Mind that last Weigh which turneth Deliberation into Faith Fourthly The means which God hath given us towards necessary Faith and the ceâ—â—ainâ—y of it is nâ—t the Authority of any infallible Guide on Earth Yet Fifthly All 〈…〉 is not to be rejected in our pursuance of the 〈…〉 in the finding out or â—â—ating of which it is a very 〈…〉 Sixthly By the 〈…〉 to us the Holy Scriptures in the 〈…〉 â—â—ans sufficient to lead us to certainty 〈…〉 to â—iâ—e Eternal First 〈…〉 and Profession of the nâ—â—essâ—r 〈…〉 Faith are annexed Prop. I 〈…〉 the Chriâ—â—â—â—â— Church There â—â— but 〈…〉 and accâ—â—â—ing â—â— he saying of Leo the great * Nisi 〈…〉 Fides non est â— M Ser. 2â— If 〈…〉 at all For it cannot be contrary â—â— it seâ—â— And though it be 〈◊〉 â—et Men oâ— diâ—â—ering Creeds â—ret 〈…〉 it as the Merchants of Reliâ—â—s in the Church of 〈◊〉 shew in several places the one â—â—amless Coat of Christ †â—ee Ferrand l. 1. c. 1. Sect 4. disquis Relig. This one Faith never did nor ever shall in all places fail The Apostles were themselves without error both in their own assent to the Fundamentals of the Christian Faith and in the delivery of them They heard the Oracles of Christ from his own mouth and they were Witnesses of his Resurrection And they spake * Act. 4. 19 20. what they had seen and heard And they gave to the World Assurance of the Truth by the
or Papists but yet heartily desire to do good to them both But there is a more mischievous suggestion then this that the design of such Papers is only to raise a new cry and noise about Popery and to alarm the People and disturb the Government with new Fears and Jealousies Truly if I thought this would be the effect of it I would burn my Papers presently for I am sure the church of England will get nothing by a Tumultuary and clamorous Zeal against the Church of Rome and I had much rather suffer under Popery then contribute any thing towards raising a Popular Fury to keep it out We profess our selves as irreconcilable Enemies to Popery as we are to Phanaticism and desire that all the World may know iâ— but we will never Rebell nor countenance any Rebellion against our lawful Soveraign to keep out either we leave such Principles and Practices to Papists and Phanaticks But when we find our People Assaulted by the Agents of Rome and do not think our selves secure from Popish Designs we think it our Duty to give them the best Instructions we can to preserve them from such Errors as we believe will destroy their Souls and cannot but wonder that any men who are as much concerned to take care of Souls as we are should think this a needless or a scandalous undertaking I wish such men would speak out and tell us plainly what they think of Popery themselves If they think this Design not well managed by those who undertake it it would more become them to commend the Design and do it better themselves I know no man but would very gladly be excused as having other work enough to imploy his time but yet I had rather spend my vacant minutes this way then in censuring the good that other men do while I do none my self The Words of the Paper which was sent to me are these IT is my Opinion that the infinite Goodness of our Legislator has left to us a means of knowing the true sense and meaning of the Holy Scriptures which is the Church Now J judge this Church must be known to be the true Church by its continual visible Succession from Christ till our Dayes But I doubt whither or no the Protestant Church can make out this continual visible Succession and desire to be informed ANSWER THAT Christ has lest a means of knowing the true sense and meaning of the Holy Scriptures I readily grant or else it had been to no purpose to have left us the Scriptures But the latter Clause is very ambiguous for the meaning may either be that we may understand by the Scriptures which is the Church or that the Church is the means whereby we must understand the true sense and meaning of the Scripture The first is a true Protestant Principle and therefore I presume not intended by this Objector For how we should know that there is any Church without the Information we receive by the Scripture I cannot Divine and yet we may as easily know that there is a Church as we can know which is the true Church without the Scripture For there is no other means of knowing either that there is a Church or what this Church is or what are the Properties of a True and Sound and Orthodox Church but by Revelation and we have no other Revelation of this but what is contained in the Holy Scriptures As for the Second That the Church is the means of knowing the true sense and meaning of the Scriptures it is in some sense very true in some sense very false 1. It is in some sense true and acknowledged by all sober Protestants As 1. If by the Church we understand the Universal Church of all Ages as we receive the Scriptures themselves handed down by them to our time so what ever Doctrines of Faith have been universally received by them is one of the best means to find out the true sense of Scripture For the nearer they were to the times of the Apostles the more likely they were to understand the true sense of their Writings being instructed by the Apostles themselves in the meaning of them And thus we have a certain Rule to secure us from all dangerous Errors in expounding Scripture For the great and fundamental Doctrines of the Christian Religion are as plainly contained in the Writings of the first Fathers of the Church and as unanimously asserted by them as the Authority of the Scriptures themselves and therefore though we have not a Traditionary Exposition of every particular Text of Scripture yet we have of the great and fundamental Doctrines of Faith and therefore must never expound Scripture so as to contradict the known and avowed sense of the Catholick Church And this course the Church of England takes she receives the Definitions of the four first General Councils and requires her Bishops and Clorgy to Expound the Scriptures according to the profest Doctrines of those first and purest Ages of the Church 2. We ought to pay great deference to and not lightly and want only oppose the Judgement and Authority of the Particular Church wherein we live when her Expositions of Scripture do not evidently and notoriously contradict the sense of the Catholick church especially of the first and best Ages of it For it does not become private men to oppose their Sentiments and Opinions to the Judgement of the church unless in such plain cases as every honest man may be presumed a very competent Judge in the matter and no church nor all the churches in the World have such Authority that we must renounce our senses and deny the first principles of Reason to follow them with a blind and implicite Faith And thus the church that is the sense and Judgment of the catholick church is a means for the finding out the true sense of Scripture and though we may mistake the sense of some particular Texts which the Romanists themselves will not deny but that even infallible councils may do who tho' they are infallible in their conclusions yet are not alwayes so in the Arguments or Mediums whither drawn from Scripture or Reason whereby they prove them yet it is Morally impossible we should be guilty of any dangerous mistake while we make the catholick Doctrine of the church our Rule and in other matters follow the Judgment and submit to the Authority of the church wherein we live which is as absolutely necessary as Peace and Order and good Goverment in the church 2. But then this is very false if we mean that the church is the only means of finding out the true sense of the Scriptures on if by the church we understand any particular church as I suppose this Person does the Roman Catholick that is the particular universal church of Rome or if we mean the church of the present Age or by Means understand such a Decretory sentence as must determine our Faith and command out Assent that we must seek
Rule whereby our Church is reformed and to which we appeal There are but three things necessary to be understood by Christians either the Articles of Faith or the Rules of Life or the external Order and Discipline of the Church and Administration of Religious Offices 1. As for the Rules of Life all those Duties which we owe to GOD and Men they are so plainly contained in the Holy Scriptures that no honest man can mistake them I suppose the church of Rome her self will not pretend that there is any need of an infallible Interpreter to teach men what is mean'd by Loving GOD with all our Heart and our Neighbour as our selves 2. As for the Articles of Faith those which are fundamental to the christian Religion and which every Christian ought to believe are so plain in Scripture that every honest and unprejudiced man may understand them but however as I observed before we govern our selves in these things by the received Doctrine of the catholick church of the first and purest Ages and if this be not a safe Rule we can be certain of nothing And what the catholick Faith was we learn from those short summaries of Faith which were universally owned by all catholick churches For what we now call the Apostles creed was very anciently received in all churches with some little variety indeed of Words and Phrase but without any difference of sense and the catholick Faith was not only preserved in such short Summaries and creeds which were as liable to be perverted by Hereticks as the Scriptures themselves but was more largely explained in the Writings of the ancient Fathers and though this will not enable us to understand every Phrase and Expression of Scripture but we must use other means to do that as Skill in the Original Languages a knowledge of ancient customs and ancient Disputes to which the Apostles frequently aflude a consideration of the Scope and Design of the place c. Yet the catholick Faith received and owned by the Primitive Church is so far a Rule as it directs us to Expound Scripture to a true catholick sense As St. Paul commands the Romans that those who prophesie should Prophesie according to the proportion of Faith Rom. 12. 6. Kat ' analogian pisteos according to the Analogie of Faith That is that in the interpreting the Scriptures of the Old Testament they should expound them to a christian sense according to those Doctrines of the christian Faith which he had taught them and this was a safe Rule for expounding the Old Testament which contained the Types and Figures and Prophesies of the Gospel-State And thus in expounding the new Testament now it is committed to writting we must Prohpesie according to the Analogie of Faith or as he commands Timothy in his Preaching Hold fast the form of sound words which thou hast heard from me 2. Tim. 1. 13. It seems the Apostle had given him a form of sound words according to which he was to direct his Preaching whither this refers to a short summary of Faith such as our Creed is I cannot say though it is not improbable it may but it is plain we have a form of sound words delivered to us by the Catholick Church which contains the true Catholick Faith and therefore ought to be so far a Rule to us in expounding Scripture as never to contradict any thing which is contained in it for that is to contradict the Faith of the Catholick Church And when one great Article of this Faith concerning the Eternal God-head of Christ the Son of God was corrupted by Arius a Presbyter of the Church of Alexandria it gave an occasion for a full Declaration of the sense of the Catholick Church about it And though the effects of that Controversie were very fatal to the Church yet it was very happy that it broke out in such an Age when it could be determined with greater certainty and greater Authority then it could have been in any succeeding Age of the Church by men who were venerable for their Age for their Wisdom for their Piety for their undaunted Confessions under Heathen and Persecuring Emperours who knew what the sense of the Catholick Church was before this Controversie broke out and before External Prosperity had through ease and wantonness corrupted the Faith as well as the Manners of Christians 3. As for matters of External Order Discipline and Government the Universall Practice of the Catholick Church is the best and safest Comment on these General Rules and Directions we have laid down in Scripture There is no doubt at all but the Apostles did appoint Governours and Rules of Order and Discipline in the Churches planted by them what these were the Christians of those dayes saw with their eyes â— in the dayly practice of the Church and therefore the Apostles in those Epistles which they wrote to their several Churches did not give them so punctual and particular an account of those matters which they so well knew before but as occasion served make only some accidental mention of these things and that in such general terms as were well enough understood by them who knew the practice of the Church in that Age but it may be cannot meerly by the force of the words which may be capable of several Senses be so certainly and demonstratively determined to any one sense by us who did not see what was done in those dayes as to avoid all possible Cavils of contentious men This has occasioned those disputes concerning Infant Baptism the several Orders and Degrees of Church Governours the Rites and ceremonies of Religious Worship and the like Those who lived in those dayes and saw what the Apostles did in these matters could not doubt of these things thought it were not in express words said that infants should be baptized with their Parents or that Bishops are a Superiour Order to Presbyters and Presbyters to Deacons or that it is lawful for the Governours of the Church to institute and appoint some significant Rites and ceremonies for the more decent and orderly Administration of Religious Offices But because there is not a precise and punctual account given of these matters in the Writings of the Apostles which there was no need of then when these things were obvious to their very Senses some perverse and unreasonable Disputers who obstinately reject all other Evidence will judge of these things just as they please themselves and alter their Opinions and Fancies as often as they please But now if there be any certain way to know what the practice of the Apostles was in these cases this is the best comment we can possibly have on such Texts as are not sufficiently plain and express without it Now me thinks any reasonable man must acknowledge that the best way to understand the Practice of the Apostles is from the Practice of the Catholick Church in succeeding Ages especially while the memory of the Apostles was fresh and the Church
Governed by Apostolical Men when we cannot reasonably suspect any Deviation from the Primitive Practice and this is the Rule which the Church of England owns in such matters and by which she rejects and confutes both the Innovations and corruptions of the Church of Rome and the wild pretences of Phanaticism So that we do in the most proper sense own the Belief and Practice of the Primitive Church to be the best means for Expounding Scripture We do not leave every man to Expound Scripture by a private Spirit as our Adversaries of the Church of Rome reproach us we adhere to the ancient Catholick Church which the Church of Rome on one side and the Phanaticks on the other have forsaken And though we reject the new invention of an infallible Judge yet we are no Friends at all to Scepticism but can give a more Rational account of our Faith then the Church of Rome can Had we no other way of understanding the sense of Scripture but by Propriety of the Language and the Grammatical construction of the Words and the scope and design of the Texts their connexion and Dependence on what goes before and what follows and such like means as we use for the understanding any other Books of humane composition I doubt not but honest and diligent Inquirers might discover the true meaning of Scripture in all the great Articles of our Faith but yet this alone is a more uncertain way and lyable to the Abuses of Hereticks and Impostors The Socinians are a famous Example what Wit and Criticism will do to pervert the plainst Text and some other Sectaries are as plain a demonstration what wâ—rk Dullness and Stupidity and Enthusiasm will make with Scripture but when we have the practice of the Catholick Church and an ancient and venerable summary of the Christian Faith which has been the common Faith of Christians in all Ages to be our Rule in Expounding Scripture though we may after all mistake the sense of some particular Texts yet we cannot be guilty of any great and dangerous mistakes This use the Church of England makes of the Catholick Church in Expounding Scripture that she Religiously maintains the ancient Catholick Faith and will not suffer any man to Expound Scriptures in opposition to the ancient Faith and Practice of the Catholick Church But though the Belief and Practice of the Catholick Church be the best means of understanding the true sense of Scripture yet we cannot affirm this of any particular Church or of the Church of any particular Age excepting the Apostolick Age or those Ages which immediately succeeded the Apostles Notwithstanding this the Church of Rome may be no good Expositor of Scripture for the Church of Rome though she usurp the name of the Catholick Church as presuming her self to be the Head and Fountain of catholick Unity yet she is but a part of the catholick Church as the Church of England and the Churches of France aind Holland are and has no more right to impose her Expositions of Scripture upon other Churches then they have to impose upon her If there happen any controversie between them it is not the Authority of either Church can decide it but this must be done by an appeal to Scripture and the sense of the Catholick Church in the first and purest Ages of it For when we say that the belief and Practice of the Catholick Church is the best means to find out the true sense of Scripture we do not mean that the Church is the Soveraign and absolute Judge of the sense of Scripture but the meaning is that those Churches which were founded by the Apostles and received the Faith immediately from them and were afterwards sor some Ages governed by Apostolical men or those who were taught by them and convers'd with them are the best Witnesses what the Doctrine of the Apostles was and therefore as far as we can be certain what the Faith of these Primitive Churches was they are the best Guides for the Expounding Scripture So that the Authority of the Church in Expounding Scripture being only the Authority of Witnesses it can reach no farther then those Ages which may reasonably be presumed to be Authentick and credible Witnesses of the Doctrines of the Apostles and therefore if we extend it to the four first general councils it is as far as we can do it with any pretence of Reason and thus far the Church of England owns the Authority of the Church and commands her Ministers to Expound the Scriptures according to the Catholick Faith owned and profess'd in those days but as for the later Ages of the church which were removed too far from the Apostles dayes to be Witnesses of their Doctrine they have no more Authority in this matter then we have at this day nor has one church any more Authority then another 3. And therefore if by the church being the means of knowing the sense and meaning of the Holy Scriptures be understood the Judgment and Sentence and Decree of the church that we must seek no farther for the reason of our Faith then the infallible Authority of the church in Expounding Scripture this also is absolutely false and absurd This is more then Christ and his Apostles assumed to themselves while they were on Earth they were indeed infallible Interpreters of Scripture but yet they never bore down their Hearers meerly with their Authority but Expounded the Scriptures and applied ancient Prophesies to their Events and took the vail off of Moses's Face and shewed them the Gospel state concealed under those Types and Figures they confirmed their Expositions of Scripture by the force of Reason and appealed to the Judgments and consciences of their Hearers whither these things were not so Christ commands the Jews nor meerly to take his own word and to rely on his Authority for the truth of what he said but to study the Scriptures themselves and the Bereans are commended for this generous temper of mind that they were more noble then those of Thessalonica for they daily search'd the Scriptures to see whither the Doctrine the Apostles preach'd were to be found there or not Now I think no Church can pretend to be more infallible then Christ and his Apostles and therefore certainly ought not to assume more to themselves then they did and if the Church of Rome or any other Church will convince us of the truth of their Expositions of Scripture as Christ and his Apostles convinc'd their Hearers that is by enlightning our Understandings and convincing our Judgments by proper Arguments we will gladly learn of them This course the Primitive Christians took as is evident in all the Writings of the ancient Fathers against Jews and Hereticks they argue from the Scriptures themselves to prove what the sense of Scripture iâ— they appeal indeed sometimes to the sense of the Catholick Church not as an infallible Judge of Scripture but as the best Witnesses of the Apostolical Doctrine Thus
found there as the Churches infallibility is But however that be after all this boast of infallibility a Papist has no more infallible Foundation for his Faith then a Protestant has nor half so much We believe the Articles of the Christian Faith because we find them plainly taught in Scripture and universally received as the sense of Scripture by the Catholick church in the best and purest Ages of it A Papist believes the Church to be Infallible because he thinks he finds it in Scripture though the Catholick church for many Ages never found it there and the greatest part of the Christian church to this day cannot find it there Now if they will but allow that a Protestant though a poor fallible Creature may reason about the sense of Scripture as well as a Papist and that the Evidence of reason is the same to both then we Protestants stand upon as firm ground as the Papists here and are at least as certain of all those Doctrines of Faith which we find in the Scripture and are ready to prove by it as they are of their Churches infallibility but then we have an additional Security that we Expound the Scriptures right which they want and that is the Doctrine and Practice of the Primitive Church which confirms all the Articles of our Faith and Rules of Worship and Discipline but gives not the least intimation that the Pope or Church of Rome was thought infallible by them and if the Primitive Church was ignorant of this which is the best witness of Apostolical Tradition it is most probable that no such thing is contained in Scripture though some mercenary Flatterers of the Pope have endeavoured to perswade the World that they found it there So that we have a greater assurance of all the Articles of our Religion from Scripture and Catholick Tradition then a Papist can have of the Churches Infallibility and yet he can have no greater assurance of any other Doctrines of Religion which he believes upon the Churches Infallibility then he has of Infallibility it self So that in the last Resolution of Faith the Protestant has much the advantage of the Papist for the Protestant resolves his Faith into the Authority of the Scriptures Expounded by the Doctrine and Practice of the Primitive Church the Papist resolves his into the Infallibility of the Church which he finds out only by Expounding Scripture by a private Spirit without the Authority of any church but that whose Authority is under dispute And as the Doctrine of Infallibility is of no use in the last Resolution of Faith so it is wholly useless in disputing with such Hereticks as we are who deny Infallibility for it is a vain thing to attempt to impose any absurd or groundless and uncatholick Doctrines upon us by the Churches infallible Authority who believe there is no such infallible Judge but are resolved to trust our own Eyes and to adhere to Scripture and the Catholick Faith of the Primitive Church in these matters And therefore the great Advocats for the Church of Rome are forced to take the same course in confuting Heresies as they call them that we do They alledge the Authority of Scripture the Authority of Fathers and Councils to justifie their Innovations and here we willingl joyn issue with them and are ready to prove that Scripture and all true Antiquity is on our side and this has been often and unanswerably proved by the learned Patrons of the Reformation But there are some very material things to be observed from hence for our present purpose For either they think this a good way to prove what they intend and to convince Gain-sayers the Authority of Scripture and Primitive Antiquity or they do not If they do not think this a good way to what purpose are there so many Volumes of Controversie written Why do they produce Scripture and Fathers and Councils to justifie the Usâ—â—pations of their Church and those new Additions they have made to the Christian Faith and Worship If this be not a good way to convince a Heretick why do they give themselves and us such an impertinent trouble If this be a good way then we are in a good way already we take that very way for our satisfaction which by their own Confession and Practice is a very proper means for the conviction of Hereticks and to discover the Truth and after the most diligent inquiries we can make we are satisfied that the Truth is on our side If the Authority of Scripture signifie any thing in this matter then it seems Hereticks who reject â—he Authority of an Infallible Judge may understand Scripâ—ure without an Infallible Interpreter by the Exercise of Reason and Judgment in studying of them otherwise why do they pretend to expound Scripture to us and to convince us by Reason and Argument what the true sense of Scripture is If the Authority of the Primitive Church and first Christian Writers be considerable as they acknowledge it is by their appeals to them then at least the present Pope or Church is not the sole infallible Judge of controversies unless they will say that we must not Judge of the Doctrine or Practice of the Primitive Church by ancient records and then Baronius his Annals are worth nothing but by the Judgement and Practice of the present Church The sum is this There is great reason to suspect that the Church of Rome her self does not believe her own Infallibility no more than we Protestants do for if she does she ought not to suffer her Doctors to dispute with Hereticks from any other Topick but her own Authority when they vie Reasons and Arâ—uments with us and dispute from Scripture and Antiquity they appeal from the infallibility of the present church to every mans private Reason and Judgment as much as any Protestant does and if the Articles of the Christian Faith may be establish'd by Scripture and Antiquity without an infallible Judge as they suppose they may be by their frequent attempts to do it this plainly overthrows the necessity of an infallible Judge In a word not to take notice now how weak and groundless this pretence of Infallibility is it is evident that it is a very useless Doctrine for those who believe the churches Infallibility have no greater assurance of their Faith then we have who do not believe it and those who do not believe the churches Infallibility can never be confuted by it So that it can neither establish any mans Faith nor confute any Heresies that is it is of no use at all The Church of England Reverences the Authority of the Primitive Church as the best witness of the Apostolical Faith and practice but yet resolves her Faith at last into the Authority of the Scriptures She receives nothing for an Article of Faith which she does not find plainly enough taught in Scripture but it is a great confirmation of her interpretation of Scripture that the Primitive church owned the
or Apostolical men or has lost the Memory or Records of its first Plantation may yet have very certain means of knowing the true sense of Scripture from the Scripture it self and the Doctrine and Practice of Apostolical and Primitive Churches and a Church which has the most visible uninterrupted Succession from Christ and his Apostles may be so far from being an infallible Interpreter of Scripture that she may be very corrupt and erroneous her self if she forsake the Apostolical Tradition contained in the Writings of the new Testament and Expounded by the Catholick Faith and Practice of the first Churches as we know the Church of Rome has done which is so far from being an infallible Church that we believe her to be the most corrupt Church in the World And thus I think we are prepared to venture upon the last Clause of this Paper wherein the whole force of the Argument such as it is is turned upon the poor Protestant Churches But I doubt sayes the Author of this Paper whither or no the Protestant Church can make out this continual visible Succession and desire to be informed The sting of which Argument lies in this that we Protestants have no certain way of knowing the true seâ—nse and meaning of Scripture because we cannot prove the continual visible Succession of our Church from Christ unto this day and therefore we ought to go over to the church of Rome who has this visible Succession and receive all her Dictates as infallible Oracles But for Answer to this consider 1. That suppose the Protestant Church could not make out such a continual visible Succession yet we may understand the Scriptures very well without it and need not go to the church of Rome to Expound Scripture for us as I have already shewn at large Had he proved that we had been no church for want of a visible Succession of church Officers or that our Religion were a Novelty which was never heard of it in the world before Luther this had been something more to the purpose but to pretend that we cannot understand the Scriptures for want of a visible Succession is such a loose and inconsequent way of reasoning as a poor fallible Protestant would be ashamed of 2. But pray why can't the Protestant Church of England prove her continual visible Succession from Christ till this day as well as the church of Rome Here was a Christian Church planted in this Nation as very good Historians say as early as at Rome and it has continued here ever since to this day when Austin the Monk came over to England he found here a company of resolute Brittish Bishops and Monks who would not submit to the Usurpations of Rome and the English and Brittish Churches under several Changes and Alterations have continued to this day with a visible Succession of Christian Bishops and what better Succession can Rome shew than this I suppose no Roman Catholick will disown the Succession of the church of England till the Reformation and I pray how came we to lose our Succession then Did the Reformation of those Abuses and Corruptions which had crept into the Church unchurch us Just as much as a man ceases to be the same man when he is cured of some mortal Disease Did not the Church of England consist of the same Persons before the Reformation and after A great many indeed disowned the Reformation but were not all those Persons who were so active and zealous in the Reformation formerly of the Roman communion And did they lose their Succession too when they became Reformers When a Church consists of the same Bishops Priests and People which she had before though she have not all the same that she had when she retains the same ancient Catholick and Apostolick Faith which she did before only renounces some Errors and Innovations which she owned before how does this forfeit her Succession The Church of England is the very same Church now since the Reformation which she was before and therefore has the very same Succession though not the same Errors to this day that ever she had and that I think is as good a Succession as the Church of Rome has There are but two things to be considered in the case of Succession Either a Succession of Church Officers or a Succession of the Faith and Doctrines of the Church 1. As for a Succession of Church Officers we have the same that the Church of Rome has Those English Bishops who embraced the Reformation received their Orders in the Communion of the Church of Rome and therefore they had as good Orders as any are in the Church of Rome and these were the Persons who Consecrated other Bishops and so in Succession to this day For as for the story of the Nags-head Ordination that is so transparent a Forgery invented many years after to Reproach the Reformation that I presume no sober Roman Catholick will insist on it But we are Hereticks and Schismaticks and this forfeits our Orders and our Succession together But 1. This charge ought first to be proved against us that we are Hereticks and Schismaticks we deny and abhor both the name and thing and if we be not Hereticks and Schismaticks as we are sure we are not and as the Church of Rome can never prove us to be then according to their own Confession our Orders must be good 2. However be we Hereticks or Schismaticks or what ever they please to call us how does this destroy our Orders and Succession The Catholick Church would not allow in former Ages that Heresie or Schism destroyed the validity of Orders St. Jerome disputes against this at large in his Book Contra Luciferianos And St. Austin allows the Donatists Bishops to have valid Orders though they were Schismaticks and therefore that the Sacraments adminstred by them were valid And indeed if Heresie will destroy Orders and Succession the Church of Rome will be as much to seek for their Orders and Succession as we are which by their own Confession have had several Heretical Popes and no body knows how many Bishops Ordained by them 2. As for Succession of Doctrine which is as considerable to the full as Succession of Orders the great Articles of our Faith are not only plainly contained in Scripture but have been delivered down to us through all ages of the Church by an uninterrupted Succession The Church of Rome her self in her greatest Degeneracy did own all that we do in pure matters of Faith When we reformed the Church we did not make a new Religion but only separated the old Faith from new and corrupt Additions and therefore the quarrel of the Church of Rome with us is not that we believe any thing which they do not believe but that we do not believe all that they would have us The Doctrine of the Church of England is truly Primitive and Catholick taught by Christ and his Apostles owned by the Primitive Church and
Saints mentioned by St. Jude is not intirely delivered in the Scripture but we must seek for the rest in the Traditions of the Church Which Traditions say they are to be received as a part of the Rule of Faith with the same Religious Reverence that we do the Holy Scripture Now though this is not really the bottom of their heart as will appear before I have done but they finally rest for their satisfaction in matters of Faith somewhere else yet this being plausibly pretended by them in their own Justification that they follow Tradition and in their Accusations of us that we foresake Tradition I shall briefly let all our People see who are not willing to be deceived what they are to judge and say in this business of Tradition About which a great noise is made as if we durst not stand to it and as if they of the Roman Church stedfastly kept it without any variation neither of which is true I shall plainly shew in this short Discourse The meaning of the Word Which for clearness sake shall begin with the meaning of the word TRADITION which in English is no more than delivering unto another and by a Figure signifies the matter which is delivered and among Christians the Doctrine of our Religion delivered to us And there being two wayes of delivering Doctrines to us either by writing or by word of mouth it signifies either of them indifferently the Scriptures as you shall see presently being Traditions But custom hath determined this word to the last of these wayes and distinguished Tradition from Scriptures or writings at least from the Holy Writings and made it signifie that which is not delivered in the Holy Scriptures or Writings For though the Scripture be Tradition also and the very first Tradition and the Fountain of all true and legitimate Antiquity yet in common Language Traditions now are such ancient Doctrines as are conveyed to us some other way whither by word of mouth as some will have it from one Generation to another or by humane Writings which are not of the same authority with the Holy Scriptures How to judge of them Now there is no better way to judge aright of such Traditions then by considering these four things First The Authors of them whence they come Secondly the matter of them Thirdly Their Authority Fourthly The means by which we come to know they derive themselves from such Authors as they pretend unto and consequently have any authority to demand admission into our belief 1. For the first of these every body knows and confesses that all Traditions suppose some Author from whom they originally come and who is the diliverer of those Doctrines to Christian people who being told by the present Church or any person in it that such and such Doctrines are to be received though not contained in the Holy Scriptures because they are Traditions ought in Conscience to inquire from whom those Traditions come or who first delivered them By which means they will be able to judge what credit is to be given to them when it is once cleared to them from what Authors they really come Now whatsoever is delivered to us in Christianity comes either from Christ or from his Apostles or from the Church either in General or in part or from private Doctors in the Church There is nothing now called a Tradition in the Christian World but proceeds from one or from all of these four Originals 2. And the mater which they deliver to us which is next to be considered is either concerning that Faith and godly life which is necessary to Salvation or concerning Opinions Rites Ceremonies Customs and things belonging to Order Both which as I said may be conveyed either by writing or without writing by the Divine Writings or by Humane Writings though these two wayes are not alike certain 3. Now it is evident to every understanding that things of both sorts which are delivered to us have their Authority from the credit of the Author from whence they first come If that be Divine their Authority is Divine if it be onely Humane their Authority can be no more And among Humane Authors if their Credit be great the Authority of what they deliver it great if it be little its Authority is little and accordingly must be accepted with greater or lesser Reverence Upon which score whatsoever can be made appear to come from Christ it hath the highest authority and ought to be received with absolute submission to it because he is the Son of God And likewise whatsoever appears to have been delivered by the Apostles in his Name hath the same Authority they being his Ministers sent by Him as He was by God the Father and indued with a Divine Power which attested unto them In like manner whatsoever is delivered by the Church hath the same Authority which the Church hath which though it be not equal to the foregoing the Church having no such Divine Power nor infallible Judgement as the Apostles had yet is of such weight and moment that it ought to be reverenced next to theirs I mean the sense of the whole Church which must be acknowledged also to be of greater or lesser Authority as it was nearer or farther off from the times of the Apostles What was delivered by their immediate Followers ought to weigh so much with us as to have the greatest Humane Authority and to be looked upon as little less then Divine The Universal consent of the next Generation is an Authority approaching as near to the former As the Ages do one to another But what is delivered in latter times hath less humane Authority though pretending to come but without proof from more early dayes and hath no Authority at all if it contradict the sense of the Church when it was capable to be better acquainted with the mind of Christ and of his Apostles As for particular Churches their Authority ought to be reverenced by every Member of them when they profess to deliver sincerely the sense of the Church Universal and when they determine as they have power to do Controversies of Faith or decree Rites and Ceremonies not contrary to GOD's Word in which every one ought to acquiesce But we cannot say the same of that which comes from any private Doctor in the Church Modern or Ancient which can have no greater Authority than he himself was of but is more or less credible according as he was more or less diligent knowing and strictly religious 4. But to all this it is necessary that it do sufficiently appear that such Doctrines do really come from those Authours whose Traditions they pretend to be This is the great and the only thing about which there is any question among sober and judicious persons How to be sufficiently assured that any thing which is not delivered unto us in the Scriptures doth certainly come for instance from CHRIST or his holy Apostles For in this all Christians are
it is to no more purpose to shew us the word Tradition in other places of St. Paul's Writings particularly in the third Chapter of the same Epistle v. 6. where by Tradition St Chrysâ—ston understands the Apostles Example which he had given them and so it follows v. 7. For your selves know how you ought to follow us c or it may refer to the commandment he had given them in his former Epistle 4. 11. which the Reader may be pleased to compare with this but cannot with any colour be expounded to signifie any Doctrine of Faith about which the Roman Church now contends with us For it is plain it hath respect to their good manners and orderly living for the information of which we need go no where but to the holy Scriptures wherein we are taught full enough how we ought to walk and please GOD in all things The same may be said of that place 1 Cor. 11. 2. Now I praise you Brethren that you remember me in all things and keep the Traditions or Ordinances as we render it or Precepts as the vulgar Latine it self hath it as I have delivered them unto you For we are so observant of what he hath delivered that we are confident if Saint Paul were now alive and in this Church he would praise us as he doth the Corinthians for keeping the Traditions as be delivered them and on the contrary reprove and condemn the Roman Church for not keeping them as they were first delivered And we have good ground for this confidence there being an instance in that very Chapter which demonstrates our fidelity in preserving the very first Traditions and their unfaithfulness in letting them go For he tells us v. 23. that he had delivered to them what he had received of the Lord and that which he received and delivered was about the whole Communion as you may read there and in the following verses 24 25. in both kinds the Cup as well as the Bread Thus he saith the Lord appointed it and thus he delivered it and this Tradition we keep intire as he received it of the Lord and delivered it to his Church in this Epistle which is a part of the holy Scripture whereas they do not keep it but have broken this Divine Tradition and give the Communion of Christ's Body and Blood otherwise than St. Paul delivered keeping the Cup from the People By which I desire all that love the Lord Jesus in sincerity to judge which Church keeps closest to the Apostolical Tradition foâ— so St. Paul calls this Doctrine of the Communion in both kinds that which he delivered or left as a Tradition with them they that stick to what is unquestionably the Apostolical Doctrine or they that leave it to follow those Doctrines or Presumptions rather which at the best are very dubious and uncertain And farther I desire all that read this Paper to consider whither it be reasonable to think that those Riâ—es which have no Authority in the holy Scripture but were instituted perhaps by the Apostles have been kept pure and uncorrupâ—ed according to their first intention when these sacred Rites for instance the holy Eâ—charist are not preserved intire which are manifestly ordained in the holy Writings And so much may serve for the first thing for it would be too long to explain all the rest of the places of holy Scripâ—ure which they are wont to alledge though the word Tradition be not mentioned in them to give a colour to their present pretences how pertinently may be judged by these places now considered II. Secondly then That Word of God which was once unwritten being now written we acknowledge our selves to be much indebted to the Church of God in all foregoing Ages which hath preserved the Scriptures and delivered them down to us as his Word which we ought to do unto those that shall succeed us as our Church teacheth us in its Twentieth Article where the Church is affirmed to be a Witness and a keeper of holy Writ This Tradition we own it being universal continued uninterrupted and undenied Though in truth this is Tradition in another sense of the word not signifying the Doctrine delivered unto us but the manner and means of its delivery And therefore if any Member of our Church be pressed by those of the Romish Perswasion with this Argument for their present Traditions that Scripture it self is come to us by Tradition let them answer thus Very right it is so and we thank God for it therefore let this be no part of our dispute it being a thing presupposed in all Discourses about Religion a thing agreed among all Christian people that we read the Word of GOD when we read the holy Scriptures Which being delivered to us and accepted by us as his Word we see no necessity of any other Tradition or Doctrine which is not to be found there or cannot be proved from thence for they tell us they are able to make even the men of God wise unto Salvation And if they press you again and say How do you know that some Books are Canonical and others not is it not by a constant Tradition Answer them again in this manner Yes this is true also and would to GOD you would stand to this universal Tradition and receive no other Books but what have been so delivered But know withal that this universal Tradition of the Books of Scripture unto which you have added several Apocryphal Writings which have not been constantly delivered as tâ—â—se we receive is no part of the Tradition or Doctrine delivered That is no Doctrine distinct from the Scriptures but only the instrument or means of conveying that Doctrine unto us In short it is the fidelity of the Church with whom the Canon of Scripture was deposed but is no more a Doctrine not written in the Scripture then the Tradition or delivery of the Code or Book of the Civil Law is any Opinion or Law not written in that Code And we are more assured of the fidelity of the Church herein then the Civilians can be assured of the Faithfulness of their Predecessours in preserving and delivering the Books of their Law to them because these holy Books were alwayes kept with a greater care then any other Books whatsoever and in the acceptance of them also we find there was a great caution used that they might not be deceived all Christians looking upon them to be of such importance that all Religion they thought was concerned in them Of which this is an Argument that they who sought to destroy the Christian Religion in the Primitive times sought nothing more then to destroy the Bible Which they were wont to demand of those who were suspected to be Christians to be delivered up to them that they might burn it And according as men behaved themselves in this trial so they were reputed to be Christians or not Christians And the Traditours as they were called that is they who delivered
the holy Scriptures into the hands of the Pagans were look'd upon by Christians as men that were content to part with their Religion For which there could be no reason but that they thought Christian Religion to be therein contained and to be betrayed by those who delivered them to be burnt By which I have proved more then I intended in this part of my Discourse that in the holy Scriptures the whole Will of God concerning our Salvation is contained Which is the true Question between us and the Church of Romeâ— Not whither the Scripture be delivered to us as the Word of GOD or no in this our People ought to tell them we are all agreed but whither they have been delivered to us as the whole Will of GOD. And from that Argument now mentioned and many more we conclude that Universal Tradition having directed us unto these Books and no other they direct us sufficiently without any other Doctrines unto GOD and to our everlasting rest And if they urge you farther and say that the very Credit of the Scripture depends upon Tradition tell them that it is a Speech not to be endured if they mean thereby that it gives the Scripture its authority and if they mean less we are agreed as hath been already said for it is to say that Man gives authority to GOD's Word Whereas in truth the holy Scriptures are not therefore of Divine Authority because the Church hath delivered them so to be but the Church hath delivered them so to be because it knew them to be of such authority And if the Church should have conceived or taught otherwise of these Writings then as of the undoubted Oracles of GOD she would have erred damnably in such a Tradition I shall sum up what hath been said in this second particular in a few words Christ and his Apostles at first taught the Church by word of mouth but afterward that which they preach'd was by the commandment of GOD commited to writing and delivered unto the Church to be the ground of our Faith Which is no more then Irenaeus hath said in express words L. 3. C. 1. speaking of them by whom the Gospel came unto all Nations Which they then preached but afterward by the Will of GOD delivered unto us in the Scriptures to be in time to come the Foundation and Pillar of our Faith III. And farther we likewise acknowledge that the sum and substance of the Christian Religion contained in the Scriptures hath been delivered down to us even from the Apostles dayes in other wayes or forms besides the Scriptures For instance in the Baptismal Vow in the Creed in the Prayers and Hymns of the Church Which we may call Traditions if we please but they bring down to us no new Doctrine but only deliver in an abridgment the same Christianity which we find in the Scriptures Upon this there is no need that I should enlarge but I proceed farther to affirm IV. That we reverently receive also the unanimous Tradition or Doctrine of the Church in all Ages which determines the meaning of the holy Scripture and makes it more clear and unquestionable in any point of Faith wherein we can find it hath declared its sense For we look upon this Tradition as nothing else but the Scripture unfolded not a new thing which is not in the Scripture but the Scripture explained and made more evident And thus some part of the Nicene Creed may be called a Tradition as it hath expresly delivered unto us the sense of the Church of GOD concerning that great Article of our Faith That JESUS CHRIST is the Son of GOD. Which they teach us was alwayes thus understood the Son of GOD begotten of his Father before all worlds and of the same substance with the Father But this Tradition supposes the Scripture for its ground and delivers nothing but what the Fathers assembled at Nice believed to be contained there and was first fetch'd from thence For we find in Theodoret L. 1. C. 6. that the famous Emperour Constantine admonished those Fathers in all their Questions and Debates to consult only with these heavenly inspired Writings Because the Evangelical and Apostolical Books and the Oracles of the old Prophets do evidently instruct us what to thiâ—k in Divine matters This is so clear a Testimony that in those dayes they made this compleat Rule of their Faith whereby they ended Controversies which was the reason that in several other Synods we find they were wont to lay the Bible before them and that there is nothing in the Nicene Creed but what is to be found in the Bible that Cardinal Bellarmine hath nothing to reply to it but this Constantine was indeed a great Emperour but no great Doctor Which is rather a Scoff than an Answer and casts a scorn not only upon him but upon the great Council who as the same Theodoret witnesseth assented unto that speech of Constantine So it there follows in these words That most of the Synod were obedient to what he had discoursed and embraced both mutual Concord and sound Doctrine And accordingly St. Hilary a little after extols his Son Constantius for this that he adhered to the Scriptures and blames him only for not attending to the true Catholick sense of them His words are these in his little Book which he delivered to Constantius I truly admire thee O Lord Constantius the Emperour who desirest a Faith according to what is writen They pretended to no other in those dayes but as he speaks a little after look'd upon him that refused this as Antichrist It was only required that they should receive their Faith out of God's Books not merely according to the words of them but according to their true meaning because many spake Scripture without Scripture and pretended to Faith without Faith as his words are and herein Catholick and constant Tradition was to guide them For whatsoever was contrary to what the whole Church had received and held from the beginning could not in reason be thought to be the meaning of that Scripture which was alledged to prove it And on the other side the Church pretended to no more then to be a Witness of the received sense of the Scriptures which were the bottom upon which they built this Faith Thus I observe Hegesippus saith in Euseb his History L. 4. C. 22. that when he was at Rome he met with a great many Bishops and that he received the very same Doctrine from them all And then a little after tells us what that was and whence they derived it saying That in every succession of Bishops and iâ— every City so they held as the Law preached and as the Prophets and as the Lord. That is according to the Doctrine of the Old and New Testament I shall conclude this particular with a pregnant passage which I remember in a famous Divine of our Church Dr. Jacksons in his Treatise of the Catholick Church Chap. 22. who writes
Faith of Christ they shall not teach nor any thing at all whereby the unskilful multitude may be inflaâ—ed either to the study of Novelty or to Contention VI. But though nothing may be taught as a piece of Religion which hath not the forenamed Original yet I must add that those things which have been universally believed and not contrary to Scripture though not written at all there nor to be proved from thence we do receive as pious Opinions For instance the perpetual Virginity of the Mother of GOD our Saviour which is so likely a thing and so universally received that I do not see why we should not look upon it as a genuine Apostolical Tradition VII I have but one thing more to adde which is that we allow also the Traditions of the Church about matters of Order Rites and Ceremonies Only we do not take them to be parts of GOD's worship and if they be not appointed in the holy Scriptures we believe they may be altered by the same or the like authority with that which ordained them So our Church hath excellently and fully resolved us concerning such matters in the XXXIV Article of Religion where there are three things asserted concerning such Traditions as these First It is not necessary that Traditions and Ceremonies they are the very first words of the Article be in all places one or utterly alike for at all times they have been divers and may be changed according to the diversities of countries times and mens manners so that nothing be ordained against God's Word But then to prevent all disorders and confusions that men might make in the Church by following their own private fancies and humours the next thing which is decreed is this Secondly That whosoever through his own private judgment willingly and purposelie doth openlie break the Traditions and Ceremonies of the Church which be not repugnant to the Word of GOD and be ordained and approved by common authority ought to be rebuked openlie that others may fear to do the like as he that offendeth against the common Order of the church and hurteth the Authority of the Magistrate and woundeth the consciences of the weak Brethren Lastlie It is there declared That every particular or National church hath authority to ordain change and abolish ceremonies or Rites of the church ordained only by man's authority so that all things be done to edifying This is sufficient to shew what we believe concerning Traditions about matters of Order and Decency VIII As for what is delivered in matters of Doctrine or Order by any private Doctor in the church or by any particular church it appears by what hath been said that it cannot be taken to be more then the private Opinion of that man or the particular Decree of that church and can have no more authority then they have that is cannot oblidge all christians unless it be contained in the holy Scripture Now such are the Traditions which the Roman church would impose upon us and impose upon us after a strange fashion as you shall see in the Second Part of this Discourse unto which I shall proceed presently when I have left with you this brief Reflection on what hath been said in this First Part. Our people may hereby be admonished not to suffer themselves to be deceived and abused by words and empty names without their sense and meaning Nothing is more common then this especially in the business of Traditions About which a great stir is raised and it is commonly given out that we refuse all Traditions Then which nothing is more false for we refuse none truly so called that is Doctrines delivered by Christ or his Apostles No we refuse nothing at all because it is unwritten but merely because we are not sure it is delivered by that Authority to which we ought to submit Whatsoever is delivered to us by our LORD and his Apostles we receive as the very word of God which we think is sufficiently declared in the holy Scriptures But if any can certainly prove by any Authority equal to that which brings the Scriptures to us that there is any thing else delivered by them we receive that also The Controversie will soon be at an end For we are ready to embrace it when any such thing can be produced Nay we have that reverence for those who succeeded the Apostles that what they have unanimously delivered to us as the sense of any doubtful place we receive it and seek no farther There is no dispute whither or no we should entertain it To the Decrees of the Church also we submit in matters of Decency and Order yea and acquiesce in its authority when it determines doubtful Opinions But we cannot receive that as a Doctrine of Christ which we know is but the Tradition of man nor keep the Ordinances of the ancient Church in matters of Decency so unalterably as never to vary from them because they themselves did not intend them to be of everlasting obligation As appears by the changes that have been made in several times and places even in some things which are mentioned in the holy Scriptures being but Customs suted to those Ages and Countries In short Traditions we do receive but not all that are called by that name Those which have sufficient Authority but not those which are imposed upon us by the sole authority of one particular Church assuming a power oâ—er all the rest And so I come to the Second Part. PART II. What Traditions we do not receive AND in the first place we do not believe that there is any Tradition which contains another Word of God which is not in the Scripture or cannot be proved from thence In this consists the main difference between us and them of the Romish Perswasion who affirm that Divine Truth which we are all bound to receive to be partly written partly delivered by word of mouth without writting Which is not only the affirmation of the Council of Trent but delivered in more express tâ—rms in the Bresace to the Roman Catechism drawn up by their order where we finde these words towards the conclusion of it The whole Doctrine to be delivered to the faithfull is contained in the Word of GOD which Word of GOD is distributed into Scripture and Tradition This is a full and plain declaration of their mind with which we can by no means agree for divers unanswerable reasons 1. Not only because the Scriptures testifie to their own perfection which they assirm to be so great as to be able to compleat the divinest men in the Church of CHRIST in all points of heavenly wisdom 2 Tim. 3. 15. 16. 17. but 2. Because the constant Tradition of the Church even of the Roman Church anciently is that in the Scriptures we may find all that is necessary to be known and believed to salvation I must not fill up this Paper with Authorities to this purpose but we avow this unto the people of
our Church for a certain Truth which hath been demonstrated by many of our Writers who have shewn that the ancient Doctors universally speak the language of St. Baul 1. Cor. 4. 7. Not to think above that which is written I will mention only these memorable words of Tertullian who is as earnest an Advocat as any for ritual Traditions but having to deal with Hermogenes in a question of Faith Whither all things in the beginning were made of nothing urges him in this manner I have no where yet read that all things were made out of a subject matter If it be written let those of Hermogenes his shop shew it if it be not written let them fear thâ—◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is alloted to such â—â— adde or take away The very same Answer should our People make to those that would have them receive any thing as an Article of Faith which is not delivered to them by this truly Apostolical Church wherein we live If it he written let us see it if it be not take heed how you adde to the undoubted Word of GOD. We receive the holy Scriptures as able to make us wise to Salvation So they themselves tell us and so runs the true Tradition of the Church which you of the Romish perswasion have forsaken but we adhere unto 3 And we have this farther reason so to do because if part of God's Word had been written and part unwritten we cannot but believe there would have been some care taken in the written Word not onely to let us know so much but also inform us whither we should resort to find it and how we should know it if it be absolutely necessary for us to be acquainted with it But there is no such notice nor any such directions left us nor can any man give us any certain Rule to follow in this matter but onely this To examine all Traditions by the Scripture as the supreme Rule of Faith and to aâ—mit only such as are conâ—ormable thereunto 4. For which we have still this farther reason that no sooner were they that first delivered and received the holy Scriptures gone out of the world but we find men began to adde their own fancies unto the Catholick Truth which made it absolutely necessary to keep to the Tradition in the holy Scriptures all other growing uncertain This is observed by Hegesippus himself in Euseb l. 3. c. 32 that the Church remained a chast Virgin and the spouse of Christ till the Sacred Quire of the Apostles and the next Generation of them who had had the honour to be their Auditonrs were extinct and then there began a plain Conspiracie of impious atheistical errour by the fraud of Teachers who delivered other Doctrine Which was a thing Saint Paul feared even in his own life time about the Church of Corinth 2 Cor 1. 3. lest the Devil like a wily Serpent should beguil them and corrupt their minds from the original simplicity of the Christian Doctrine wherein they were first instructed And if it were attempted then it was less difficult and therefore more endeavoured afterward as shall appear anone by plain History which tells how several persons pretended they received this and that from an Apostle Some of which Traditions were presently rejected others received and afterwards found to be impostures Which shews there was so much false dealing in the case that it was hard for men to know what was truely Apostolical in those dayes if it came to them this way onely and therefore impossible to be discerned by us now at this great distance of time from the Apostles who we know delivered the true Faith but we have no reason to rely upon mere Tradition without Scripture for any part of that Faith when we see what Cheats were put upon men by that means even then when they had better helps to detect them then we have It is true the Fathers sometime urge Tradition a as proof of what they say But we must know that the Scriptures were not presently communicated among some barbarous Nations and there were some Hereticks also who either denied the Scriptures or some part of them and in these cases it was necessary to appeal to the Tradition that was in the Church and to convince them by the Doctrine taught every where by all the Bishops But that mark this I pray you of which they convinced them by this Argument was nothing but what is taught in the Scripture 5. With which we cannot suffer any thing to be equalled in authority unless we would see it confirmed by the same or equal Testimony This is the great reason of all why we cannot admit any unwritten Traditions to be a part of the Word of GOD which we are bound to believe because we cannot find any truths so delivered to us as those in the holy Scriptures They come to us with as full a Testimony as can be desired of their Divine Original but so do none of those things which are now obtruded on us by the Romish Church under the name of Tradition or unwritten Word of God For the Primitive Church had the very first Copies and authentick Writings of those Books called the New Testament delivered by the Apostles own hands to them And those Book confirm the Scriptures of the Old Testament and they were both delivered to Posterity by that Primitive Church witnessing from whom they received them who carefully kept them as the most precious Treasure so that this written Word hath had the general approbation and testimony of the whole Church of Christ in every Age untill this day witnessing that it is Divine And it hath been the constant business of Doctors of the Church to expound this Word of GOD to the People and their Books are full of Citations out of the Scripture all agreeing in substance with what we now read in them Nay the very Enemies of christianity such as Celsus Porphyry Julian never questioned but these are the Writings of which the Apostles were the Authors and which they delivered Besides the Marks they have in themselves of a Divine Spirit which indited them they all tending to breed and preserve in men a sense of GOD and to make them truly vertuous Not one word of which can be said for any of those unwritten Traditions which the Roman Church pretend to be a part of GOD's Word For we have no testimony of them in the holy Scriptures Nor doth the Primitive church affirm she received them from the Apostles as she did the written Word Nor have they the perpetual consent and general approbation of the whole church ever since Nor are they frequently quoted as the words of Scripture are upon all occasions by the Doctors of the Church Nor do we find them to be the Doctrine which was constantly taught the People Nor is there any notice taken of them by the enemies of our Faith whose Assaults are all against the Scriptures In short they are
first 600. years 1. By Usurpation upon the Rights of other Churches every degree of Exaltation gained being the depression and diminution of them till all power was in a manner swallowed up by the Papal ambition and none left to any oâ—her which was not dependent hereupon in its Original and altogether precarious in its administration So that here alone it must be immediately derived from Christ but to all others by commission from Him Thus in the choice of the chief Governours of the Church all must await his consent and confirmation where he does not alone forcibly obtrude them and must pay for it a round sum for an acknowledgement at their entrance and an after Tributary Pension out of their income and take a formal Oath of subjection at their admittance and own their own Authority from his Delegation and be lyable to have their sentences reversed at his pleasure and flee as far as his Judicatory and stand to the tryal of it when he is pleased to call any cause to himself Nay if a controversie arise between him and any Prince or State the whole Kindom or Nation shall lie at once under his Interdict the Clergy be with-held from the exercise of their Function and the People from the benefit of publick Divine Worship and Sacraments Of these and such like effects of the plenitude of Apostolick Power so much talkt of lately they would do well to shew us any thing like a Plea from Scripture or Antiquity within the bounds forementioned or for some Ages after in the greater part certainly so great a change could not be effected without some notice and complaints struglings and contentions of which Church History is fâ—ll Their early Faith spoken of throughout the world in St. Pauls time The eminent Zeal of the first Bishops of that Church most of whom if we may credit the account generally received of them sealed to the former with their bloud Their continued constancy in the Orthodox Profession thereof amidst the corruptions or defections of so many others particularly in the time of the Arrian Persecution The concurrent opinion of the Foundation of their Church being laid by the two chief Apostles St. Peter and St. Paul and the honour of the Imperial Seat wherein they were placed c. gave them great repute and advantagious recommendation in those first Ages None will much contend with them about priority of Order or Precedence But when the preheminence of the first Bishop came to be improved into a Patriarchate and that swelled into the Title of the Universal Bishop which a S. Greg. l. 4 Reg. Ep. 32. Absit à cordibus Christianornm nomen islud blasphemiae in quod omnium Sacerdotum honor adimitur dum ab uno sibi demenâ—er arrogatur c. Et alibi in Epist passim St. Gregory so severely condemned in the Bishop of Constantinople and that at last grew into the stile of the sole Vicar of Christ and Soveraign Monarch of the whole Church when the interposition of a Friendly and Brotherly Arbitration which all persons in distress or under the apprehensions of injury are apt to flee unto and amplifie made way by degrees for the challenge of an ordinary Jurisdiction and that at first from the pretence of Canonical priviledge to that Divine Right and Sanction and then to prevent all scruple about its determinations these must be back'd with the vindication of an infallible conduct When instead of that charitable support they at first readily bestowed on other Churches in their distress they now made use of this power to rob them of what was left taking the advantage of the poverty and oppression of some under the common Enemy or the confusion of others through Domestick distractions to raise themselves out of their spoils then no wonder if other Churches complain and strugle under the yoke which they could not presently or easily throw off Indeed had not this claim of the Church and Bishop of Roâ—e risen to such an extravagant height in the arrogance of its pretended Title and been strained to that excess in the exercise of its assumed Authority so as not to leave it in the power of other churches to take all due and necessary care of their own members or provide for them all needful supplies these might more easily have born their usurpation of more power then ever they could prove belonged to them They that have learnt the Humility of Christs School and who are more concern'd to perform their Duty then vindicate their Priviledge and know how much safer it is to obey then command and easier to be Governed then to Govern will not be much moved at what others fondly assume knowing still that the more difficult account awaits them But then this power became most intolerable when it was made use of to purposes so much worse then it self which were beside the former 2. The weakning of the power of Temporal Princes and disturbing the Civil Rights of men a Cracanthorp's defence of Constantine and against the Popes temporal Monarchy Although our blessed Saviour assured Pilate his Kingdom was not of this world yet his pretended Vicar here on earth can hardly say so for beside the Temporal Dominions unto which he hath entitled himself a Soveraign Prince there are few other Kingdoms or States on this side of the world in which he hath not or had not almost as great a share of the Government as their immediate Princes at least so far as to prescribe bounds to their Administrations and subject in great measure all Laws and Persons to his Foreign Courts Jurisdiction and Decrees yea their Purses to his Exactions and upon the least dispute hath withdrawn so great a number of his immediate dependants who scarce own any other Governours and raised so many disturbances that great Princes and States have been forced at last to yield Not to mention the Arrogance it at length grew up unto in dethroning Princes giving their Kingdoms to others authorizing their Subjects to rebel against them or all wayes to oppose them and what oft follows if not expressed to murder them as in their late Sentence against some of our Neighbour Princes But before much of this may be seen in the long contentions between some of the Western Emperours particularly Henry the Third and Fourth and the Popes as we have them discribed in their own Authors b Sigonius de regno Italiae Also to go no farther their various contests with several of our Kings especially Henry the second and the almost continual complaints in all our Parliaments before the Reformation of the encroachments made by them upon the Civil Rights of Prince and Subject by vexatious and chargeable suits and appeals as far as Rome by Insolencies and diverse Rapines committed under the shelter of their protection and defended from due punishment and by their extravagant Extortions c. abundantly prove Now though these Usurpations grew by degrees and were practised
first General Councils are received with great Veneration and a particular a In libro canonum in Synodo Londinensi an 1571. titulo de concionatoribus Imprimis videbunt ne quid unquam doceant pro concione quod a populoreligiose teneri credi velint 〈◊〉 quod consentaneum sit doctrinae Veteris Novi Testamenti quodquo ex illa ipsa doctrina catholici Patres Veteres Episcopi collegerint Injunction was laid upon its Ministers to press upon none the necessary belief of any Doctrine but what may be proved from Scripture and the generall current of the Expositions of the Fathers thereupon So carefull it hath been in all points to keep within the bounds of catholick Principles in those first instilled into its young Disciples in the catechisms and in those delivered in its Articles to be subscribed by such to whom it entrusts any Office that the positive part of them will hardly be disowned by our very Adversaries and can scarce appear otherwise to any then the common Faith of all christians of Orthodox repute in all Ages And for other determinations in the Negative she only declares thereby how little concerned she is to receive or own the false or corrupt additions to the first unalterable Rule No church hath professed and evidenced a more awful and tender regard to Antiquity next to the express Word of GOD. Both which she oft appeals to desires to be ruled by and where their footsteps are not sufficiently clear chooses not to impose upon her own Children nor censure her Neighbours keeps within the most safe and modest boundaries is not forward in determining nice and intricate disputes which have perplexed and confounded many in their hasty and bold Positions particularly about the Divine Decrees and such like sublime Points In which few understand where the main stress of the Controversie lies It may be none can comprehend the depth of the matters upon which the Decision ought to grounded But alas how many have been forward to lay down and fiercely contend for on each side their private opinions herein as the first Rudiments of Theology to be placed in their very Creeds or Catechisms and so a foundation must be laid for endless Contests and Divisions But most cautious hath our Church been in not laying such occasions to fall in the way of any So that both sorts of Adversaries have made their complaints against her for not being positive and particularly in such Declarations though none can charge her justly with defect in any point of Faith so owned in the best Ages of the Church 2. As clear and unexceptionable hath been her proceeding in Church Government preserving that form which from all Testimonies of Antiquity hath continued in the Church from the very Apostles under the conduct and happy Influence of which Christianity hath been propagated and continued throughout the World whatever different measures some other Reformed Churches have taken whither forc'd by necessity or swayed by particular inclination or prejudice The Church of England kept up the universally received distinct prime Orders of Bishops Priests and Deacons not desiring to censure others who can best answer for themselves but endeavouring to confine her self to what was most Canonical and Regular and to shew how little affected she was to alteration from any establishment except in notorious corruptions and abuses And how necessary she thought due Order and Subordination in the Church to prevent Schisms and Heresies and to give the greater Authority and advantage to her Ministrations and finally to free her self from all suspicion of irregularity in her Succession derived down from Christ and his Apostles which she as much as any Church in the World may pretend unto And though some intermediate Ages have been blemished with much degeneracy yet she was concerned only to separate this but retain and convey down to others whatsoever good and wholsome provision she received from those before Farther to evince this particular care was taken by express Law a See the Statute 25 of Henry the 8. cap. 19. Sect. 7 expresly revived 1 Eliz c. 1. sect 6. to confirm the Rules of Government or Canon Law before received in the Church till some better provision could be made so far as it contradicts not the Law of the Land or the Word of GOD making as few changes in the outward face of the Church as was possible and sensibly proving it her design properly not to destroy but build nor yet therein to erect a new but reform an old Church 3. Alike Canonical and orderly hath been her Constitution in matters of Worship Her Forms of Prayer and Praise with the whole order of her Liturgy are composed with the greatest temper and expressed in the most plain and comprehensive terms to help forward uniform devotion pious Affection the most Orthodox Profession and catholick communion So that I think it may be universally affirmed that there is not any thing required in her publick Service necessary to those who communicate with her which any that own the name of christians or are owned for such by the general body of them can almost scruple unless because it is a Form by one sort and because it is ours by another sort But how unreasonable herein are both So careful she hath been to lay the ground of most catholick Unity and to remove whatever might obstruct it This our Adversaries the Romanists confirmed by their own practice when for several years as we have been told a Camdeni Eliz. an 1570 in the beginning of Queen Elizabeths Reign they frequented our churches joyn'd in our Prayers and Praises attended on our Sermons and other Instructions and received as some add our Sacraments according to the order for substance the same as now and had it is like done so still having nothing to object against them but from the after-prohibition of the Pope who had reason to fear they who were so well provided of all needfull supply and defence at home might thus by degrees be withdrawn from subjection to his Authority abroad that darling point never to be dispensed or parted with whatever else might have been yielded b Camd. Eliz. an 1560. Our Reformers who composed our Liturgy carefuly collected the remainders of true Primitive Devotion a camdeni Eliz an 1560. then in use and separated from them all those corrupt additions which ignorance superstition and crafty policy had mixed therewith Therefore it is so far from being an objection that any part of our Liturgy was translated from the Roman Offices that while nothing is retained contrary to wholsome Doctrine and sound Piety it is a convincing argument of her impartial Sincerity and desire to preserve Uniformity as much as possible with all christians abroad as well as at home in her own Members securing all the Substantials of Worship according to the plain sense of Scripture and the pattern of the Primitive church And as to Circumstantials
condition of those who lived in that Communion before the Reformation many of them groaned under those Oppressions from which we are happily freed nay whatever charitable allowance may still be made for them who now live within those Boundaries where they have little opportunity of knowing better and are under vaâ—â— prejudices by contrary Education and the severest awe over them Now far I say these cases may be pleadable must be left to GOD and their own Consciences As for those born and bred among us who have been treacherously deluded into Apostacy from us or will persist in their hereditary obstinate averseness to us against the Clearest conviction which they may receive and in opposition to the express Laws of GOD and of the Land to the perpetual disturbance of the State and confusion of the Church there appears no room for any excuse to lessen their Crime or alleviate their doom which will be mightly encreased when all manner of hidden and crafty Artifices or open violence against the common Rights of Humane Society and moral Honesty as well as the Faith and Charity of Christs Church are imployed and consecrated into a religious but blind Zeal for the destruction of both No marvel if the Nation awakened with the effects hereof which it hath sometimes felt and oftner had reason to fear have provided some severe Laws for an aw over them and to stop the first beginnings of such exorbitant attempts ready to break through all ordinary inclosures and which will hardly be restrained by the usual methods of Government No temper is more difficulty mastered or more mischievous if let loose then such a false fiery zeal which neglected burns all before it But whatever may have been their Treatment of us formerly or we may justly apprehend would be still had they any opportunity which GOD pervent we ought not and hope shall not ever desist from wishing and endeavouring as much as is in our power their real welfaâ—e and so of all our implacable Enemies and therein their hearty Union with us in the holy Offices of Religion and Fellowship of GODs Church where they live with the sincere renounciation of those dangerous Errours and Practices that hitherto keep them at a distance from us In Conclusion instead of querulous expostulations or catching occasions to find fault we have great reason to admire and adore that gracious Providence which amidst so many Confusions Disorders and Corruptions that prevail too much in most places â—ound about hath placed our Lot in so happy a soil and provided for us so goodly a Heritage and safe Retreat in the Bosom of that Church whose Charity is as eminent as its Faith and its Order as signal as its Purity whose Arms are alwayes open to receive its returning Enemies with the most tender Compassions as well as to cherish its faithful Friends with the wholsom and indulgent provisions where nothing is wanting to ensure our safety and encourage our proficiency in every thing that is good and excellent Which upon former tâ—al of both the opposit extremes the whole Kingdom hath seen necessary to fâ—ee back into to repair the Confusions and Devastions they had brought and in its most dangerous Convulsions here hath found the readiest Cure and under whose name her very Enemies desire to shelter themselves which finally engages us to express our gratitude for so peculiar Priviledges by â— ready and impartial Obedience to the holy Doctrine we are taught and a fruitful improvement of all those happy Advantages which we enjoy therein That our Lives may be answerable to our Profession and our pious vertuous peaceable and charitable Conversation may be in some proportion as defensible and remarkable as the Principles we proceed upon or the benefitâ— we lay claim to This would most effectually silence the captious Cavils of our Enemies on every side and more powerfully invite them to our communion then all other the most demonstrative Arguments When their very senses would bear witness that GOD is in us of a truth I hope we are not distitute of some such eminent Examples of unfeigned Piety true Holiness and universal Probity GOD Almighty increase their number more and more Yet whatsoever may be the effect thereof upon other men this method would unquestionably ensure our own firmest Peace here and everlasting Salvation hereafter Here we keep certainly within our own bounds and may most safely and profitably spend all our Zeal while other men please themselves in diverting it aâ—road to what they have no power over It seems horribly â—â—useous to hear men quarrel fiercely about the best church who live in the most open defiance to all Religion and I doubt there are too many of all denominations chargeable herewith Yet whatever the case of others prove it will be most safe and pious to bring it home and close to our selves Be our Church or our Profession never so much better then any other if we be not also suitably better then other men they will rise up in judgment against us at the last But by a careful and diligent observance of its sacred Prescriptions we shall justifie our Reformation throughout put a stop to the Reproaches and shame the calumnies of our Adversaries and which is the Summary of all good intentions and endeavours bring honour to our great LORD and Master the Author and Finisher of our Faith FINIS A DISCOURSE Concerning the Object of RELIGIOUS WORSHIP OR A SCRIPTURE PROOF OF THE UNLAWFULNESS of giving any Religious Worship to any other Beeing BESIDES THE ONE SUPREME GOD EDINBVRGH Re-Printed by J. Reid MDC LXXXVI A DISCOURSE Concerning the Object of Religious Worship The INTRODVCTION OF all the Disputes between â—s and the Church of Rome there is none of greater concernment then that about the Object of Religious Worship We affirm as the Scripture has taught us that we must worship the LORD our GOD and serve him only the Church Mat. 4. 10. of Rome teaches that there is a degree of Religious Worship which we may give to some excellent Creatures to Angels and Saints and Images and the Host and to the Reliques of Saints and Martyrs If they are in the right we may be thought very rude and uncivil at least in denying to pay that Worship which is due to such excellent Creatures and very injurious to our selves in it by losing the benefit of their Prayers and Patronage If we be in the right the Church of Rome is guilty of giving worship to Creatures which is due to GOD alone which is acknowledged on all hands to be the greatest of sins and therefore this is a dispue which can never be compromised though we were never so desirous of an union and reconciliation with the Church of Rome for the Incommunicable glory of GOD and the salvation of our Souls are too dear things to be given away in complement to any Church And should it appear in the next world for I believe it will never
Land was a Holy Land Gods peculiar Inheritance which he gave by promise to their Fathers and the Temple was his House where he dwelt among them it cannot be expected that any other Gods might be worship'd by such a people in such a Land and in such a house as God had appropriated to himself 3. It is very considerable that we have no approved example under the Law of any worship pay'd to Saints or Angels or any other Beeing but God alone We have too many sad examples of the Idolatry of the Jews both in worshipping the Molten Calf which Aaron made and Jeroboams Calves and Baalim's and other Heathen gods but had it been allowed by their Law to have pay'd any inferiour degree of Religious Worship to Saints and Angels which is now asserted by the Church of Rome to be a matter of such great benefit and advantage to mankind it is a very strange that we should not have one example of it throughout the Scripture nor any authentick Records among the Jewish Writers All the Psalms of David are directed to God alone and yet we cannot think but such a devout man would have bestowed some Hymns upon his Patron and tutelar Saints had he worship'd any such as well as the Papâ—sts do now This the Church of Rome sees and acknowledges and thinksshe answers too when she gives us the reason why it could not be so under the Law because those Old Testament-Saints were not then admitted into Heaven to the immediate vision and fruition of God Heaven-gates were not opened till the resurrection and Ascension of our Saviour and therefore those blessed Spirits were not in a condition to be our Intercessors and Mediators till they were received into Heaven but now Saints and Martyrs ascend directly into Heaven and reign with Christ in Glorie and it seems share with him in his peculiar Worship and Glorie too Now 1. Whither this be so or not the Scriptures assign no such reason for it and therfore it is likely there might be other reasons and I think I have made it very plain that there was We are not inquiring for what reasons the Jewish Church did not worship Saints and Angels but whither they did worship them or not and it appears that they never did so that we have neither precept nor example for this during all the time of the Jewish Church which is all we intend to prove by this argument 2. But yet it is evident that this is not a good reason why the Jews did not worship Angels under the Law For certainly Angels were as much in Heaven then as they are now whatever Saints were They are represented in the Old Testament as the constant Attendants and Râ—tinue of God and the great Ministers of his Providence and therefore they were as capable of Divine Worship in the time of the Law as they are now nay I think a little more For the Law it self was given by the Ministry of Angels and their appearances were more frequent and familiar and the world seemed to be more under the Government of Angels then then it is now since Christ is made the Head of the Church and exalted above all principalities and powers And therefore sometimes the Advocates of the Church of Rome make some little offers to prove the worship of Angels in those days to this purpose they alledge that form of benediction which Jacob used in blessing the Sons of Josheph The Gen. 44. 16. Angel which redemed me from all evil bless the Lads But 1. This is not a direct prayer to the Angel but onely his committing of them to the care and patronage of that Angel with a prayer to God for that purpose And if he by experience had found that God had appointed his Angel to defend and protect him it was but reasonable to pray to God that the same Angel might protect his posterity 2. But yet according to the sense of the Antient Fathers this was no created Angel and Spirit but the Son and Word of God the Angel of the presence who is so often in Scripture stiled Jehovah a name which can belong to no created Spirit And it is no hard matter to make it highly probable that this is that Angel who redeemed Jacob out of all his troubles But it is strange if Angels were worshipped under the Old Testament we should have no clearer and plainer evidence of it then such a single Text which was never expounded either by any Jewish or Christian Writers to this sense till of late dayes and here the Priests of the Church of Rome are to be put in mind of their Oath to expound Scripture according to the unanimous consent of the Ancient Fathers SECT III. The Testimonies of the Gospel considered whither Chrâ—â—â— and his Apostles have made any alteration in the object â—f our Worship LEt us now proceed in the second place to consider Sect. 3. the writings of the New Testament and examine what they teach us concerning the object of our Worship And that Christ and his Apostles have made no change in the object of our worship will appear from these considerations 1. That they could not do it Had they ever attempted to set up the worship of any other Beeings besides the One Supreme God the Lord Jehovah the Jews were expresly commanded by their Law not to believe them nor hearken to them whatever signs and wonders and miracles they had wrought If there arise among you a Prophet or a dreamer of dreams and giveth thee a Deut. 13. 1 2 3 4 5. sign or wonder and the sign or wonder come to pass whereof he spake unto thee saying let us go after other Gods which thou hast not known and let us serve them Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of the Prophet or that dreamer of dreams for the Lord your GOD proveth you to know whither you love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your Soul Ye shall walk after the Lord your God and fear him and keep his Commandments and obey his voice and you shall serve him and cleave unto him And that Prophet or dreamer of dreams shall be put to death c. in which Law there are some things very matterial to be obsered in this present dispuâ—e 1. When they are forbidden to hearken to any Prophet who seduces them to the worship of any other Gods this must be extended to all those instances of Idolatrous worship which are forbid by the Law of Moses whatever is opposed to the worship of one Supreme and Soveraign Beeing the Lord Jehovah And therefore whither these Prophets seduced them from the worship of the Lord Jehovah to the worship of other Gods or perswaded them to worship other Gods besides the Lord Jehovah whither they were any of those Gods which were at that time worship'd by other Nations or any other Gods whom the ignorance and superstition of the people should create in after
this was not done why we are not directed to pray to Saints and Angels and Images c. but the argument lies in this that there can be no alteration made in the object of worship without an express Law and therefore there is no alteration made because there is no such Law in the Gospel The Jews were expresly commanded to worship no other Beeing but the Lord Jehovah as I have already proved which Law appropriates all the acts of Religious worship to one God and therefore all those who were under the obligation of this Law as to be sure all natural Jews were could not without the guilt of Idolatry give any Religious worship to any other Beeing till this Law were expresly repeated and express leave given to worship some other Divine Beeings besides the Supreme God so that at least our Saviour himself while he was on Earth and subject to the Law and his Apostles and all believing Jews were oblidged by this Law to worship none but God unless we can shew where Christ by his Legislative Authority or his Apostles by Commission from him have expresly repealed this Law nay indeed unless we can shew that Christ himself repealed this Law and taught the worship of Saints and Angels Mat. 28. 20 the Apostles themselves could have no authority to do it for their Commission was only to teach what Christ had commanded them which though it does not extend to matters of order and discipline and the external circumstances of worship yet it does as to all essentials of Faith and worship and I think the right object of Worship is the most essential thing in Religious Worship From hence it appears that at least all the Jewish Christians in the Apostles dayes and all succeeding Ages to this day cannot worship Saints and Angels without Idolatry because the Law which was given to them and never yet repealed commands them to worship none but God and if Gentile Converts were received into the Jewish Christian Church and Christ has but one Church of Jews and Gentiles they must also be oblidged by all those Laws which were then and are still obligatory to all believing Jews and therefore Gentile as well as Jewish Christians are still bound to worship none but God Now I think I need not prove that an express Law can be repealed onely by an express Law That Law which commands us to worship God and him only must continue in full force till GOD do as expresly declare that he allows us to pay some degree of Religious Worship to other Beeings besides himself When a Law-giver has declared his will and pleasure by a Law it is not fit that Subjects should be allowed to guess at his mind and dispute away an express Law by some surmises and consequences how probable soever they may appear for at this rate a Law signifies nothing if we may guess at the will of our Law-giver without and against an express Law And yet none of the Advocates of the Church of Rome though they are not usually guilty of too much modesty ever had the confidence to pretend an express Law for the worship of Saints and Angels and Images c. and though they sometimes alledge Scripture to prove this by yet they do not pretend that they are direct proofs but only attempt to prove some other Doctrines from Scripture from which they think they may prove by some probable consequences that which the Scripture no where plainly teaches nay the contrary to which is expresly taught in the Scripture And if this may be allow'd I know no law of God so plain and express but a witty man may find wayes to escape the obligation of it This is a consideration of great moment and therefore I shall discourse more particularly of it The Law of Moses expresly commands us to worship GOD and him only Our Saviour Christ owns and confirms the authority of this Law in the Gospel the Church of Rome notwithstanding this Law gives Religious Worship to Creatures the question then is how she avoids the force of this Law since it is no where expresly repealed and she does not pretend that it is Now the Patrons of Creature-worship thinks to justifie themselves from the breach of this Law these three ways 1. By consequences drawn as they pretend from other Scripture-Doctrines 2. By distinctions And 3. By authority Let us then examine whither all this have any force against an express Law which was never expresly repealed 1. By consequences drawn as they pretend from other Scripture-Doctrines and I shall discourse this with a particular reference to the Invocation of Saints For when they would prove the lawfulness of praying to Saints they alledge no direct proof of this from Scriptureâ— but because they must make a shew of saying something from Scripture when they are to deal with such Hereticks as will be satisfied with no less authority they endeavour to prove something else from Scripture from whence they think by an easie consequence they can prove the lawfulness of praying to Saints Thus they very easily prove that we may and ought to pray for one another and to desire each others prayers while we are on Earth and from hence they presently conclude that we may as lawfully pray to Saints in Heaven to pray for us as beg and desire their prayers while they are one Earth And to confirm this they endeavour to prove that some extraordinary Saints whose merits are very great do directly ascend up into Heaven unto the immediate presence of God and a participation of his Glory and hence they conclude that they have authority and power to help us and to intercede for us and that they are so far advanced above us in this mortal state that they deserve some kind of Religious Honour and Worship from us as being Dii per participationem Gods by participation that is by partaking in the Divine Nature and Glory by their advancement to Heaven And if after all this they can prove that the Saints in Heaven do pray and intercede for us on Earth they think the demonstration is complete and perfect that therefore * Bonum atque utile esse suppliciter Sanctos invocare ad beneficia impetranda a Deo per filium ej us Jesum Christum Dominum nostrum qui solus noster Redemptor Salvator est ad eorum orationes opem auxlium que confugere Conc. Trin. 16. 25. de Invocat It is good and profitable as the Council of Trent words it huâ—bly to invock the Saints after the manner of Suplicants and to â—â—y to their prayers and help and aid to obtain blessings of God by his Son Jesus Christ our Lord who is our only not Intercessor and Advocate but Redeemer and Saviour Now how they prove all this is not my business at present to enquire but my inquiry is whither such arguments as these be sufficient to oppose against the authority of an express Law and if
and promulged this Law this reason can never repeal it nor dissolve the obligation of it Thus if the Saints and Angels being in Heaven be a good reason why they should be worshipped this was as good a reason at the giving of of the Law as it is now for thö we should suppose with the Church of Rome that Saints departed were not in Heaven then yet certainly the Angels were and if their being in Heaven made them fit objects of our worship why did God so expresly forbid it and if he forbad it then when there was as much reason to allow the worship of of those heavenly Inhabitants as there is now this argument cannot prove but that God forbids it still The same may be said of the Intercession of Saints and Angels The Papists suppose that the Saints and Angels pray and intercede for us in Heaven and obtain for and convey many blessings to us and therefore it is good and profitable to pray to them and to flie to their patronage now though indeed they date the Intercession of Saints as they do their admission into heaven from the Resurrection of our Saviour yet there is as much evidence for the aids and intercessions of Angels before and under the Law as there is now nay I think somewhat more for the government of the world was much more under the administration of Angels in the time of the Law then it is now and yet notwithstanding this God did by an express law forbid the worship of any being but himself and therefore of these Angelical powers who are somewhat superiour to Saints in Heaven and if this were no good reason against making this law it can be no good reason to prove the abrogation of it â— The next way they take to evade the obligation of this law of worshipping God only is by distinctions As to name the chief of them They tell us that this law is only opposed to the worship of false Gods such Gods as the Heathens worshipped not to the worship of Saints and Angels who are the Friends and Favourites of God And then they distinguish about the nature of worship they confess there is a worship which is peculiar to God Supreme and Soveraign worship which is peculiar to the Supreme Beeing and this for what reason I know not they call Latria but then there is an inferiour degree of worship which they call Dulia which may be given to excellent Creatures to Saints and Angels who reign with Christ in Heaven They farther distinguish between absolute and relative worship Absolute worship is when we worship a Beeing for its self and thus God only is to be worshipped but relative worship is when we worship one Beeing out of respect to another and thus we may worship Saints and Angels upon account of their relation to God Now I shall have occasion to examine these distinctions more particularly hereafter my business at present is to examine how far these distinctions can justifie the worship of Saints and Angels against an express Law which commands us to worship God only And I have three things to say on this argument 1. That the letter of the law will admit of no such distinctions as these 2. That the Scripture no where allows any such distinctions And 3. That no distinctions can justifie our acting against the letter of a law which have not the same authority which the Law has 1. The letter of the Law will admit of no such distinctions Exod. 20 as these The Law is Thou shalt have none other Gods before ME. The explication of this Law is Deut. 10 20. Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God him shalt thou serve and to him shalt thou cleave and swear by his name Or as Matth 4 10 our Saviour expounds it Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve Now these words do plainly exclude the worship of all other Beeings besides the Supreme God They exclude indeed the worship of all the Heathen Gods which were at that time worshipped in the world but they are not confined to the worship of the Heathen Gods nor meerly to the worship of those Gods who were at that time worshipped but should any new Gods start up in after Ages whither among Jews or Christians the words extend to all that are and all that ever shall be worshipped Thou shalt have noe other Gods before Me signifies that we must worship no other Beeing but the Supreme God for to have a God is to give religious worship to some Beeing as appears from that exposition which both Moses and our Saviour Christ gives of it Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve For it is impossible to have any God besides the Supreme God in any other sense then as we worship some other Beeing besides the Supreme God with Divine honours and whatever being we so worship become our God and therefore this Law forbids the worship of any Beeing which is not God be it Saint or Angel or the Virgin Mary how excellent and perfect Creatures soever they be they are not our God and therefore must not be worshipped If we must worship and serve God only as our Saviour expresly tells us that we must worship no creature whatever it be the worship of saints and Angels is as expresly forbid by this Law as the worship of the Heathen Gods for that Law which commands us to worship GOD onely excludes the worship of all Creatures whatever they be But may not the meaning of this Law be onely this That we must not give supreme and soveraign worship to any other â—eeing but the supreme GOD but we may give an inferiour degree of worship to some excellent spirits who under God have the care of us And is not this plainly signified in the very letter of the Law when it sayes Thou shalt have none other Gods before me For no other worship makes any Beeing a God but that which is supreme and soveraign peculiar and appropriate to the One supreme God and therefore not to have any other Beeing for our God is not to give Supreme and Soveraign Worship to it Now what that worship is which is peculiar and appropriate to the Supreme God I shall discourse particularly in the second part our present inquiry is whither this Law makes any such distinction The Laws says Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him onely shalt thou serve Here is no distinction between supreme and subordinate worship whatever is an Act of worshâ—p must be given to God onely But the Law sayes Thou shalt have no other Gods before me and therefore it must signifie supreme and soveraign worship for no other degree of worship makes a God Did the Heathens then worship no inferiour gods did those who worshipped so many several gods look â—pon them all as supreme and absolute or were they so senseless as to give supreme and soveraign
would inquire into the lawfulness of such things as appertain to Divine Worship we must apply our selves to the Holy Scripture being in matters of that nature to determine of Right and Wrong Lawful and Unlawful according to the Directions Commands and Prohibitions of it If we would be satisfied about their Expedience we must consider the Nature Ends and Use of what we inquire about This therefore is a proper method for the Resolution of the foregoing Question But because the Apostle in his Discourse upon this Subject 1. Corinthians 14. doth argue from the ends and use of the several Offices belonging to Divine Worship and because the like Order may give some light and force to what follows I shall first of all I. Treat of the Ends for which Divine Worship and the several Offices of it were instituted II. Consider whither those Ends may be attained when the Worship is performed in a Tongue not understood III. Whither the worship so performed as to leave those ends unattainable will be accepted by GOD IV. I shall consider the Apostle's Discourse upon this Argument and whither it can be reasonably concluded from thence That Divine Worship so administred as not to be understood of the people is unlawful I. In the first of these the Masters of Controversie in the Romish Church do proceed with great tenderness and no little obscurity For would we know what the Worship is they would have in an Unknown Tongue they answer it is the publick only they defend For as for private saith one It is lawful for P. Sancta not in Epist P. Molinaei c. 17. n. 6. T. G. First reply to Dr. Stelingfleet sect 3. every one to offer his lesser Prayers to GOD in what Tongue soever he pleaseth And saith another All Catholicks are â—aught to say their private Prayers in their Mother Tongue As if it were possible to assign such a vast difference betwixt them when the Dispositions Reasons and Ends required and intended are the same that what is lawful expedient and necessary in the one is unlawful inexpedient and unnecessary in the other Or as if the saying private Prayers in Latin was never heard of practiseâ— or encouraged in their church Again Would we understand to what purposes the Divine Offices do serve and whither the Edification Instruction and consolation of the people be not some of those Ends. Bellarmin answers De verbo l. 2. c 16. Sect obj quart 1. That the principal end of Divine Offices is not the instruction or consolation of the People but a worship due to GOD from the Church As if there were no regard to be had to the special ends of those Offices such as the Instruction and Consolation of the people Or as if GOD could be honoured by that Worship where those ends are not regarded 2. The Rhemists add That Prayers are not made to teach make learned or increase knowledge Annot. 1. cor 14. P. 63. though by occasion they sometimes instruct but their especial use is to offer our Hearts desires and Wants to God c. As if there were no Offices in God's Worship appointed for Instruction and increase of Knowledge and which are performed in an Unknown Tongue amongst them as well as Prayer Or as if their Adversaries did either deny it to be the special use of Prayer To offer our hearts c. to God Or did affirm that the special use of it is To teach make learned and increase knowledge as they with others Censur proposit Erasmi prop. 5. Poncet dis cord de L' Auvis ch 1. do falsly suggest and would fain have believed But to set this in a better light and that we may understand what are the Ends and Uses for which Divine Worship was appointed and after what manner they are to be respected It is to be observed 1. That Divine Worship in its first notion respects God as its Object and so the end of it in general is the giving Honour to him by sutable Thoughts Words and Actions 2. That he hath appointed several wayes and Offices by which he will be so honoured and in which as the Honour doth terminate in him so there redounds from thence benefit to the church 3. That the Benefits redound to the church according to the nature of those Offices and the special Ends they were designed unto As the Word of God is for our instruction and comforâ— c. The Lord's Supper for the increase of Faith in God and love to him through Jesus Christ The praising of God is to raise our Affections and to make us more sensible of his goodness and to quicken us in our duty The special use of Prayer that I may use the Words forecited Rhem. Annot. is to offer up our Hearts Wants and Desires to God and that by conversing with him Part. 4. c. 2. Sect 7. 8. we may be the more ardently excited to the love and adoration of him as the Trent Catechism doth express it 4. That those Offices are to be performed so as may effectually answer those Ends and as we may receive the benefits they were appointed for From whence it follows 5. That if the Offices of Divine Worship are to be performed by Words those Words and that Tongue in which they are administred must be such as will not obstruct but promote and in their nature are qualified to attain those Ends. And if those Ends cannot be aâ—â—ained without the Tongue in which the service is performed be understood It makes that means as necessary in its kind as the End and it is as necessary that the Tongue used for those Ends in Divine Worship be understood as that those Ends should be respected or that there should be a Tongue used at all For it is not God but Man that is immediately respected in the Words since there is no more need of Words to GOD then of Words that are vulgarly understood and so it is not for him but Man that this Tongue or that or indeed that any Tongue at all is used And if it be requisite that there be a a Tongue and Words used in publick Worship and which all persons present are supposed to joyn in and receive benefit by then it is as necessary for the same reason to use Words significant and understood as to De Doct. Christ l. 4. c. 19. use any Words at all For saith S. Austin what doth the soundness of speech profit if not followed with the Understanding of the â—earer seing there is no reason at all for our speaking if what we speak is not understood by them for whom that they might understand we spoke at all From what hath been said we may be able to vindicate such Arguments of the Protestants Divine service in a known and vulgar Tongue as were taken from the Ends of worship against the replyes made to them by their adversaries of the Romish Church As 1. The Protestants argue in general that
with Thunder in his hand And my Saviour appears more lovely to my mind thoughts when I consider him as coming into the World and dying for us then when I see him pictured and carved on a Crucifix For it is more useful to see him with the Eye of Faith then of Sense and it is not the Proportion of his Body represented to my eyes but the Dignity of his Nature the love that he bore me and the Passions of his Soul for me that I admire most and which no Pencil can draw Besides a Picture or Image tells me nothing but what I knew before and it is by what I knew before that I can make sense or any devout use of this Picture for else I might take it for another profane and idle Story And I would fain know whither the reading considerately the 26 and 27th Chapters of S. Matthew will not affect any pious Heart much more then the seeing and contemplating a Picture Certainly if this will affect the Sense and bodily Passions the other will more work on our Reason and that will be to better purpose Nay the seeing of any Picture often will naturally make it familiar and not at all affecting to us 5. And if the severity of the Monks to their Bodies is not any great Sign of Devotion much less can the Austerities used by the common People turn to any great Commendation of the Church It is true they are forced to keep Fasts but it would make a Man laugh to read how their Casuists have defined concerning the modus the Measure the End of Fasting Escobar hath resolved it That no Drink breaks a Fast be it Wine or Chocolat and because it is not wholesome to drink without eating you may eat two Ounces of Bread For that is but a quarter of a Meal and if a man should chance to break his Vow of Fasting thus he is not bound to fast another day for it unless on a new Obligation And if all this be too hard you may be dispensed with for your whole Life and that whither there be any just cause for it or no. Nay Servants tho they eat never so gluttonously of the Scraps they break no Fast Indeed there need be no Rules set down concerning the Poor Peoples observing Fasting Dayes They are kept low enough without them And as for the Rich their Fasting is Mock-fasting to fast to Luxury with Wine and Fish and Sweet-meats Is not this great Self denial If any therefore are still truly mortified when they can thus help it I must rather commend their own Piety and devout Temper then the Rules and Orders of their Church which give much Liberty that a man must have a very cross-grain'd Appetite or be in the highest degree sensual not to be willing to comply with it We find then no Fault with Fasting being enjoyned and at set seasons For we our selves commend and practise it but let it not be to play tricks but for true and real Mortification and for the proper end of Mortification to humble the Body to the Soul and to bring the Mind to a better Temper and to these ends is Fasting commanded by our Church but not as if we looked on this or that kind of Meat to be unholy or design'd to purchase Heaven by our Abstinence as the Church of Rome doth 6. And as for their Pilgrimages and Worship of Reliques they must needs have less pretence to Religion For their Fasts and other Austerities somewhat resemble true Christian Duties but these have no shew that way If Pilgrimage be enjoyned for Penance then there is no thanks due to the Person performing it If it be voluntary there is no true Devotion in it For the Worth of it must consist in some of these Reasons viz. either First That GOD is more present or Secondly more propitious in one publick place of Worship then another both which are contrary either to the Nature of God or his Declaration in Scripture when he says In every place a pure Offering shall be offered to him Mal. 1. 11. And Where ever two or three are gathered together in Christs Name he is in the midst of them Mat. 18. 20. And the teaching otherwise is in some measure to revive Judaism which allowed God as to some cases to be served acceptably only in one place or Thirdly that the Saint is more present or propitious here then any where else But we are speaking of Devotion to God not to the Saint or Fourthly That it is their punishing themselves that is so acceptable but that hath been sufficiently discarded already Or Fifthly That going so far and taking such pains is a sign of their Love But a man may shew his Love to God and to his Saints too by more proper Instances and do more good by it which GOD to be sure will better accept and the Saint if he be a Saint will like as well And therefore the making such account of Pilgrimages seems rather to favour the Mahumetan then the Christian Religion For the going on Pilgrimage to Mecca is one of the five indispensable points of the Mahumetan Superstition And as for the Veneration of Reliques all the World knows what a cheat is put on Men in vending any old rotten Bone or peice of Cloth c. for a Relique of this or that Saint So that according to a moderate Computation I suppose scarcely one in a hundred is true And some have pleaded they need not be true Now what ever Devotion is performed to or on occasion of these Reliques can be commendable only in regard of the Mind and devout Temper of the Person which I think might as acceptably shew it self in any other proper time and place And there is required a long Series of Consequences before the sight of St. Joseph's Axe or any such other of their Reliques can be pretended to raise a man's Devotion But it being the chief Trade at Rome to sell feigned pieces of Antiquity and other such worthless Trinkets at a high rate I the less wonder that they have such an Esteem for Reliques for it is for their profit to keep up the value of them they being the principal commodities of the place 7. And the belief which they have of the Saints hearing them and their practice of praying to them is no proper Encouragement or instance of true Devotion For all Devotion is properly towards God and therefore the making of Addresses to any other cannot possibly have any direct Tendency to exalt our Devotion to him but is really a great hinderance For it takes mens Mindes off from GOD and sets them on his Creature And the same time that is spent in Prayer to them surely is better spent in praying to God who is more present with us hears us better and loves us more And Men's going to Saints when God is present naturally tends to provoke God's Jealousie For he declares himself jealous as to his Worship
practice excepting only the object of their Worship giving them real Saints and Holy Angels instead of their feigned and impure Deities and that which makes this the more probable is that their invasion and stay in Italy and the rise and growth of daemon-Daemon-Worship there jump exactly as to time and both bear date from the Fourth and Fifth Centures III. That there is not the least proof for it from Scripture 1. ANd here we are firstâ—â— take notice that Bellar. de sanct beat c. 19. Salm. in 1 Tim. 2. disp 7. Eckius Enchirid de vener sanct c. 15. Cardin. du Perron it is â—reely confeâ—â— by some of their own Learned Divines that there is no express Text either in the Old or New Testament for this Doctrine and practice and is it not hard to make that an Article of Faith that has no Foundation to stand on in the word of God Or to make that a Duty that has no Law â—or sanction to bind us to the practice of it Were not the Scriptures written to make Men Wise unto salvation and to instruct them throughly unâ—o all good works Were they not written that 2 Tim. 3. 15. 16. we might believe believing might have Eternal Life Do not the Apostles say they have made known to Man the whole will of God and kept nothing hid from them Do John 20. 30. they not abound in earnest Exhortations to Pray to Pray alwayes to pray without ceasing with all prayer Have they not left frequent directions for the right performance of it in a Language that all that hear may understand with pure hands in Faith without wrath and doubting And now can 1 Cor. 14. we imagine after all this that had Invocation of Saints been so good and profitable a Duty or that it had been so great a Crime so much as to doubt of the Blessed Virgin 's Merits and Ability to help that theâ— would have been Catech. Rom. 584. wholly silent as to this matter Were not the Apostles guided by the Holy Spirit of God Must they not be supposed to have as hearty a concern and as burning a Zeal for the Salvation of Souls and the Glory of God as the Trent Fathers had And now had this practice been so highly instrumental to promote both these as that Synod would have us believe is it to be imagined that every one of them would have quite forgot it and neglected to have given it in charge with as much strictness as they have done to all Bishops and Pastors to instruct their Flocks in the Pieâ—y and Usefulness of it Have not the Apostles both by their precept and example enjoyned Christians to beg the Prayers of one another whilst they are in the body Have they not prescribed the Sick Man as the most Soveraign receipt to have recourse to the Prayers of the Elders of the Jaâ— 5. 14. Church What reason then can be given that we have not any one example or precept to fly to the Prayers of Saints departed to their help and assistance as the more prevailing and meritorious but only this that they are not in a capacity to hear our requests or to know our conditions Nay had our Saviour and his Apostles intended this Saint-Invocation as a necessary Christian Duty it would have needed a more express command and penalty to have inforced its obligation then most other Duties of Christianity since it was altogether a thing new to the Jews and what had never been practised by them for though sometimes in their prayers to God they besought him to remember Abraham Isaac and Luk 1. 55. 72. 73. Deut. 7. â— Jacob that is his own covenant and promise he had made with and to them yet they never used them as intercessors or said Holy Abraham or Holy Isaac pray for us But to blunt the edge of this Argument that they themselves have put into our hands against it they tell us was not for any intrinsick Evil in the thing but for some particular reasons relating to the times of the Old Testament and the first Ages of the New that It was not mentioned and enioyned in scripture but if the reasons produced by them do hold with equal force against it promiscuously in all Ages as well as against it then certainly the main reason why it 's no where prescribed in scripture is that it might at no time be put in practice The reasons they give are chiefly two For the Old Testament they say it 's not there enjoyned because the Patriarchs and Saints departed during that dispensation were not admitted into the beatifick Vision and so could not ordinarily understand the Prayers of the Living but if for ought we know Abraham Isaac and Jacob are still in the same Limbo or place of rest they went to at first or if our Saviour at his ascension into Heaven did give them a happy deliverance and took them up with him into the immediate presence of God 't is not certain that they understand the desires of the Living any more then they did before then there is as much reason not to Invocate them now as there was not to do it then Many of the Romanists will not have the Saints in Heaven come to know the desires of their Living Votaries by the benefit of the beaufick Vision which they enjoy but by particular Revelation from God and if so then the Old Testament worthies were as capable of it and consequentlie there was as much reason to pray unto them before our Saviours coming when they were but in Paradise as afterwards when by his Glorious Victory and Triumph over Death they were exalted into Heaven since God could have revealed the requests of their supplicants alike to them in all places in one as well as another besides considering the great esteem and veneration the Jews ever had for those great Men the Founders of their Nation Abraham Isaac Jacob Moses Joshua and others had there been no evil in the thing no reason can be given why it was not preached to the Jews by our Saviour and his Apostles as the most likely argument to win them to embrace the Christian Religion For the New Testament they say 't is not there enjoyned because it would have been a great offence and scandal to the new converted Gentiles and have given them an occasion to think that they had only changed their Gods but not their Religion that the Christian Doctrine was only a device of the Apostles to thrust out their old Daemons and Heroes and to put in themselves that as those had hitherto been Worship'd for the great services and benefactions they did in this present World so they for the future might have the some Honour done them for the full discoveries they had made and excellent directions they had given relating to a future and more happy State And is not this a good Argument and does it not hold still against Romish Invocation Is
so far from having any true authority that counterâ—eit Testimonies and forged Writings have been their great Supporters Besides the plain drist of them which is not to make all men better but to make same richer and the manifest danger men are in by many of them to be drawn away from GOD to put their trust and confidence in Creatures As might be shewn if this Paper would contain it in their Doctrines of Papal Supremacy Purgatory Invocation of Saints Image Worship and diverse others Concerening which we say as Saint Cyprian doth to Pompeius about another maâ—ter If it be commanded in the Gospels or in the Epistles of the Apostles or in their Acts that they should not be baptized who return from any Heresie but only be received by imposition of hanâ—s LET THIS DIVINE and HOLY TRADITION BE OBSERVED The same say we if there be any thing in the Gosples in the Epistles in the Acts concerning Invocations of Saints concerning the praying Souls out of Purgatory c. Let that divine that holy Tradition be observed But if it be not there What obstinacy is this as it follows a little after in that Epist l. 24. what presumption to prefer human Tradition before the Divine Disposition or Ordinance A great deal more there is in that place and in others of that holy Martyr to bring all to the source the root the original of the Divine Tradition for then human errours ceases which original Tradition he affirms to be what is delivered in the holy Scriptures which delivering to us the whole Will of GOD concerning us we look after no other Tradition but what explains and confirms and is consonant to this For we believe that what is delivered to us by the Scriptures what is delivered by true Tradition are but two several waves of bringing us acquainted with the same Christian Truth not with different parts of that Truth And so I have done with the first thing the sum of which is this We do not receive any Tradition or Doctrine to supply the defect of the Scripture in some necessary Article of Faith which Doctrines they of Rome pretend to have one and the same Author with the Scripture viz. God and therefore to be received with the same pious affection and reverence But cannot tell us where we may find them how we shall discern true from false nor give us any assurance of their Truth but we must take them purely upon their word Now how little reason we have to trust to that will appear in the second thing I have to adde which is this 11. That we dare not receive any thing whatsoever merely upon the Credit of the Roman Church no not that divine that holy Tradition before spoken of viz. the Scripture Which we do not believe onely upon their testimony both because they are but a part of the Church and therefore not the sole Keepers of Divine Truth and they are a corrupted part who have not approved themselves faithful in the keeping what was committed to them Let our People diligently mark this That Traditions never were nor are now onely in the keeping of the Roman Church and that these things are widely different the Tradition of the whole Church or of the greatest and best part of it and the Tradition of one part of the Church and the least part of it and the worst part also and most depraved What is warranted by the Authority of the whole Church I have shewn before we reverently receive but we cannot take that for current Tradition which is warranted only by a small part of the Church and we give very little credit to what is warranted only by that part of it which is Roman Because 1. First This Church hath not preserved so carefully as other Churches have done the first and orginal Tradition which is in the Scriptures but suffered them to be shamefully corrupted Every one knows that there is a Latin Vulgar Edition of the Bible which they of that Church prefer before the Original none of which they preserved heretofore from manifest depravations nor have been able since they were told of the faults to purge away so as to canonize any Edition without permitting great numbers in their newest and most approved Bibles Isidore Clarius in his Preface to his Edition complains that he foâ—nd these holy Writings defaced with innumerable errours Eight thousand of which that he thought most material he saith he amended and yet left he knew not how many lesser ones untouched After which the Council of Trent having vouched this Vulgar Latine Edition for the onely authentick Pope Sixtus the Fifth published out of the several Copies that were abroad one which he straightly charged to be received as the onely true Vulgar from which none should dare to vary in a tittle And yet two years were scarce passed before Clement the Eight found many defects and corruptions still remaining in that Edition and therefore published another with the very same charge that none else should be received Which evidently shews they have suffered the holy Books to be so fouly abused that they know not how to amend the errours that are crept into them nor can tell which is the true Bible For these two Bibles thus equally authorized as the onely authentick ones abound not only with manifest diversities but with contradictions or contrarieties one to the other Whereby all Romanists are reduced to this miserable necessity either to make use of no Bible at all or to fall under the curse of Sixtus if he make use of that of Clement or the curse of Clement if he use the Bible of Sixtus For they are both of them enjoyned with the exclusion of all other Editions and with the penalty of a Curse upon them who disobey the one or the other and it is impossible to obey both This might be sufficient to demonstrate how unfaithful that Church hath been in the weightiest concerns Whereby all the Members of are plunged beyond all power of redemption into a dismal necessity either of laying a side the Scriptures or of offending against the sacred Decrees as they account them of one or other of the heads of their Church which some take to be infallible and being accursed of them 2 But for every one 's fuller satisfaction it may be fit farther to represent how negligent they have been in preserving other Traditions which were certainly once in the Church but now utterly lost There is no question to be made but the Apostles taught the first Christians the meaning of those hard places which we find in their and other holy Writings But who can tell us where to find certainly so much as one of them And therefore where is the fidelity of this Church which boasts so much to be the Keeper of sacred Traditions For nothing is more desirable then these Apostolical Interpretations of Scripture nothing could be more useful and yet we have no hope to meet with them
Tongue understood and spoken by none in a Nation or so few as are next to none and which if used in Divine Offices would be wholly unintelligible Such are Persick and Indian with us The use of all this niceness is partly to clear the state of the Question and partly to prevent many of the Objections which the case is cumbred with And without the observing of which the Dispute will be turned from the point that is contraverted to that which is not As it happens for the most part among those of the Church of Rome that undertake the management of this Cause who do either distinguish where they are not to distinguish or do not distinguish where they should distinguish For sometimes they oppose the Dialects of a Tongue to that Tongue of which they are the Dialects At other times they oppose the common Tongue to the Vulgar Sometimes they confound the Learned Tongue with the common And then again oppose the learned and utterly unknown as if these two were of as different kinds as known and unknown To give an instance of each of these Ledesma c. 9. n. 4 5. 9. c. 20. n. 2. Sanders orat de Ling. Offic. eccl Do they undertake to shew how unfit and unreasonable it is to translate the Service or Scriptures into a Vulgar Tongue They endeavour to make it out by shewing how unfit it is to think of Translating and how unreasonable it is to expect they should be translated into the several Dialects of each Tongue Would they farther shew that the Divine Offices c. were not of old so translated they attempt to prove it from their not having been translated into different Dialects As if the Dialects of a Tongue differed as much from each other and all from the main Tongue of a Nation as a learned Tongue differs from the Vulgar which is to speak charitably for want of observing that the Dialects are but several modes of speaking the same Tongue and that ordinarily there is some common Standard which as I have said over-rules the rest and iâ— a guide common to all As here in England notwithstanding there be several Dialects and that there is one in Scotland differs much from them all yet there is but one Translation of the Bible and one Service for the use of the whole and that is fully if not equally understood by all Farthermore would they prove that anciently the Christian Churches used not a Vulgar Tongue in Divine Lâ—desma c. 9. n. 6. Service they presently multiply Authorities to shew that in many places they used Greek and Latine and that Greek and Latine were oftentimes Likâ—â—â—â— de SS in vulg non vert p. 51. not the Vulgar Tongues where they were so used As if the common Tongue for such were those two in elder in times where they were not the Vulgar was opposed to the Vulgar as much as unknown is to knownâ— and each was inconsistent with the other Bellarm. de verbo l. 2. c. 15. Thus they tell us from S. Jerom That the Vulgar Tongue in Galatia was in effect the same with that of the Treviri in Germany And yet there and in the neighbouring Countries they had the Scriptures if not their Divine Service in Greek Not observing that Greek was the common Tongue of those parts and that both that and a Vulgar were there freely and generally spoken as Greek and Latine as well as the Gallick Tongues were so frequent in Massilia that it was called Trilinguis as S. Jerome shews in the same Dissertation of his So that these two the Common and Vulgar are so far from being inconsistent that notwithstanding the bold saying of our Countrey-man Sanders That the common people understand nothing but their Mother Tongue The experience of Orat. ut antea all Ages as well as our own shews that they are frequently met together But to proceed would they demonstrate that they do and may lawfully use the Latine now in Divine Service they attempt with great industry to prove that both that and the Greek were anciently Ledesma c. 9. n. 1. c. 27. n. 9. used therein And so they confound the learned and the common Tongues and compare those times and places in which the Latin and Greek were commonly known and understood with our times and places in which neither of them are understood but by the learned Lastly Would they shew that S. Paul in 1 Corinthiaâ—s Ledesma c. 27. n. 9. Sanders orat Bellarm. de verb. l. 2. c. 16. 14. doth not oppose Service in Latine they undertake to shew That he opposeth no other Service then what is altogether unknown and no Body understands as Persick and Arabick and that he doth not condemn a Learned Tongue thereby supposing the Learned Tongue and Tongue altogether unknown to be different in kind whereas they only differ so that the one is rarely understood and by very few in comparison and other is understood by none Now in all this they say litle or nothing to the purpose For if they plead for their Latin Service as Greek was in Galatia and Latin in Africa who is their Adversary For these Tongues were as I have shewed in those and the like places as well or litle less spoken and understood then the Vulgar and Mother Tongues And the Protestants do not think it unlawful to have the common Service in a Tongue which is commonly understood though it be not the Vulgar Tongue of the Nation especially in Maritim and Provincial Countries where there is a concourse of diverse Nations and where either these several Languages are understood or there is a componnd Language that serves for all as the Lingua Franca before spoken of But if they plead for Latin as it is now when a Dead and Learned Tongue that is where it is not known at all as in the West-Indies where yet it is as much used by those of the Roman communion in Mass as in Europe or where it is not known to the Vulgar people as it is with us and every where else then they speak to the purpose for that the Reformed do oppose but then the way of arguing hitherto taken notice of is of no use to them in the World and is no more to the purpose then if they would undertake to prove that there is at this day a famous University at Athens and that Latin is the Vulgar Tongue now at Rome because these were so formerly So that if we will know where the Controversie lies and what is contended for and against we must restore things to their proper places and I think all may be brought to an Issue by puting and resolving this plain Question viz. SECT II. Qu. Whither it be lawful and expedient to use such a Tongue in the publick Worship of GOD as is not vulgarly or commonly understood by the people acording to the way at this day required and practised in the Church of Rome If we