as Impudence Nonsence Monstrous Stupidity and the like But I would know of the Representer whether there can be any just occasion for letting these words loose and to the Sense and Reason of Mankind I may appeal if there can be an occasion more just than this for 't is impossible we should have greater Evidence that any thing is true than we have that the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is false and then I may ask the Representer whether it be not the greatest abuse that ever was put upon mankind This Argument therefore would bear a little more quickness than was thought convenient for the handling of the rest But here lies the sting of the Representer's Charge That Transubstantiation is a Subject in which so many Learned and Virtuous Men of the Christian World are nearly concerned To which I answer That 't is so much the worse for the Christian World but not for the Author of that Discourse For if indeed Learned Men and Virrtuous Men espouse such a Monstrous Doctrine as that of Transubstantiation there is not less but greater cause to exclaim both against them and it If the Representer thought that the Learning and Virtue of the Men should have gained some more reverence for the Cause than that Author had for it he may think so still for me I will not go about to question the Learning and the Virtue of many that hold Transubstantiation but 't is Transubstantiation still I think it is no question but there were many Learned and Virtuous men in Egypt who were nearly concerned in the business of making Gods of Things that grew in their Gardens and yet he had not been too blame that should have said it was Impudence Nonsence and Monstrous Stupidity to Worship and to teach others to Worship Leeks and Onyons Now for the Second Observation P. 5. That we have no news of any Success those Discourses had upon the parties designed I say if they had indeed no Success the Stater was the honester man not to say they had any tho he scaped here very well that he was not made a Misrepresenter for not confessing that they had none But upon this occasion the Representer is very angy It could not says he be rationally expected that those who chose rather to forgo all the interest and convenience of humane life than join with a Schismatick Congregation should be afterwards brought to Church by a few empty Discourses which making no more Converts than they deserved made as I can hear of none at all But why Schismatick Congregation and a few empty Discourses When men keep what their Adversaries would get from them and when they have disappointed all their designs they use to be pleased and in good humour and tho perhaps they may laugh heartily at their Antagonists for losing their pains yet 't is not so natural to rage against them as if themselves were the Losers I begin therefore to suspect that our Representer knows of some Success those Discourses had which he is not willing to own But be that as it will as we did not think the better of the former Performances for their having had some Success so neither should we think the worse of these if they have had none which may perhaps be imputed to the prejudice of the persons for whose good they were designed rather than to the pretended Emptiness of the Discourses themselves unless the Representer's word may be more securely relied upon for Empty Discourses now than for Empty Churches before We are sorry that is proves so difficult a matter to recover these men yet 't is some Consolation to us that we have lost so very few out of so great a body as the Communion of the Church of England makes And therefore if Discourses are to be judged of by their Success the Representer and such as he should have a care of boasting at this time of day Our design was not only to recover those that are deceived but likewise to keep those from Error that are in the way of Truth and therefore it may be reasonably presumed that our endeavours have had good Success upon the greatest part of those whom they were designed to serve tho not upon all But when I have told this man what perhaps himself knows that by these Discourses we have gained some from Popery to the Reformed Religion I will also tell him that if we had never gained so much as one it had been no disparagement to our Arguments since they have ways of fixing their Proselytes which we abhor of which I shall give this one Instance It is their Rule let otherr judg whether it be their Practice to require a dreadful Oath of all whom they can gain not to be prevailed withal Quocunque Argumento by any Argument to forsake the Communion of the Roman See This Oath is to be seen in the Pontifical under the Title of Ordo ad Reconciliandum Apostatam Hoereticum aut Schismaticum and if the Representer be importunate he shall have it next time at length To doubt only of any Point which the Church of Rome teaches is a sin that must come under Confession by which the Priest is sure to have notice when the Spirit of Truth begins to work and upon signal given to extinguish the first Motions of it We have a hard Task who are not only to oppose Reasons to Reasons and to the common prejudices of men but to produce Reason against particular Engagements and Oaths never to hearken to any Reason at all The Representer gives out himself to be a Convert and may therefore be presumed not to be ignorant of these things but to be himself intangled by an Oath to be moved by no Argument whatsoever to return to this Schismatick Congregation as he calls it and therefore in him it was great forgetfulness to ascribe the Steadiness of the English Romanists to nothing else but a Christian Resolution when he could not but know of some other Engagements that are amongst them which are not altogether so Christian Which I had not observed here if his Severity to the Stater had not led me to it for it was but the very Page before in which he set upon him with all his Eloquence for imputing the fulness of our Congregations to the Reasonings of the Divines without mentioning the execution of the Laws If I had been a Representer that Page I think would have kept me in some awe and hindred me from doing that in the very next which he calls telling Stories by halves As for the most cruel persecution which as he says those of his Communion suffered lately for not joyning with our Schismatick Congregation he describes it so terribly and assigns the Cause of it as positively as if this was a matter beyond our memory which he knows it is not But when a Man has a mind to exercise his Stile one Subject may serve him as well as another But to return to the
the Representer has made for us One thing I am sure of that the Converts of the City of Orange were received upon such easy terms in point of Declaration that if Subjection and Communion had not been to follow one would have look'd upon the whole Transaction as a solemn Jest between the French General and the Bishop of Orange on the one side and the Citizens of Orange on the other The Passage is very remarkable and instructing and therefore I shall not think much to set down the Articles of Reconciliation as I have received them from hands of unquestionable credit 1. The Citizens of the Town of Orange that are under written considering that it is the Will of God of which Kings are the principal Interpreters that all Christians should reunite themselves into the same Church To testify their submission to the Order of the Divine Providence and that which they bear to the Holy Intentions of the King do intreat of his Majesty that his Troops commanded by the Count de Tessé should depart from them and that the Expence which has been or shall be made by them be levied upon the whole State without distinction of Religion We Order the Execution of the present Article according to the full Tenor of it Tessé 2. They declare that they do reunite themselves to the Catholic Apostolic and Roman Church after the manner which that Church do's use to believe and to profess all the Christian and Orthodox Truths contained in the Holy Scripture which God hath manifested to the Prophets Apostles and Evangelists following the Interpretation and Sense of the Universal Church and renouncing all Errors and Heresies contrary thereunto 3. That for their great Consolation and Edification every Sunday before the Service there shall be read a Chapter of the Holy Scripture of the Old and New Testament in French according to the Translations approved by the Church and that all the Divine Service which is performed in Latin shall be explained in French by the Pastors of the Church 4. That they shall invoke no other besides God the Father Son and Holy Ghost 5. That they shall not believe that it is necessary to Salvation to have any other Intercession and Mediation than that of our Lord Jesus Christ towards God the Father 6. That they shall not be obliged to render any Divine Honour to Images which shall be in the Church 7. That they shall adore Jesus Christ in the Eucharist who is Really Spiritually and Sacramentally contain'd in that Adorable Sacrament 8. That this Consolation shall be given to the Faithful that they shall communicate in both Kinds if the Universal Church shall think it convenient Done at Orange the 11th of Nov. 1685. We James d' Obeilh by the Grace of God Bishop of Orange Abbot and Count of Montfor Counsellor of the King in all his Councils have admitted these who are countersigned to the Reunion of the Catholic Apostolic and Roman Church upon the Conditions expressed in the Eight Articles above written Done at Orange this 13th of Novemb. 1685. John James Bishop of Orange The Representer may I think see in this Example that he is out-done in his own way and that there are in the World more mild and inoffensive Representations of Popery than his own and some provisions for saving the Consciences of the Reformed which himself has not made But I would know of him whether he do's believe that those who united themselves to the Roman Church with these Cautions can be reasonably judged to have proceeded with satisfaction in themselves and about what they did Or rather whether there be not all the Signs that one can have in a thing of this Nature that being distressed between a troublesome Conscience on the one Hand and Count Tessés Troops on the other they capitulated as well as they could for their own quiet and granted what they did to be delivered from the Souldiers and no more than what they did if by that means they might pacify their own Minds A very miserable Case most certainly And that which is yet more to be lamented is that these things should be done by Christians upon Christians Let the Representer take it into his serious Consideration and I believe it will be one of those things that he will always forget to put into the Character of his Papist Represented But why must the Minds of Men be racked in this manner Why must they be brought under the most dangerous Temptations to cheat themselves and for the gaining of rest from outward Miseries to betray the Tranquillity of their own Consciences and be constrained to play such Tricks with them as if one Man should chuse to put upon another he would be accounted no better than a cunning Knave He that cannot see the true Reason of this unmerciful dealing and that too by this very Example can see but little It is Vnion that is to say Submission to what they call the Catholic Apostolic and Roman Church that must be by these means or by any means carried on This we meet with at the very head of the Provisions and again at the foot of them in the Bishop's Certificate Nor are any of the Reformed to expect otherwise but that this shall be expresly insisted on But because the poor People knew that Union to that Church carried dreadful Things along with it therefore they strugled and it seems they gained one of the prittiest Limitations of that Vnion that ever was heard of viz. To believe and to profess all the Christian and Orthodox Truths contained in the Holy Scripture which God hath manifested to the Prophets Apostles and Evangelists But then this Limitation would make the Vnion very insignificant for thus one may be united to the Turk viz. to believe and to profess all the Christian and Orthodox Truths contained in the Holy Scripture And therefore something must be added to that and certainly greater Artifice on both sides shall seldom be seen than what is shewn in putting in these words after the manner which that Church dos use which may indifferently refer either to reuniting or believing The People may understand it of being united to the Roman Church after the manner it uses till the Bishop teaches them to understand it of believing the Christian Truths of the Scripture after the manner of that Church And so by understanding the Scripture after the Interpretation and Sense of the Vniversal Church the Bishop has his meaning and they have theirs as long as he will suffer them The most jealous Princes never treated more nicely for their Honour than these poor Protestants did for their Conscience and their Masters for the Church of Rome And considering that they had but two hours allowed them to unite to the Roman Church before the last Extremity should be used upon refusal and that there were Difficulties on both Sides the Protestants consulted for their Consciences as much as it was possible for Men to do
Approved Councils or whether she has not The two Points are the Doctrine of the Invocation of Saints and the Doctrine of Worshipping Images If she has not done it then in the Church of Rome there can be no Doctrine concerning these two things which can be called a Doctrine of Faith. The Vindicator therefore will say I hope that she has delivered her Sense by her Voice And so I ask him in the Second place Whether by the Doctrine which the Church delivers he understands only so many Words put together and not rather the Sense of those Words which the Voice of the Church uses that is which her General and Approved Councils have put together to express their Meaning by This is a Question which the Vindicator must needs understand because I do in effect but borrow it of his Friends For the like Question has been often put to us by them and particularly by his good Friend the Representer and it may be by himself viz. Whether by the Scriptures we understand the Words or the Sense So say I by the Doctrines of Faith which the Vindicator says are delivered by the Voice of the Church in her General Councils Does he mean the Sense or the Words only of her Councils I will for once answer for him That he means the Sense which is contained under the Words I ask him therefore the Third time Whether the Sense of those Words which his General Councils have put together Pag. 6. be not as he says what truly we ought to mean by Popery If I may be bold to answer for him once more he must needs grant it For if the Churches Doctrine of Faith be the same with the Sense of her General Councils and if that which we ought to call Popery and to mean by Popery be the Churches Doctrine of Faith it will go very hard if Popery be not the Sense of her General Councils And now the Odious Distinction clears up apace in going this way to work For if that part of Popery which is made by Doctrines of Faith be neither more nor less than the Sense of General Councils concerning such Doctrines as we Protestants disclaim it follows presently that the Sense of those Councils is what we ought to call Popery And therefore 1. I humbly conceive that if there be two Parties in the Church of Rome that are not agreed what the Sense of her General Councils is it follows out of hand that so far they are not agreed about Popery and that for this very good Reason Because the Sense of her General Councils and the Faith part of Popery according to him is all one and indeed but two Expressions of the same thing 2. It follows also That in what Sense soever either of those Parties takes the Words of the Churches Councils that Sense is and must necessarily be that Parties Popery because the Sense of her Councils being Popery that which is to one Party the Sense of her Councils must likewise be Popery to that Party 3. If therefore one of those Parties takes the Words of her Councils in one Sense and another takes the same Words in a contradictory Sense then because the Sense in which the former takes those Words is the Popery of or to that Party and the Sense of the latter is its Popery it unavoidably follows that there are two pretended Poperies betwixt those two Parties which are inconsistent with one another 4. If the Sense of one of these Parties was that which prevailed without Controul ever since the Council of Trent till very lately and the Sense of the other Party is therefore but of yesterday then of these two Poperies the former must needs be the Old Popery and the latter the New Popery 5. So much Reason as we have to believe the Old Popery to be the true Sense of the Churches Councils rather than the New one so much reason also we have to believe that the Old Popery is the True Popery and the New to be but an Imposture or a Mistake of those of the Roman Church that have of late brought it up 6. And lastly If Protestants did not make those different Senses for them but each Party in that Church made them for themselves then this Distinction of an Old and a New Popery is no Misrepresentation Falsification or Calumny of Protestants but a Distinction grounded upon the Real Disagreement of Papists about Popery Quod erat demonstrandum But I think that Men were never put to it as we are to make solemn proof of things that are so evident that they need not to be proved at all The Council of Trent determines That we are to fly to the Prayers the Help and the Assistance of the Saints If we would know the Councils Sense in this Matter the Old ones will tell us that the meaning is we should have recourse to them for other Aids besides their Prayers And as one would verily take this for the meaning from the Construction of the Words themselves so the Terms of Invoking the Saints which were then used in their Offices and still are so do manifestly favour that Interpretation But our New Expositors come and tell us that they require no other Aid and Assistance from the Saints than their Prayers and the Vindicator intimates that if they did we should have something to say against the Lawfulness of what they practise If Popery therefore be not so much the Words of the Council in which I acknowledge they all agree as the Sense of the Council in which they do not agree how is it possible but that here are two Poperies in this matter advanced amongst themselves one against the other Again The Council of Trent affirms That due Honour and Veneration is to be given to Images And therefore what one Party in that Church takes to be that due Honour is Popery to them because 't is the Sense of the Church to that Party And what another believes to be so is their Popery And here I am sure if we find a Harmony 't is made up all of Discords Indeed one would have thought that the Council by Due Honour and Veneration had meant that Worship which was at that time given to Images in the Roman Church which their Offices required and for which their most celebrated Writers had contended And this way of coming to the Sense of the Council must lead a Man to the Popery of giving the same Honour to the Image that is due to the Prototype or at least an Inferior Honor by which the Image might be said to be truly and properly worshipped For the former Sense Cardinal Capisucchi does at this day earnestly contend and very fairly argues it against all Opposers from the Words of the Council But the Bishop of Meaux and the Representer and the Vindicator are as cross to that Sense as downright Contradiction can make them They say See Second Def. p. 31 32 c. That in presence of
Images respect is paid to the Persons whom they represent but Images themselves are not to be worshipped No God forbid but only used to put us in mind of the Original Thus they explicate the Language i. e. give us the Sense of their Church in her Decisions of Faith But so I dare say as it was never explicated before However if these Gentlemen believe the Sense of the Council to be as they say I wonder how it comes to pass that the Vindicator should not acknowledge it to be Popery For he must not forget that Popery is the Sense of the Church which she delivers by her Voice in Councils and therefore that the Sense of the Councils Words it truly Popery And consequently what He and His Party take to be their Sense they must in spite of their Hearts confess to be their Popery unless they care not how inconsistently they talk And then I would ask the Vindicator whether it be possible to reconcile his and the Bishops Sence with Cardinal Capisucchi's and those of his way The Truth is the Vindicator has given up the Cause for by saying that we bring only the private Sentiments of Men which other Members of the same Church condemn he confesses that they do in these things condemn one another Which perfectly acquits us from the charge of misrepresenting them when we say that there are two sorts of Popery amongst them by which we never meant any thing else than that one Party of them and that the greater does earnestly contend that that is Popery which the other utterly disclaims and does therefore set up another Sense of their Councils and their publick Offices opposite to that of the former As for his calling the Sentiments of the opposite Party Private Sentiments If he means that they keep their Persuasions to themselves and do not trouble the Church with them He is to know that as the Men are not private but of great Note and Authority in the R. Church and the number of their Followers far more considerable than of theirs who condemn them so their Sentiments are not private neither but as publick as Disputing for them and censuring and punishing their Opposers can make them But if I can understand him by private Sentiments he means the Sentiments of Men out of Council so that no measure is to be taken of the Doctrine of their Church by what is delivered by such Men tho they be Bishops or Cardinals and their number never so great and their Declarations never so publick and notorious and their Censures never so sharp against those that oppose them for still they are but the private Sentiments of Men out of Council Why then must the Representers or the Vindicators or even his Lordship the Bishop of Meaux's Sentiments concerning the Doctrine of the Church go for any other than the private Sentiments of Men For their Expositions have been neither made nor approved in General Councils Must Cardinal Capisucchi the Archbishop of Bourdeaux and Father Crasset with his Holy Bishops and Learned Doctors nay and with the Learned of all Nations be said to deliver only the Sentiments of private men whilest a few Teachers that arose in this Age whose Party is despicable who labour under the marks of Insincerity whose Doctrine being professed in good earnest is persecuted by that Church whose Faith it is said to be whilst those Men I say must be thought to deliver the True and Genuine Doctrine of the Church But if neither the one side nor the other side delivers the Sense of the Church Who knows what the Sense of the Church is and how shall I come by it The Vindicator directs me to the Express Words of General and Approved Councils But then I must needs ask him Who is to be Judge of the Sense of those express Words I see express Words indeed and I am very apt to think that I do understand the Sense of plain and express Words But if I may be allowed to understand express Words why can I not as well understand such Words in the Scriptures as in their Councils For the Words of the Scripture seem to me to be very expresly against many things that are held in the Church of Rome And here I have been told that this is not the Sense of the Scripture but my private Sense that the Scripture is a Dead Letter till the Churches Interpretation gives it Life and Sense that private Judgment is Fallible and therefore not to be relied upon that the same places seem to be express to one Man for this thing and to another Man for that thing that so many private Heads as there are so many Bibles there will be that after all our assurance that we understand plain and express Texts of Scripture there is no certainty to be had but by submitting to Authority and receiving Doctrines of Faith not from the Scripture but from the Church Well I submit to the Church and ask Where or by whom she delivers her Sence concerning Doctrines of Faith Ans By her Voice in her General and Approved Councils But where is that Voice to be heard Ans In the express Words of those Councils I go therefore to those Councils God help them that can't Here indeed I find express Words if a Man could but tell how to come to the Sense of them for I thought my self very sure of the meaning of express Words of Scripture But it seems I was mistaken then What assurance have I that I am not mistaken now For express Words are but as express Words in the Councils as they are in the Scriptures And if my Sence of such Words in the Scripture was but a private Sence before my Sence also of such Words in the Councils is no more now And therefore if I must trust to my own private Sence I shall be sorely tempted to go back again and to make as good a shift as I can with my private Sence and the Scriptures together rather than follow those who tell me my private Sence is not to be trusted and yet leave me to it at last For when all is done the Churches Sence according to this Man is a mere Notion of a thing that is no where to be found for the several Sences of her Words in Council are but the Sentiments of private Men which this Man opposes to the Sence of the Church to save his Church from two Poperies For instance if I go to Cardinal Capisucchi and his Party to ask them what the Churches Sence is of that due Honour and Veneration that is to be given to Holy Images they tell me the very same that is given to the Persons represented by them But what am I the nearer for this is but the Sentiment of private Men. I go to ask the Bishop of Meaux and his Party and they cry God forbid the Church requires no such thing But I conceive his Sentiment is as private as the Cardinals and so
Construction is no False Translator but a True one especially if that Sentence be part of a Work where the Latin is every where else very good and that Sense which the Construction makes agrees with all that is in connexion And 1. it agrees very well with the mention of those many Benefits which Reliques are said to be the Means of And 2. It holds with the Difference between the Matter of this Period and that of the foregoing one much better than the Vindicator's Sense does For he would have the Help of the Saints to be mentioned here But let him observe that this was abundantly taken care for in the Provision that went immediately before and therefore if it were Indifferent as it is not which way the Construction should be carried according to the use of Latin this should carry it for ours that here the Council was engaged in a new Matter not for the Invocation of Saints and the Benefits of that which are provided for before but for the Veneration of their Reliques and the Benefits that come that way which is the Business of this Period And now the Vindicator may consider to whom of right the Character of a False Translator belongs of a Falsifier and a Calumniator too Certainly Controversies about Religion were never disgraced by such mean Bickerings as these but who can help it that has to do with such Men as this Vindicator and his Friend the Representer So much for knowing the Sense of the Church by her Voice in her General and Approved Councils Again We are to know what the Church delivers as a necessary Practice Pag. 6. by her universally practising such things as necessary I ask therefore 1. Did not the Church intend her Public Offices for Rules of Vniversal Practice and are they not therefore one Means by which we are to judge of such Practice 2. Whether those things are not necessary to be done in the Roman Church which her Public Offices require 3. Whether she does not practice those things as necessary which she practises in conformity to her own Public Offices or Whether it be indifferent for the Children of the Church to observe her Rules or to refuse to observe them The Vindicator understood himself to be liable to these Questions and therefore when he comes to apply this Means of knowing the Churches Sense in necessary Practices he adds a new Limitation Vnless says he you can prove That what you term Old Popery was delivered as a Practice necessary TO SALVATION all you say will avail you nothing For the Church is to answer for nothing which she requires not as necessary to Salvation And tho she obliges all her Children to worship the Wood on Good-Friday and condemns those that refuse as Schismatics as Imberâ— knows to his Cost yet 't is not the Churches Sense that they should do so because the Rubric does not add that this is Necessary to Salvation So that if the Church had commanded us to worship Moloch that had not been Popery or the Churches Sense unless she had inserted that Reason for her Command That 't is necessary to Salvation to worship Moloch In a word The General Practice of the Church of Rome in the Service of the Virgin the Invocation of Saints and the Worship of Images is notorious to the World. And no Man that knows the authorized Practice can doubt of the Sense of the Church nor be ignorant that in these things the Bishop of Meaux has delivered not the Churches Sense but his own if indeed it be his own The Defender produced an Author of the Roman Communion who concluded that the true and only Means to free their Religion from the Exceptions of Heretics was to shew that it does not tolerate any thing but what is Good and that the Public Worship the Customs and Doctrines Authorized in it are Just and Holy. This Author had good Reason for what he said especially against the Bishop of Meaux who imputed to the Pagan Religion those Abuses which were publicly committed amongst them and laughed at the Expositions of the Philosophers that would put a good Sense upon their Abominable Worships The Vindicator says he admits the Parallel but he is certain that it will never make any thing for us till we can shew that the Church does or did make use of Racks and Gibbets and all sorts of Tortures to oblige People to believe and practise those things which we call Old Popery as the Heathens did to make them worship Idols That is to say He does not admit the Parallel tho he says he does admit it For the Bishop of Meaux was brought in charging Paganism with a Barbarous and Idolatrous Worship upon the account of their Notorious and Authorized Practices without regard to their Cruelties upon those that refused to comply with them And therefore if the Parallel be admitted we may conclude an Old Popery from a like general Practice without enquiring whether Racks and Gibbets and all sorts of Tortures were used to enforce it upon the people But the Vindicator has required a wise condition to make the Parallel hold for he says in effect that before Christianity appeared against Heathenism and till the Pagans had some people to hang and to torture Paganism could not be charged with a Corrupt and Idolatrous Worship And yet if this were necessary to be added Old Popery has not been behind hand with the use of Racks and Gibbets and all sorts of Tortures to speak all in a word it has had and to this day it has an Inquisition to uphold it As for what he says that the Defender must shew Pag. 7. that the Church allows such wicked Practices as correspond to his Authors example of Killing and Robbing and are as dangerous to the Church as those are to a State. I reply that the Question is not here how dangerous those Doctrines and Practices are which we call Old Popery but whether indeed they are to be charged upon the Church of Rome And the Similitude was brought to shew That it is to as little purpose to defend the Church of Rome against our exceptions by pretending that no decision of Council can be produced requiring that Service and Worship which is universally given to Saints and Images as to acquit a City where they rob and kill without contradiction by saying that there is no Law commanding Men to rob and murther one another As for the danger of those Doctrines and Practices which we call Old Popery 't is another Question in which I am pretty confident that Good Man the Representer is bound to appear He and the Vindicator therefore shall agree about it at their leisure I shall do my part to bring them fairly together and so let them compound the matter betwixt them as well as they can The Vindicator felt himself born down with those clear Testimonies of an Old Popery which the Defender plied him with and by what appears now he struggles
have a strong Fansie that the Good Advice is the Representer's own But the Vindicator's good Words of it will not I guess make amends for undoing the Representer in his main Chance 7. For that Parallel which the Defender required to the account of things in Q. Elizabeths time for which Dr. Heylin is quoted this Man says no more than to this purpose That if it were not for some hot-headed Spirits these brangles about Religion might be ended Which is as much as to say that he insinuated something which his Superiours have forbidden him to own It seems that it was to be insinuated but not spoken plainly But because he forbears I shall do so too and refer my self to the World if he has not now made Nonsence of the Application of Heylin's Account 8. As to his being a Spy upon the Defender his Vindication of himself is the very Master-piece of his Answer For no Man that closely attends to his Words can tell whether he denies or confesses it tho to a Superficial Reader he seems to deny it His Words are elaborately put together and tho I am in very great haste yet I must needs let the Reader see them If I reflected upon your preaching it was from meer report but he might be at Church when he did not reflect upon the Defenders preaching for I assure you Sir what you were told of my being sometimes a part of your Auditory is like many other Stories which you abound with in all your Writings I suppose too from hear-say But if the Defender were not told of it but saw him at Church then this comes not within the Case because he had it not then from Hear-say but from Eye-sight Again if the Defender were told of it then indeed he had it from Hear-say but he might hear the Truth for all that The Vindicator was afraid of Proof and I advise him to be so still That which follows is just such another pleasant Strain it concerns the Sunday Night Conferences but the Reader shall go for that himself as he likes the other But whereas upon this occasion of the Defenders Preaching he bids him ask his Conscience Whether they who acknowledge only One God whom they must adore can be guilty of such a Horrid Crime as to give Divine Worship to Saints I have asked the Defender about it who has also asked his Conscience and in the name of his Conscience he says That they may be guilty of that Horrid Crime And more then that he intends to give these Men such Reasons for his Conclusion as he is in his Conscience persuaded cannot be fairly answered In the mean time I will give the Vindicator a Question for his Question and desire him to put it to his own Conscience Whether a Woman who acknowledges only one Husband to whom she must pay Conjugal Duty can be guil-of such a horrid Crime as to give her Husband's Bed to another And then let him use a little Conscience in the Application 9. For what next follows That he would not be thought to have abused the Defender's Auditory that the Defender had better give up the Cause that he gave ill Language and justified it that he believes every idle Report of the Bishop of Meaux Pag. 11 12. rather than his Vindication and his explaining of the Word Reveries this shall all pass off quietly 10. And so should his next Reflexion too but that he is so warm upon it that he must not be neglected The Defender had affirmed those Expressions of St. Germane St. Anselm and the rest of 'em concerning the Virgin which Crasset had transcribed to be horrid Blasphemies This the Vindicator could not endure The Defender therefore transcribed them out of Crasset and left the Reader to judge What now says the Vindicator Why truly he knew not well what to say To confess plainly that they were Blasphemies would be to vindicate the Defender To deny it plainly was yet a little too soon for tho New Popery was drawing on it had not yet breathed its last He took a middle Course and thus informs the Defender Pag. 12. Had you only said that Father Crasset had collected such Passages from those great Saints as if taken in that strict and dogmatical sense he brought them for might be called Blasphemies that Father must only have answered for them This Man has a notable Gift of Speaking and saying nothing which does him great service at a pinch He does not say That if those Passages were taken in that strict and dogmatical sense for which Crasset brought them then they might be called Blasphemies for this had been to bring Father Crasset upon his back with all those great Saints which Crasset had already raised up against Widenfelt And yet he does not say That if the Defender had said what he supposes for him that Father Crasset could have brought himself off No he answers more warily That that Father must only have answered for them which it may be he could and it may be he could not Now here he should have ended For Crasset may take himself to be sacrificed in what follows But to lay them to those Holy Saints Charges to call them Superstitious Men their Expressions horrid Blasphemies is what truly pious Ears cannot hear without Indignation For Father Crasset is in an ill case if to lay the Holy Saints Expressions in Crasset's sense to the charge of the Holy Saints be what truly pious Ears cannot hear without Indignation But I beg the Vindicator's Pardon for now I see how Crasset may be brought off again or rather the Vindicator For perhaps that which pious Ears cannot hear is not every Particular by it self but altogether i. e. pious Ears may hear those Passages laid to the charges of the Saints even in Crasset's sense but that therefore those Saints should be called Superstitious Men and their Expressions Horrid Blasphemies as they were not by Crasset but by the Defender this is what truly pious Ears cannot hear without Indignation Now after all this dexterity he has not offered to shew that those Passages which the Defender produced are not horrid Blasphemies or that they are capable of a good sense If the Reader has forgot them he may go to the Defender for them p. 89 90 c. and then he will be satisfied that all this shuffling comes to no more than this that the Vindicator cannot bear any thing that reflects dishononourably upon his Great and Holy Saints but his pious Ears can hear Expressions from them that do blasphemously reflect upon Almighty God without any Indignation at all 11. The Defender produced those Prayers and Ceremonies in the Consecration of a Cross which to him seemed to be Magical Incantations rather than Prayers The Vindicator to be even with him says That we use the like Prayers and Ceremonies in the Consecration of Churches and Chappels Now if we do then I for my part will say
only in presence of their Images I stand corrected and desire to know what Rule I am to go by in judging what Popery is in all other Doctrines that I may not be mistaken again as I was before The Vindicator tells me That what I can prove from the express Words of the Churches Councils and what they have Positively defined and declared that is Popery as to Doctrines of Faith and nothing else Well I am now furnished for a Journey into France or Spain or Italy because now I know what Popery is as a Man ought to do that ventures into those Parts There for instance at Sevil or at Bourdeaux I am apt to talk as other foolish Men have done before me Crucifixes say I are upon no account whatsoever to be honoured with Divine Worship Images say I are not properly to be Worshipped No God forbid The Church requires it not and so forth But I soon find that this English Popery for so I must now call it does not agree with those Climates and that my Propositions are Heretical there and since the Definition of the Council of Trent intolerable I pretend truly that I had my Popery from a Man that admits nothing for Popery but what is proved from the express Words of Councils They laugh at me and assure me that my Propositions are to be found in Councils neither in express Words nor by any good Consequence I desire to know if my Propositions be contrary to the express Words of Councils They tell me that they are contrary to the Sense of the Council of Trent and I find that unless I could shew where the Council does expresly define against what they call Popery I shall have but little comfort of insisting upon my English Rule That nothing is Popery but what is expresly defined in Council For at Sevil I am forced to retract my Propositions as Heretical and at Bourdeaux I am Imprisoned and because I am not a Man of Renown my Lord the Bishop of Meaux will not break with his Friend the Archbishop for so small a Matter as the Ruine of a Man of no Renown And this I get by learning Popery from the English Vindicator of the French Expositor Now if this be not as clear a Demonstration of two Poperies as any Difference in the World needs to have a Man must be forsaken of his Reason and bereft of his Senses For if I say this thing is Popery here in England I am a Misrepresenter a Falsifier and a Calumniator too If I go into a warmer Sun and say in the simplicity of my Heart concerning the very same thing that it is not Popery there I am a Misrepresenter a Falsifier and a Calumniator too for saying so And which is somewhat worse if I do but hold my own they will not only say that I am a Misrepresenter but they will use me like one too or rather like an Heretic Now if on the other side a Man has but apprehension enough to understand when one thing contradicts another as for example that to say of a certain Doctrine concerning Image-Worship That it is Popery is a Contradiction to saying of the very same Doctrine That it is not Popery and that the contrary is Popery And if on the other side he has sense enough to understand when he is rail'd at by those that say 't is not Popery for saying that it is and worse than railed at by those that say 't is Popery for saying that 't is not I will give the Vindicator leave to write a Book as big as Aquinas his Summs and as full of Subtilty to prove to the same Man or to any Man else that for all this there are not Two Poperies among Papists This of Image-Worship is the Case about which the Vindicator called the Defender all to naught and concludes with this remarkable Saying What I have said in this Case is applicable to all others With all my heart for so say I too What I have said in this Case is applicable to all others viz. where we pretend this Distinction to hold between Old and New Popery I should now leave this Point but that he still insists with an unparallell'd Confidence that the Defender is a false Translator of that Passage in the Council of Trent which concerns Reliques I shall therefore once more go our Fallible way to work to vindicate his Translation and thereby to shew from the express Words of the Council of Trent that the Old Popery was to seek the Aid of Reliques The Council having established the Invocation of Saints Sess 6. proceeded also to establish the Veneration of Reliques in these Words That the Holy Bodies of the Holy Martyrs and of others who live with Christ which were the Living Members of Christ and the Temple of the Holy Ghost and to be raised up by him to Eternal Life and glorified are to be venerated by the Faithful by which many Benefits are from God bestowed upon Men. Ita ut affirmantes Sanctorum Reliquiis venerationem atque honorem non deberi vel eas aliaque sacra monumenta à fidelibus inutiliter honorari atque EORVM opis impetrandae causâ Sanctorum memorias frustra frequentari omnino damnandos esse So that they who affirm Veneration and Honour not to be due to the Reliques of the Saints or that those and other Sacred Monuments are unprofitably honoured by the Faithful and that for the obtaining of THEIR help the Memories of the Saints are in vain frequented are to be condemned This is a Literal Translation and I say That by THEIR Help we are to understand the Help of Reliques and other Monuments not as the Vindicator would have it of the Saints To put some Colour upon his own Translation he inverted the Order of the Words as the Defender accused him and he has said nothing to it But Their Help must be the Help of Reliques and Monuments because otherwise the Construction of the Latin is False and against Rule For had the Council meant what the Vindicator says the Words must have run thus Or that those and other Sacred Monuments are unprofitably honoured Vel eas aliaque sacra monumenta inutiliter honorari atque SANCTORVM opis impetrandae causâ EORVM memorias frustra frequentari and that for the obtaining of the Help of the Saints Their Memories are in vain frequented The Relative Eorum had this way been determined to the Saints and so it had been placed if that had been the meaning because otherwise Eorum would according to the Rules of Latin Construction fall to the share of Monumenta and this tho Eorum does by chance agree in Number and Gender with Sanctorum that comes afterward but which comes out of place there for Eorum to be referred to it because this Relative had a very good Antecedent of its own before This therefore I say That he who Translates a Latin Sentence according to true Latin