For though he florish with Greek and Latinâ—quotations of Fathers joynd to Scripture which they do not yet since there is no visible Judge talk'd of in it but himself that is able to speak What is this but private spirit having little measure of the gift of Tongues more than Quakers have So that let them preach as much as they will the result of all Dispute between them and us must come to this Whether their last speaking Iudge in England or ours in the whole Catholic Church deserves better to be believ'd and rely'd on 5. It cannot be deny'd but that there is somthing of Truth in all these Sects The Guide which each of them respectively layes claim to is a justifiable Guide though being alone not sufficient For 1. To exclude Reason from guiding us would be to become Beasts 2. To exclude Gods Spirit from directing us would be to cease being Christians 3. To renounce the Testimony of Antiquity and Authority of General Primitive Councils would be an arrogant temerity unpardonable 4. And last of all to deny a judging determining power to the present visible Governors I mean those Governors and Synods which are Superior in respect of all other Governors or Synods Inferior would be to make all Heresies and Schisms justifiable Therefore not any of these partial Guides must be neglected Yet unlesse they all concur that which we take to be Reason and Inspiration and the sense of the Primitive Church may deceive and mis-guide us 6. Now it is only the Roman Catholic Church whose enâ—â—re Guidance proceedâ— from all these and the effect of which Guidance in full satisfaction to each mans Soul and universal peace in Gods Church which effects cannot possibly flow but from a complication of all these Guides Roman Catholics admit Reason to judge of the sense of Scripture as the Socinians do but they give due bounds to Reason nay they silence it quite when it would presume to judge of incomprehensible Mysteries and reject them because Philosophy cannot comprehend them When Reason has found out the sense of Scripture they with the Presbyterians and even Fanatics acknowledge it is Divine Inspiration that moves the Soul to assent thereto and embrace the verities contained in Scripture directing their actions accordingly But because the Devil can transform himself into an Angel of Light neither can there be any Guide more dangerous then false Inspirations they conclude that all such pretended Inspirations are indeed Diabolical Suggestions which are prejudicial to Honesty Virtue Piety and the common Rules of Obedience both Spiritual and Civil All Inspirations which which incite private uncommission'd persons to reform either Churches or State all that nourish Factions or Commotions in the Common-wealth All that beget Pride and an opinion of self-sufficiency or an humor of censuring others especially Superiors In a word whensoever the spirit of single Prophets refuse to be subject to the community of the Prophets that is Church Governors such Inspirations in Catholic Religion are rejected detested and sent back to the Infernal Father of them 7. Moreover Roman Catholics do willingly and confidently appeal to the Primitive Church the four first General Councils and the holy Fathers But universal experience demonstrating it impossible that any writing can end a Debate between multitudes of persons interessed and therefore not impartial or indifferent their last recourse is to the present visible Church which cannot declare her sense to us in any other way then as she is represented by her Pastors out of all Nations that is by a General Council All Catholics submiting to this Council not their tongues only but also their judgments by following the Church thus with humility shew that they are guided both by Reason Inspiration and Examples of Primitive Fathers Hence St. Austin sayes We receive the Holy Spirit if we love the Church if we rejoice in the name of Catholics and in the Catholic Faith And elsewhere Contra rationem nemo sobrius c. No sober man will admit an opinion against Reason no Christian against Scriptures no lover of peace and unity against the Church And this only is the Guide that we say and presently will demonstrate to be infallible 8. Now that the final Decision of all Controversies in Faith can only be expected from such a Guide and consequently that all Christians under pain of damnation are obliged never to contradict this Guide and alwaies to assent when it requires we are taught not by Reason only but God himself also and this in the Law of Moses The whole Nation of the Iews saith St. Augustin was as it were one great Prophet the policie of their Church was the Scheme of the Christian to the twelve Princes of their Families answer'd the twelve Apostles to the Seventy Elders the Seventy Disciples to the several Courts of Judgement our Ecclesiastical Synods to the great Sanhedrim a general Council and to the High Priest our Supreme Pastor Now for our present purpose the Ordinance that God made in the Jewish Church for deciding Controversies about the Law ran thus If there arise a matter too hard for thee in judgement c. that is as we find in 2 Chron. 19. 8. between blood and blood between Law and Commandment Statutes and Iudgements then shalt thou arise and get thee into the place which the Lord thy God shall chuse And thou shalt come to the Priests and Levites and to the Iudge that shall be in those dayes and enquire and they shall shew thee the sentence of Iudgement and thou shalt do according to the sentence which they shall shew thee c. Thou shalt not decline from the sentence to the right hand or to the left The man that will do presumptuously and will not hearken to the Priest or unto the Iudge even that man shall die and thou shalt put away the evil from Israel Upon those words in this passage unto the Iudge that shall be in those daies Ainsworth out of the Rabbins observes that if the high Synedrion had determin'd of a matter after another Synedrion rose up which upon Reasons seeming good unto them disannulled the former Sentence then it was disannull'd and Sentence passed according as seemed good to those later So that the present Authority was alwaies to take place and no Appeals to be made from it For if any Disputes against the Sentence of living speaking Iudges upon any pretence whatsoever either of a private exposition of the Law or the Authority of preceding Rabbies were allow'd there would never want Contentions and Schisms in the Synagogue And observe that in this obedience was implyed an assent or submission of Judgment For otherwise it would be against Conscience in case the party continued in a contrary opinion of the sense of the Law It is just so and alwaies has been so in the Catholic Church The present Superiors living and speaking must conclude all Controversies their Interpretation of Scripture and Fathers
arguments he knows St. Gregory makes use of in several Epistles both to the Emperor to Iohn himself and others which being already produc'd by him need not be repeated Yet for all this neither Pelagius nor St. Gregory notwithstanding their detesting this Title did therefore quit their right to the Vniversal Pastorship of the Church and their Iurisdiction over all both Bishops and Patriarks too nay they assert it in these very Epistles wherein they are most sharp against that Title as shall be shew'd 6. The reason of this 't is manifest the Preacher does not understand therefore let him not disdain to be inform'd The like Order that is observ'd in the Church of England he may conceive is observed in the Catholic Church that is that the same person may be both a Bishop an Archbishop and a Primat I will add also the Supreme head of the Church as the Archbishop of Canterbury is among Eccâ—esiasticks For as for his Majestys Supremacy in Ecclesiastical affairs it is not in this place to be treated of Now my Lord of Canterbury is just like other Bishops merely a Bishop in his Diocese of Canterbury He is likewise a Metropolitan in his Province to visit all Bishops in it but he is not a Bishop in the other Dioceses subject to him for in them none have Episcopal right but only the respective Bishops themselves which are not removeable by him unlesse they incur crimes that by the Canons deserve it Lastly he is a Primat over both Provinces that is the whole Nation yet without prejudice to the other Metropolitan in whose office of Visitation and Ordinations he cannot interpose though he have a power to summon him to a National Council c. And in this regard he may be stiled the Vniversal Pastor of England and by being so makes the Church of England to be one National Church which otherwise would have two Episcopal heads Yet if any one should stile him the Vniversal Bishop of England it would not be endured because he can exercise Functions properly Episcopal in no other Province or Diocese but his own By considering this well the Doctor may more clearly apprehend how matters stand in the Catholic Church 7. For though this Title of Vniversal Bishop taken in some sense might draw after it such ill consequences yet being apply'd to the Supreme Pastor of God's Church it might innocently signifie no more but such a general Superintendency as the Scriptures allow to St. Peter and the Canons of the Church also have acknowledged due to his Successors and with such an innocent meaning as this Title was used long before in the 3d. Act of the Council of Chalcedon without any contradiction of the same Council to Pope Leo Boniface the Third did accept it from Phocas yet having done so it seems to me apparent that he neither exercised nor challenged the least access of Iurisdiction by it more than himself and his Predecessors had enjoy'd And of this the Doctor himself shall be Judge If he can find any proof to the contrary let him produce it and I will immediately recall what I have said 'T is true as appears in the History of the Council of Trent written by the Illustrious and learned Cardinal Palavicino that there was in that Council an earnest and constant opposition made by the French Prelates against naming the Pope Bishop of the Vniversal Church who in conclusion absolutely gained the silencing of that Title But this happened not because these denied to the Pope an Universal Superintendency over the whole Church or over all Churches taken disjunctively for this they willingly acknowledged but they opposed this Title only as the Universal Church might be taken in a collective sense that is to say as united in a General Council whereby a right of Superiority over a General Council may seem to be determin'd to the prejudice of the Decisions of the Councils of Constance and Basil which in this matter they allowed CHAP. IV. The absolute necessity of a Supreme Pastor in the Church Supremacy of Iurisdiction exercised by Pope Boniface the Third his Predecessors viz. St. Gregory P. Pelagius P. Felix P. Gelasius P. Leo. The 28th Canon of Chalcedon illegal Of the 2d Canon of the first Council of Constantinople 1. BEing now to demonstrate more than a Primacy of Order a primacy of Iurisdiction in the Predecessors of Boniface the Third extending it self to all Christians all particular Prelates and Churches yet a Supremacy not unlimited for then General Councils would be useless but sufficient to preserve unity in the Church I will first to make it appear reasonable declare the ground of the necessity of it which in brief is as the Preacher will find by the succeeding Testimonies of the Fathers because since General Councils the only absolute Supreme Authority Ecclesiastical either for want of agreement among Princes or by the inconvenience of the long absence of Prelates or great expences c. can very seldom be summon'd it would be impossible without an Ordinary constant standing Supreme Authority in the Church to prevent Schisms that is it is impossible the Church should subsist 2. For what effect against Schism can be expected from a meer Primacy of Order a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a sitting at the upper end of the Table a priviledge to speak first or to collect Votes Therefore for a Protestant to deny a Primacy of Iurisdiction to be necessary to conserve unity as in a National Church so in the Vniversal is to give up his own cause to the Presbyterians For all the subtilty of human wit without such a Concession can never answer the arguing thus If according to the Doctrin of the Fathers there be a necâ—ssity of setting up one Bishop â—ver many Fresbyters for preventing Schism there is say they as great a necessity of setting up one Archbishop â—ver many Bishops and one Patriark over many Arch-Bishops and one Pope over all unlesse men will imagin that there is a danger of Schism only among Presbyters and not among Bishops Arch-bishops c. which is contrary to reason truth history and experience But what expedient now without such a primacy of Iurisdiction can the Presbyterians find out against the mischief of Schism Truly no other but by rejecting that Article of the Creed in which we professe the certainly visible unity of the Catholic Church that is by believing that Schism iâ— no such ill thing as that much care needs be used to prevent it But surely English Protestants not having blotted out of their Creed that Article since they acknowledge the constituting one Bishop necessary to the unity of a Diocesse c. will find great difficulty to shew a reason why one Governor is not as necessary to the â—nity of the whole Church to which only both unity and Indefectibility is promised and without which the unity of Provinces or Dioceses are but factions 3. Certain it is that the antient Fathers thought so
When there are many Popes the Church has many Heads When the Pope is Heritical the Church has such a Head as makes her deserve to be beheâ—ded Whatever advantage the Doctor expects from such a Discourse as this it must flow from a childish Cavil upon the word Head and whatever consequences he here draws from thence against the Pope may as well be applyed to all kind of Governors whether Ecclesiastical or Civil For they are all Heads within their Precincts A King is the Head of his Kingdom and a Bishop of his Diocesse When we call therefore the Pope Head of the Church we mean that among all Governors thereof he is the Supream in the sense before declared He is a Head but not so as Christ is in respect of his Mystical body who by his Spirit internally quickens and directs it The Pope is only an external ministerial visible Head and as it were Root of Vnity and Government All this no question the Doctor knew before to be our meaning and by consequence he knew that his inferences from thence were pitifully pedantic insignificant though many of his Court-hearers and Country-readers perhaps wonder there can remain a Papist in England unconverted after such a Sermon has been publish'd 15. When there is no Pope says the Preacher the Church wants a Head It is granted For sure he does not think it is a part of our Faith to believe Popes are immortal But yet for all that the Papacy is immortal The Government is not dissolv'd Succession is not interrupted It is a Maxim in our Law that Kings dye not that is the Regal Authority lives though Kings in their particular persons dye Nor is there any substantial difference as to this point between hereditary and elective Monarchy And in this sense we may say that Popes dy not nor Bishops Partly because when a Bishop or the Pope dys at least his Jurisdiction remains in the Chapter or Body of Electors Hence it is that in St. Cyprian we read Epistles of the Roman Clergy exercising authority beyond the Diocese of Româ— But principally because when an Ecclesiastical Superior dyes there remains by Christs Ordination a vis generativa or virtue in the Church to constitute another in his place and so to continue the Government There has been oft times a long vacancy in the Apostolic See as well as in Dioceses and Kingdoms After the death of Pope Fabian before there were any Christian Emperors the See was vacant for above a years space yet neither did St. Irenâ—us Optatus Epiphanius or St. Augustin when they objected the chain of Succession in St. Peters Chair esteem that thereby the Chain had been broken neither did any old Hereticks make use of such an argument to invalidate the Popes authority 16. But what shall we say to the Doctors next inference in a case of Schism when there are many Popes then says he the Church is become a Monster with many Heads But he is deceived As when after the death of a King several pretenders to the Crown appear there is still by right but one legitimate Successor all the rest are Rebels and Tyrants It is so in the Papacy In that case St. Cyprians Rule holds If the Church be with Novatian it was not with Cornelius who by a lawful Ordination succeeded Fabian Novatian therefore is not in the Church nor can be esteemed a Bishop of Rome Or if it be uncertain to which of them the right pertains so that some Nations adhere to one Head others to another it is a great calamity but yet the Church remains though wounded yet not wounded to death A General Council cures all 17. If the Pope according to Doctor Pierce his supposition should prove an Heretic he infers very improperly that the Church haâ— such a Head as makes her deserve to be beheaded For in that case the Pope is so far from remaining a Head that he is not so much as a Member of the Church but is deprived not only of the Administration but also the Communion of the Church as other Heretical Bishops are So that then there is a pure vacancy I shall not be so severe as to take notice of the unhansom not to say unmannerly terms the Doctor uses in expressing the last branch of this Objection 18. Thus much concerning the Doctors first pretended Novelty of the Roman Church the Popes primacy Now whether my asserting that Primacy or his denying it to be a Novelty and whether his proofs or mine are more concluding I leave to the Readers consciences He will excuse my dilating on this Point because therein I follow his own example for he tels his Majesty He has spoken most at large of the Popes supremacy and his reasons given for such Largenesse shall be mine too though I believe we shall have different meanings yet without equivocation even when we deliver our reasons in the same words For i. I also acknowledg the Popes supremacy to be the chief if not only hinge on which does hang the stress of more than Papal the Ecclesiastical Fabrick as being the Cement of the Churches unity 2. Because it is a point wherin say I likewise the Honor and safety of his Majesties Dominions are most concerned His meaning is that no danger is to be apprehended for England but only from that Point I am sure on the contrary that whilst such a Primacy purely spiritual was acknowledged in England the Church here was never torn in pieces with Schisms nor poyson'd with Heresies The Throne was never in the least danger upon that account never was a Sword drawn for or against it Some few little more than Paper-quarrels hapned between the English and Roman Court about matters not of Religion but outward Interests in which generally the Pope had the worst at last But the Honor and Safety of these Dominions were far from being prejudiced The Kings of France always have been and stil continu as jealous and tender of their temporal Regalities as ever any Princes were yet they account it one of the most sparkling Jewels of their Crown that they call themselves the eldest and most devoted Sons of the Catholic Church The acknowledging the Spiritual Primacy of the chief Pastor they find a greater honor and defence to them than many Armies would be because it preserves peace and unity in that Kingdom not by the terror of Swords drawn and Muskets charged in their Subjects faces but by subduing their minds and captivating their consciences to Faith and Obedience And let Doctor Pierce be assured without a Spiritual Authority which may have influence on the hearts of Christian Subjects all their preaching and Laws too will prove but shaking Bulwarks for supporting Monarchy 19. But we must not yet leave this passage without considering it a little better He saith That in the point of the Popes Supremacy of Iurisdiction the honor and safety of his Majesties Dominions are most concern'd his
general were allow'd them That the Church is fallible in unnecessaries this will not excuse them for dissenting from the Church in any particular Doctrines actually decided by a General Council Themselves acknowledge that all dissenting even internal is unlawful without a certain demonstration that the Church hath actually erred in such and such Doctrines But which way possibly can any particular person or Church arrive to such a demonstration It must be by producing express Scripture or universal Tradition formally opposite and contradictory to what the universal Church hath declared Who can think who dares believe that those supreme Guides of all Christians who were by our Lord placed in the Church and graced with such promises who are the only Guardians of the Scripture it self and only unappealable Iudges of the sense of it should conspire to propose Doctrines formally and manifestly contrary to express Scripture or evident demonstration And as for universal Tradition there can be no Iudge of it but the whole Church particular persons or Churches are utterly uncapable of making such a judgment especially in opposition to the whole Church 11. It were happie therefore if Protestants considering the Promises of Christ and the necessity of unity in the Church would allow but as much submission to the Supreme Tribunal of his Church as God obliged the Iews to perform to their Sanedrim to which no such Promises were made For then though in Thesi they did affirm the Church to be fallible yet they would acknowledge that not only all declaration of non-assenting is forbidden but an internal assent is of necessary obligation to every one of her Decisions 12. Let them seriously consider the passage of Deuteronomy heretofore produced in which God commands the Jews under the penalty of death to obey whatsoever sentence should be pronounced by the present Iudges of those dayes in any Controversies touching the Law This Precept argues that the Supreme Council of the Iews was infallible in Fundamentals And indeed God had promised that the Scepter should not depart from Judah nor a Law-giver from between his knees till Shiloh that is the Messias came By vertue of which Promise the Iewish Religion could not fail in Fundamentals and the effect of this Promise was manifestly performed For as to the outward proâ—ession and practises of the Mosaical Law it was alwayes continued in so much as our Saviour himself enjoyned Obedience to all the Commands of those who sate in Moses his Chair I say as to the outward practises of it For in the Spiritual sense of it the Iewish Ecclesiastical Magistrates were horribly perverted so far as to oppose and Murder the Messiah himself typified therein But now Shiloh was already come and God's promise of Indefectibility rested in this New High Priest and his Successors 13. Notwithstanding all this yet Errors might creep in about non-fundamentals as the Rabbins confess when they suppose a future Sanedrim might annul the Decisions of a former Council in which case the Ordinances of the later must take place and without all tergiversation be obeyed So as though they being indeed in such things fallible should command any thing contrary to the true sense of the Law the Iews were under the utmost penalty obliged to obey them which obedience required a submission of Judgment and internal assent to such Commands that they were agreeable to God's Law because it would be utterly unlawful to obey any commands of men which the Subject believed to be contrary to God's Law Now the reasonableness of this Command of God appears in this That it was a less evil and inconvenience that some Legal Precepts of no great importance should be transgressed than that Contentions and Disputes should be endless 14. From this pattern Protestants may be instructed that though they should allow a General Council no more obliging Authority than the Iews did to their Sanedrim which was infallible in fundamentals but subject to Error in non-fundamentals they can never have a warrant to Dissent from any Decisions of such a Council but ought to submit their internal Judgment to them For since it is impossible they should have any demonstrative proofs that such Councils have de facto erred I mean in matter of Doctrine all other inferiour Judgments all only probable Arguments against them ought to cease the Judgment of the whole Church rendring all contrary opinions altogether improbable So that though upon their Supposition that the Church in non-fundamentals is fallible she should have erred in such not-much-concerning Decisions and by consequence their assent would be erroneous yet that small incommodity would be abundantly recompenc'd with the most acceptable vertue of Obedience humble submission of Judgment love of Peace and Unity which accompanies it Besides that both Truth and Errour in such things lyes only on the Churches and not at all on their account 15. But since Protestants find an extraordinary difficulty more than Catholicks to submit their Judgments to Authority and are apt to think all their opinions and perswasions to be certain knowledges Let it be supposed that their first Reformers not being able to perswade themselves to renounce their Opinions should thereupon have been excommunicated by the Church In this case they ought to have suffered such Censures with patience and not voluntarily forsake her Communion and much less ought they to have set up or repair to an Anti-communion For that was in the highest degree a Formal Schism 16. In all this discourse touching the Infallibility of the Church and the unlawfulness of separation from it I do not mean a Church of one denomination no not the Roman as such for so we ascribe not Infallibility to her But I intend the Vniversal Church which we call Roman Catholick because all true Orthodox Churches an union of which constitutes the Universal Church acknowledge the Roman Church to be the Root of their Unity Therefore Protestants in vain seek to excuse their separation upon pretence it was onely from the Roman not from the Vniversal Church because 1. A separation from the external Communion of any one true Member of the Catholick Church for Doctrines which are commonly held by other Churches in communion with that Member is indeed a separation from all Churches which is manifestly the case of the English separation 2. Because it is evident that the pretended Reformed Churches really separated themselves a toto mundo A thing which Calvin confesseth in an Epistle of his to Melancthon in these words Nec non parvi refert c. For it doth not a little concern us that not the least suspition of any discord risen among us descend to posterity For it were a thing more then absurd after we have been constrained to make a discession from the whole world if we in our very beginnings should also divide from one another And which Chillingworth also confesseth in several places cap. 5. sect 55. As for the external Communion of the
the English Reformation because by the like examinatâ—on he finds that Roman Doctrins are 〈◊〉 and that 〈◊〉 initio non fuit sic Therefore they as Jewish Divorces are 〈◊〉 abolished and that only to be confirmed which God instituted from the Beginning But he little considers that our Saviours saying It was not so signifies It was directly contray to SO as if he said You allow Divorces ob quamcunque causam in manifest opposition to God's Ordinance from the Beginning who said Whomsoever God hath joyn'd let no man put asunder This is therefore a Novelty necessary to be reform'd Now if the Preacher would have made use of this indeed perfect Primive Rule of Refermation he by his Text was obliged to have produced from the Beginning that is either in Scriptures or in the Fathers within the four first General Councils some expresse Authorities and Decisions directly contrary to Roman Doctrines which he calls Novelties He ought to have quoted out of Holy Scriptures or some Councils or consent of Fathers such sayings as these 1. St. Peter and his Successors never bad nor ought to have any Supremacy of Iurisdiction 2. The whole Church is a fallible Guide not to be relyed upon against our private sence of God's Word 3. There is no state after death in which Souls may find refreshment by the prayers of the living 4. The body of Christ is not substantially present on the Altar 5. There is no true Christian Sacrifice 6. Both Elements are essential to the Sacrament 7. All respect to Images is forbidden 8. Invocation of Sains is unlawful 9. The Scriptures must be given into all mens hands without any certain guide to interpret them 10. Prayers not in a vulgar tongue though interpreted are abominable 11. To forbid the use of Mariage to Priests is a Doctrine of Devils 12. To separate Bed and Board among maried persons though when without danger of their lives they cannot live together is a practice condemn'd by our Lord. And after all 13. To break the visible unity of God's Church for Doctrines and Practises not in themselves causing Damnation but onely said to be false is the Duty of every good Christian. Such sayings as these had been to some purpose they would have been pertinent to his Text But no such appear On the contrary it serves his turn to say again and again From the Beginning it was not so This is the burthen of his Song If he can shew that because this is the first time we hear or read such a Doctrine mentioned in any Ecclesiastical writer as Origen Tertullian c. therefore it is a Novelty it was never in the Church before the saies somthing to the purpose But let me ask him was there no Doctrine at all in the Church before it was written Or was there no Doctrine in the Church but what was written And again is all that 's written in any Age still Extant and come to our hands Or do those Fathers who first writ it say That they or their times first introduc'd it No On the contrary they expressly declaim against Innovations Noveltie is their Prescription against all Heresies So that for them to bring into the Church any Doctrines not heard of or not received before had been to profess themselves Hereticks and there would not have wanted other Fathers that would have condemned such Innovations Which yet was never done to Origen or Tertullian c for any Doctrines mentioned by the Preacher Whereas for other Errors they were sufficiently proscribed From whence 't is evident that through the whole Sermon there is a palpable misapplication of the Text and that the Preacher has been injurious to our Saviour in making his just condemnation of the Pharisees a warrant for him unjustly to condemn his Church Indeed in all matters left indifferent and no way commanded from the beginning nor contrary to any Divine Revelation the Church of later times may vary as she thinks sit either from the practice or injunctions of the former For example supposing Celibacy of the Clergy the 7th Point the Doctor instances in had not been practised or mentioned from the beginning yet if God had not commanded the contrary and the thing in it self be feasible of which more anon the Church of a later Age may lawfully enjoyn it The Rule therefore holds only for matters of Faith and Divine Revelation In which 't is true That the Later times may not vary from the former But yet neither doth the Rule hold in these as to the express terms of every Proposition that is matter of Faith but only as to the sense and substance It is not necessary that ab initio God the Son should be declared in expresse terms Consubstantial with the Father which was first put into the Christians â—reed by the Council of Nice But only that that Doctrine can be shewed ab initio which is identified in sense with this Nor can I think the Doctor upon second considerations will offer to gainsay so plain a truth But it is now time to Examin the particular Pâ—ints which he charges on the Church as Novelties and of each of which be saies as unwarrantably as our Lord against the Iewish Innovations said justly From the beginning it was not so CHAP. IV. The sum of Dr. Pierce's Discourse against the Pope's Supremacy enervated by himself The Churches Doctrin touching that Supremacy The Text Mark 10. 42. cleared 1. IN the Doctor 's Catalogue of Roman Novelties the first is The Supremacy of the Pope Concerning which he tells his Majestie he has spoken most at large because it is a Point wherein the honour and safety of his Dominions are most concern'd And because by Bellarmin 's Assertion it is the chief if not onely hirge on which does hang the whole stresse of the Papal Fabrick This universal Superintendency or Supremacy of the Pope saies he hath been a visible usurpation ever since Boniface the 3d. to whom it was sold by the most execrable Phocas the greatest Villain in the world except Cromwel and Pontius Pilate not out of reverence to the Pope but in displeasure to Cyriacus Patriark of Constantinople c. 2 In contradiction to this Usurpation he adds But from the beginning it was not so For we find in Scripture the Apostles were equally foundations of the wall of God's City c. They were all as St. Cyprian saies Pari consortio praediti honoris potestatis And S. Hierom is as expresse And sure Paul who withstood Peter to his face was equal to him at the least And for any one Bishop to affect over his Brethren a Supremacy of Power and Iurisdiction is a most impudent opposition both to the Letter and Sense of our Saviour's precept Mark 10. 42 43 44. They that rule over the Gentiles exercise Lordship over them c. But so shall it not be among you but whosoever c. Nay by the Canons of the two first
their Epistle To our most holy Lord and Brother Silvester Marinus and the Synod of Bishops assembled together in the Town of Arles We have signified to your charity the things decreed by common Council to the end that all may know what they ought for the future to observe Here may be seen a Patriarchical council sending their Decrees to the Bishop of Rome as being the chief person from whom all Christians are to receive information of what they ought to believe and practise and by whom no doubt they were to be obliged thereto In which regard St. Martin Pope and Martyr makes this the Popes most proper Title that he is Custos Canonum Divinorum 14. At this Council were present three Bishops Representatives of the British Clergy Eborius Bishop of York Restitutus Bishop of Lonidon Adelphius Bishop of Maldon called then Colonia Londinensium with Sacerdos a Priest and Arminius a Deacon And the Canons of this Council were by Restitutus brought into Britany saith Bishop Godwin out of Bale By which also it appears that neither the Pope himself nor his place and authority in the Church were unknown nor un-acknowledged by the Britains long before St. Augustines days 15. And now it will be seasonable to answer the Doctors great Objection grounded on that famous 6 th Canon of the first Nicene Council by which he says Every Patriarch and Bishop is appointed to be chief in his proper Diocese as the Bishop of Rome is chief in his This is now to be examin'd The words of the Canon are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Let the antient Customs be still in force in Egypt Lybia and Pentapolis that the Bishop of Alexandria enjoy a Iurisdiction over them all In as much as such likewise is the custom of the Bishop of Rome In like manner both in Antioch and other Provinces let the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 priviledges be preserv'd entire to every Church 16. The true sense of this Canon will best appear from the end for which it was enacted and that apparently was for the regulating and composing disorders begun in Egypt by Meletius Bishop of Lycopolis who rebelliously refused obedience to the Patriark of Alexandria presuming to ordain Bishops independently on him This Scismatical attempt the Council here represses commanding that according to the antient custom the Bishop of Alexandria should have entire Iurisdiction through all Egypt Lybia and Pentapolis And the Roman Bishop in his Patriarchat and may say in his Metropolitanship too is made the Patern according to which this Regulation is framed not in regard of his plenary right and universal Jurisdiction in the Church of God which I have shewed already and shall demonstrate the same yet further even in the times preceding this Council is extended to the whole world and was exercised over the Patriarcs themselves But only of the custom and practice of his calling Synods correcting manners and making ordinations according to his Patriarkal and Metropolitical Jurisdiction for those words in the sixth Nicene Canon Similiter autem apud caeteâ—as provincias In like manner in the rest of the Provinces that is those Provinces also that were not such where a Patriarc resided Honor suus unicuique servetur Let every one's Honor be preserved to him compared with the second Canon of the first Council of Constantinople and the eighth canon of the Ephesian Council shew clearly enough that not only Patriarkical authority but Metropolitical also is spoken of in this canon and the Roman Bishops authority also herein made a Pattern And upon this ground that the Canon intends not to equalize the Bishop of Alexandria with the Bishop of Rome in his full Jurisdiction the most learned Marca late Archbishop of Tholouse observes that those who object it against the Popes Primacy though they fortifie themselves even with Ruâ—â—inus his interposition of suburbicarian Churches will gain but little by it for it signisignifies no more but that the Bishop of Rome did ordain either immediately or by Commission all the Bishops in the Suburbicarian Churches so ought the Bishop of Alexandria to do in Egypt Lybia and Pentapolis 17. But though I mention this Version of Ruffinus because it is much applauded by our primitive Reformers and I expect Doctor Pierâ—e in his Reply will have recourse to it yet it is a most groundlesse and sencelesse Translation or rather corruption of the Canon His words are Vt apud Alexandriam in urbe Roma vetusta consuetudo servetur ut ille Egypti vel hic Suburbicariarum Ecclesiarum sollicitudiâ—em gerat Against which so much hath been written that it would be to lose time to repeat it especially to the Doctor who cannot be unacquainted with what Erasmus and Scalager have observed of the Interpreter that it is his custom to omit pervert and change the Text as he pleases and what Others with much Learning and Judgement have said to this interpretation Not to speak of the Bishop of Rome's jurisdiction as first Patriarc whereby the other Patriarcs were subordinate to him being obliged even in this matter of their own Ordinations to give him notice sending withal a Confession of their Faith upon the approbation whereof and of the legality of their Election and Ordination He confirmed them or otherwise deposed them of which many examples may be produced Whosoever hath but looked into Ecclesiastical History must confesse that His particular Patriarchat was far from being confined to the ten Suburbicarian Provinces subject to the Vicariat of Rome Nay it is manifest that it extended to the whole Western Empire which besides Italy France Spain Germany Britany the six Maritime Provinces of Africa c. contained Illyricum Macedon Epyrus Greece and the Islands near it And all this by the confessions of Adversaries Zonaras Balsamon c. writing on this very Canon Hence St. Basil calls the Bishop of Rome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the head or chief of the Western Regious And St. Augustin says that Pope Innocent did preside over the VVestern Church And St. Hierom Let them says he condemn me as an Heretic with the VVest as an Heretic with Egypt that is with Damasus and Peter And Iustinian the Emperor affirms that all the Regions of the VVorld are subject to the five Patriarcs that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to VVestern Rome Constantinople Alexandria Thepolis or Antioch and Ierusalem Now unless Hesperia signifies the whole VVest to what Patriarc was France Spain Africa c subject If not to Rome how can all Bishops be said to be subject to five Patriarcs Hence the VVestern Bishops are by Theodores call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and by Sacrates 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 CHAP. VIII Proofs of the Popes Supreme Iurisdiction before the first Council of Nice How all Apostles and all Bishops equal and how Subordinate St. Peter had more than a Primacy of Order Of St. Paul's resisting St. Peter The Popes Supremacy
Supremacy began with St. Peter his words are Among the Apostles themselves there was one chief that had chief authority over the rest to the end Schisms might be compounded And this he quotes from Calvin who said The twelve Apostles had one among them to govern the rest 26. I will now produce two who will give this whole Cause to the Pope The first is the so fam'd Melancthoâ— who writes thus As certain Bishops preside â—ver particular Churches so the Bishop of Rome is President over all Bishops And this Canonical policy no wise man as I think does or ought to disallow c. For the Monarchy of the Bishop of Rome is in my judgement profitable to this end that consent of Doctrine may be retain'd Wherfore an agreement may easily be established in this Article of the Popes Supremacy if other Articles could be agreed upon The other witnesse is learned Doctor Covel the Defender of Mr. Hooker he having shew'd the Necessity of setting up one above the rest in God's Church to suppresse the Seeds of Dissention c. thus applies it against the Puritans If this were the principal means to prevent Schisms and Dissentions in the Pâ—imitive Church when the graces of God were more abundant and eminent then now they are Nâ—y if twelve Apostles were not like to agree except there had been one chief among them For saith Hierom Among the twelve one was therefore chosen that a chief being appointed occasion of Schism might be prevenâ—ed how can they think that equality would keep all the Pastors in the World in peace and unity For in all Societies Authority which cannot be where all are equal must procure unity and obedience He adds further The Church without such an Authority should be in a far worse case then the meanest Common-wealth nay almost then a Den of Theives if it were left dâ—stitute of means either to convince Heresies or to suppresse them yea though there were neither help nor assistance of the Christian Magistrate Thus Dr. Pierce may see how these his own Primitive Reformers either joyn with us in this Point of Primacy or however they oppose him in calling it a Novelty begun by Pope Boniface the third CHAP. IX Of the Churches Infallibility The necessity thereof that she may be a certain Guide to Salvation And the grounds whereupon She claims it 1. THe Second pretended Novelty of Catholick Doctrine is the Infallibility of the Church called by the Preacher The Paâ—â—adium of the Conclave and derived from the Schollars of Marcus in Irenaeus or from the Gnosticks in Epiphanius Against which Infallibility his unanswerable Arguments are 1. Infallibility is one of Gods incommunicable Attributes 2. The Church not being omniscient must therefore be ignorant in part and consequently may fall into Error 3. It is confess'd by the great Champions of the Papacy that the Heresie of the Novatians was hatch'd in Rome and continued there almost two hundred years 4. Besides Arianism that over-spread the Church she was infected with the Heresie of the Chyliasts being deceived by Papias which Heresie found no contradiâ—â—â—â— for some Ages 5. Yea the whole Church in the opinion of St. Augustin and Pope Innocent during the space of six hundred years according to Maldonaâ— thought the Sacrament of the Eucharist necessary to Infants yet the Council of Trent is of a contrary mind 2. In order to the answering of this Discoâ—rse he will sure acknowledge that all Sect of Christianity agree in this that each of them has both a Rule of their Faith and a 〈◊〉 also But in both these there is difference among them To the Presbyterians Independents Anabaptists Quakers Socinians c. the only Rule is the Holy Scripture But both Catholicks and English Protestants though they acknowledge Divine Revelations to be their only Rule yet they admit certain universally received Traditions besides expresse Scripture 3. But as for the Guide from which we are to learn the true sense of this Rule the difference among the said Sects is far greater and more irreconcilable The Socinians will have Scripture interpreted onely by private reason a Guide evidently fallible and therefore not to be imposed on others The Independents Anabaptists Quakers and Presbyterians too pretend to an Infallible Guide Gods Holy Spirit but with this difference that the Independents Anabaptists and Quakers rationally acknowledge that this Guide is only to direct those that have it and perceive they have it but cannot oblige other men that have it not nor can be sure they have it Whereas the Presbyterians by an unexampled Tyranny at least in France do oblige themselves and their Posterity to a Profession that by a Divine Illumination they are taught to distinguish Canonicâ—l Books of Scripture from Apocriphal and by the same Guide to justifie all the Doctrines by which they dissent from all others And moreover by a most senslesse inhumanity will impose a necessity on all others to belie their own Consciences and acknowledge the same Guide though they have never wrought any Miracles which certainly are necessary to oblige others to believe and follow the internal Guidance of that Spirit to which they pretend 4. As for Dr. Pierce and the generality of English Protestants I speak of them now as hitherto they have bin for what they must be hereafter neither they nor I know a special Guide of theirs beyond Reason and Spirit for the finding out the sense of Scripture and judging of Traditions received by them is the Primitive Church or foure first General Councils But since those ancient Fathers are now past speaking and their Writings are as obnoxious to disputes as the Scriptures themselves a speaking Judge of the sense of all these I suppose is their Ecclesiastical Synods or Bishops when Synods are dissolved but principally those that are to make and determine the sense of Acts of Parliament And upon these grounds they finde themselves obliged to behave themselves differently to several adversaries For against Sects that went out from them they use the help of Catholick weapons the Authority of the Chuâ—ch Councils c. But against Catholics they renouncing the Authority of the present Church in her Supremest Councils of convening which the times are capable and in the interval of Councils in the major part of the Governours thereof united with him whom themselves acknowledge the prime Patriark will make use of a kind of private spirit or reason or the judgment of a most inconsiderable number of Church-Governâ—rs going against the whole Body of the Catholick Church and their chief Pastor but this as to assent only where it likes them and so will be their own selves Judges of what is the sense of Councils Fathers Scriptures and all And great difficultie they often find how to avoid being accounted Papists when they speak to Sectaries and being even Fanaticks when they Dispute with Roman Catholicks And truly the Doctors whole Sermon is in effect meerly Fanatick
their Testimony of Tradition must more then put to silence all contradiction of particular Persons or Churches it must also subdue their minds to an assent and this under the Penalty of an Anathema or cutting off from the Body of Christ which answers to a Civil death in the Law 9. If then an Obedience so indispensable was required to Legal Iudges who might possibly give a wrong sentence How securâ—ly may we submit our judgements to the Supream Tribunal of the Church And how justly will an Anathema be inflicted on all gainsayers of an Authority that we are assured shall never mislead us And the grounds of this assurance which the Preacher is not yet perswaded of are now to be discoverd 10. The true grounds of the Churcheâ— Infallibility are the words of Truth the Infallibility of the promises of Christ the Eternal wisdom of the Father These Promises are the true Palladium not of the Conclave but of the Vniversal Church Nor do we think Doctor Pierce such an Vlisses as to apprehend he can steal it away 11. We do not deny however that Infallibility and Omniscience are as he saies incommunicable Attributes of God It is God alone to whose Nature either lying or being deceived are essentially contrary because he is essentially immutable as in his Being so in his Vnderstanding and Will Yet the immutable God can preserve mutable Creatures from actual mutation God who is absolutely Omniscient can teach a rational Creature 〈◊〉 Truths necessary or expedient to be known So that though a man have much ignorance yet he may be in a sort omniscient within a determinate Sphere he may be exempted from ignorance or error in teaching such special verities as God will have him know and has promised he shall faithfully teach others Our Saviour as man was certainly infallible and as far as was requisite omniscient too So were the Apostles likewise whose writings Protestants acknowledge both to be infallible and to contain all Truth necessary to Salvation Good Doctor do you think it a contradiction that God should bestow an infallibility as to some things on a Creature What did our Saviour give St. Peter when he said I have prayed for thee that thy Faith fail not Thus the Doctor may see what a trifling Discourse he has made against Gods Church 12. Now the infallible promises of our Lord to his Church by vertue of which she has alwaies been believed to be in our sense infallible follow At least as many of them as may suffice for the present purpose 1. Our Saviour has promised his Apostles That he would be present with them alwaies to the end of the World Therefore since not any of them out-liv'd that age this infallible promise must be made good to their Successors 2. He has promised that When two or three of them meet together in his Name he will be in the midst of them Surely to direct them Therefore much more when the whole Church is representatively assembled about his businesse onely 3. He has promised that he will lead his Church into all Truth at least all that is necessary or but expedient for them to know 4. He has promised that Against his Church built upon St. Peter the Gates of Hell that is Heresie say the Fathers shall not prevail Therefore it shall be infallibly free from Heresie 5. He has commanded that Whoever shall not obey his Church shall be cut off from his Body as a Heathen and a Publican Therefore Anathema's pronounced by his Church are valid Our Lord indeed speaks of Decisions made by a particular Church in quarrels among Brethren Therefore if Disobedience to such Decisions be so grievously punished what punishment may we suppose attends such as are disobedient to Decisions of the Universal Church call'd by the Apostle The Pillar and ground of Truth made for the composing of publick Debates about the common Faith 6. To conclude the belief of the Churches Vnity is an unchangable Article of our â—reed Therefore certainly the onely effectual mean to preserve Unity which is an un-appealable and infallible Authority shall never be wanting in the Church 13. All these Texts and Prmises we by the example of the Holy Fathers and Authority of Tradition produce as firm Grounds of an Infallibility in the Universal Church representative which has an influence over the Souls of menâ— requiring much more than an external submission which yet is all that Protestants will allow to the most authentic general Councils We hope now Doctor Pierce will not fly to Mr. Chillingworths miserable shift and say that all these Promises are only conditional and depending on the piety of Church-governors For this is contrary to the assertion of all Antiquity which from these Promises argues invincibly against all Heretics and Schismatics who might otherwise on Mr. Chillingworths ground alledge as the Donatists did that the Church by the sins of some had lost all her Authority and that Gods spirit was transplanted from her into themselves Nor yet that he will use the plea of several other Protestant Writers somwhat more discreet who are willing to allovv those Promises absolute and to belong also to the Guides of the Church som or other that they shall in all ages continue orthodox but not alvvayes to the more superior or to the greater bodies of these assembled in Councils because thus they see their cause will suffer by it But this plea also is utterly unsatisfying For whenever the superior and subordinate Church-Officers or Ecclesiastical Courts shall contradict or oppose one another here the superior questionlesse is to be our Guide otherwise we have no certain rule to know who is so and therefore to these not the other in such cases must belâ—ng these promises where they cannot possibly agree to both 14. These promises now being Yea and Amen the Doctor must not seem to make our Lord passe for a Deceiver but apply them to his English Protestant Church since he will not allow them to the Catholic for to some Church they must be applyed But let him consider withal he must condemn St. Gregory who professed that he venerated the four first General Councils of the Catholic Church as the four Gospels He must condemn Constantine who in the first Council of Nice professed that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c whatever is decreed in the holy Councils of Bishops that ought to be attributed to thâ— Divine will In a word he must by condemning all the General Councils of Gods Church condemn likewise which is more dangerous the Act of Parliament 1 Eliz. For manifest it is that all the Fathers in those Councils did pronounce many Anathema's against all those that would not submit to a belief of such and such Decisions of theirs in some of which were new expressions not extant in Scripture but devised by the Fathers then present as the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Now I ask Doctor Pierce were
those Anathema's lawfull were they valid Or will he say those first Councils to which he professes assent usurped an Authority in this not of right belonging to them If those Anathema's were valid then the Councils had a just authority to oblige Christians to an internal belief of verities declared by them as the sence of Divine Revelation and this under the penalties of being separated from Christ And can any Authority but such as is infallible lay such an obligation upon Consciences under such a penalty But if those Anathema's were illegal and invalid then were the Fathers both of those Councils and of All others who still followed the same method not only impostors but most execrable Tyrants over the Souls of men 15. These Deductions surely are more effectual to demonstrate the Churches infallibility than any of his Quotations can be against it Here we have expresse Scripture and universal consent of Antiquity Nay here we have the concession of the more judicious Writers of the Church of England at least before their late restitution who seem to agree that in the Controversies between our Church and theirs they would certainly submit to a future lawful General Council Now could they lawfully make such a Promise and think such a Council could misguide them Therefore truly I cannot have the uncivility to judge that when one of your 39. Articles declares that some General Councils have err'd the meaning should be â— that any legal legitimate General Council has err'd but only som Councils that som Roman Catholics esteem to be General concerning which the Church of England is of another opinion And if this be the meaning the breach made by it may be curable 16. Now whereas the Doctor alleages as against this Point the concession of Baronius c. that Novatianism was hatch'd and continued two hundred years at Rome I cannot devise how to frame an Objection out of it Can no Church be Orthodox if Heretics rise and continue in the same City Is the English Church a Quaking Church because Quakers first began and still encrease at London As for Novatians at Rome he cannot deny but they were so far from being Members of the Roman Church that they were continually esteem'd Heretics and condemned by it 17. The like we say touching the Donatists Indeed his objecting the Arians has more appearance of reason and sense Ingemuit orbis c. The world says St. Hierom sadly groaned and was astonished to see it self on a sudden becom Arian that is after the Council of â—riminum But how was it Arian if it groaned c. for it could not be really Arian against its will But St. Hierom uses this expression because the great Council of Ariminum had seem'd to favour the Arian party against the Catholics And true it was that Catholic Bishops were indeed persecuted and many banish'd But not one of them chang'd their Profession of the Nicene Faith unlesse you will accuse Pope Liberius who for a while dissembled it and presently repented Besides the Canons at first made in that Council were perfectly Orthodox but afterwards by the Emperors Tyranny and subtilty of two or three Arian Bishops a Creed was composed wherein though the Nicene Faith was not sufficiently expressed Yet there was not one Article perfectly Arian but capable of a good sense to which may Catholic Bishops out of fear subscribed yet to nothing but what in their sense was true though defective in delivering all the truth but presently after being at liberty both themselves and all the rest renounced And after all there remained but three years of persecution for after that time the Arian Emperour Constantius dyed 18. Next concerning the objected Heresy of the Millenaries It is very unjust and a great irreverence in him to charge upon the Primitive Church the sayings of two Fathers and though one of them says All that were purely Orthodox that is such as he esteemed so because they were of his Opinion held that Doctrinâ— yet he thereby shews that his own Opinion was not universally embraced by the Church But the truth is there was a double Millenary opinion the one that interpreted the reign of Martyrs with Christ for a thousand years in base sensual pleasures banquets and women This was the Doctrine of the unclean Heretick Cerinthus as Eusebius and St. Augustin relate Against this St. Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria wrote an elegant Book as St. Hierom affirms And it is most deservedly detested by the Church But there was another Opinion that the Martyrs should reign a thousand years with Christ in all Spiritual delights and ravishing consolation in a blessed conversing with him And this Opinion might not unbecom Papias St. Ireneus and St. Iustin Martyr For St. Augustin and St. Hierom both professe themselves unwilling to censure it neither can the Doctor I believe shew that it was ever condemned by the Church 18. To his last Objection touching the communicating of Infants it is granted that in St. Augustin and Pope Innocent's time and many years after such was the common practice of the Church to communicate them Sacramentally but withal take notice it was onely in one species Again it is confessed that from that Text Nisi mandâ—caveritis carnem c. St. Augustin c. argue a necessity that Infants should participate of the flesh and blood of our Lord but this not Sacramentally but Spiritually by such a participation as may be had in Baptism This appears first From the constant Doctrine of St. Augustin c. the whole Church affirming that Baptism alone may suffice to the salvation of Infants 2. From his interpreting his own meaning in a Sermon quoted by St. Beda and Gratina His words are these None ought by any waies to doubt but that every Christian by being made a Member of Christ in Baptism thereby becomes partaker of the Boâ—y and Blood of our Lord and that he is not estranged from a Communion of that Bread and Chalice though being setled in the Vnity of Christs Body he should depart out of this World before he really eat of that Bread and drink of that Chalice For he is not deprived of the participation and benefit of the Sacrament whensoever that is found in him which is signified by the Sacrament 19. That therefore which the Church since and particularly the Council of Trent alter'd in this matter was nothing at all touching Belief For all Catholicks this day believe St. Augustin's Doctrine in that Point but onely an external practise of the Church And this was done out of a wonderful reverence to those Holy Mysteries which by frâ—quent Communions of Infants could not escape many irreverences and inconveniencies And many such Alterations even the English Church observes and justifies both in the administring of the Eucharist and Baptism too To conclude this matter For a further proof that these two instances about the Millenaâ—y Belief and Infant
Prayers and Oblation for the Dead In opposition whereto he saies Prayers made for the dead profit them though they do not blot out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 entirely all mortal sins And again Who shall now have the â—oldnesse to dissolve the Statute of his Mother the Church or the Law of his Father which Father he there interprets to be the Holy Trinity Moreover St. Chrysostome It is not in vain that the Apostles have instituted this Law That during the celebration of the dreadful mysteries commemoration should be made of the dead for they knew that great benefit and profit would thereby accrew unto them And yet more expresly in another place We must saith he give our help and assistance to sinners departed by our Prayers Supplications Alms and Oblations For these things were not rashly and groundlesly devised Neither is it in vain that in the Divine Mysteries we make mention of these who are dead and approaching to the Altar addresse our prayers for them to the Lamb placed there who took away the sins of the World But we do this to the end that some comfort and refreshment may come to them thereby Neither is it in vain that he who assists at the Altar at the time when the dreadful Mysteries are communicated cries out Pray for all that are dead in Christ and for those who celebrate their memorials For were it not that such commemorations were profitable to them such things would not be spoken For the matters of our Religion are no sport No God forbid These things are perform'd by the Order and Direction of Gods Spirit 10. True it is that antiently in the publick Liturgies a commemoration was made even of the greatest Saints yes and prayers were made for them But yet not such prayers as were made for the imperfect But since all future things may be the subject of our prayers it may become our charity to pray for accession of glory to Saints already glorified but which at the Resurrection shall be in a yet better State And therefore when St. Austin saies It is an injury to pray for a Martyr since we ought rather to commend our selves to his prayers he means such prayers as we make for imperfect Christians that is for remission of their sins refreshment c. 11. Now tho' some such prayers extant in the Holy Fathers did regard the day of Judgment and the glory ensuing yet withal that they thought to some Souls a present refreshment did accrew in the intermediat condition is evident both by the foresaid Testimonies and many more that may be added As where St. Aâ—brose saies he would never cease his Intercessions for the Soul of the dead Emperor till he found a deliverance by them This is so apparent both out of the Fathers and ancient Liturgies that Bishop Forbes Spalato and other Protestant Writers do acknowledge it and refuse not to assent to the ground of such a practise The words of Spalato are these There would be no absurdity if we should confesse that some lighter sins which have not in this life been remitted quoad culpam as to the guilt or fault may be forgiven after death and this somtimes a little after the departure of the Soul c. by vertue of the Churches intercession 12 It cannot be denied but that there are among the Holy Fathers great varieties of Opinions touching some particular circumstances regarding the state of Souls after death and at the present some differences there are between the Roman and Greek Church In which notwithstanding it will appear to any who will compare them that the Roman Doctrin is far more moderate receiveable and approaching to the grounds of Protestants than that of the Eastern Church But however it is without all controversy that all Churches who professed Christianity before the Reformation do agree unanimously in the practice of praying for the Dead so as to beg forgiveness of sins a bettering of their state an asswagement of their sufferings c. Which practise they esteem not a voluntary offering but a duty to a necessary performance of which charity obligeth all Christians And therefore English Protestants cannot be excused for their neglect of this duty especially consisidering that the Doctrin upon which this Practice is grounded is not mentioned at all among those Points which they account Novelties in the Roman Church On the contrary the more learned among them have and do though not in expression yet in sense agree with Bishop Andrews conceding in his Reply to Cardinal Perron That for offering doth he not mean here for offering the Christian sacrifice of the Holy Eucharist for them for what is more manifest in Antiquity than this and prayer for the Dead little is to be said against it No man can deny but it is very antient Since then the Church cannot be thought from the most antient times thereof to have offered up to God all her prayers in all ages pro defunctis in vain methinks I cannot here but in this respect also commiserate the condition of those poor Souls who depart hence un-owned by that Church and without any share in her prayers which only like a true Mother is so sollicitous and carefull a Supplicant not only for her living but also deceased children and who after a life here not so well spent seeing themselves going hence only with an inchoated repentance an unperfect reformation and very unprepared to be immediatly entertained in that place of bliss and glorious society into which no impure thing shall enter yet are content rather to lose the benefit of the daily prayers and oblations for them of this careful Mother than to render themselves capable thereof by returning into her Communion And surely much more uncomfortable must such a death be that is void of the hopes of any such assistance than theirs is who departing hence in the bosom of the Church and in this blessed communion of Saints with the request of St. Austins dying Mother in their mouth Illud vos rogo ut ad Domine altare memineritis mei This I beg of you that at the Altar of our Lord ye make remembrance of me are sure to enjoy the last aid of this pious charity and also the yet more efficacious sacrifice of the Altar to be frequently offered to God in their behalf 10. Lastly to omit particular Quotations out of the antient public Liturgies of the Church that of St. Iames acknowledged by the second General Council that of St. Basil St. Chrysostom c. in every one of which are expresse prayers and oblations for the Dead demanding pardon of their sins refreshment of their sufferings c. I will conclude with a full convincing Testimony of St. Augustin whose words are these That by the Prayers of the Holy Church and saving Sacrifice as likewise by Alms expended for their Souls our departed Brethren are helped that God may deal with them more
She delivers her mind sincerely candidly ingenuously But if I should ask him what his Church holds it would cost him more labour to give a satisfactory Answer than to make ten such Sermons 6. There are among Christians only four ways of expressing a presence of Christ in the Sacrament 1 That of the Zuinglians Socinians c. who admit nothing at all real here The Presence say they is only figurative or imaginary As we see Bread broken and eaten c. so we ought to call to mind that that Christs Body was crucified and torn for us and by Faith or a strong fancy we are made partakers of his Body that is not his Body but the blessings that the offring his Body may procure 2. That of Calvin and English Divines who usually say as Calvin did That in the holy Sacrament our Lord offers unto us not onely the benefit of his Death and Resurrection but the very Body it self in which he dyed and rose again Or as King Iames We acknowledge a presence no lesse true and real then Catholics do only we are ignorant of the manner Of which it seems he thought that Catholics were not So that this presence is supposed a Substantial presence but after a spiritual manner A presence not to all but to the worthy receivers Offred perhaps to the unworthy but only partaken by the worthy A presence not to the Symbols but the Receivers Soul only Or if according to Mr. Hooker in some sence the Symbols do exhibit the very Body of Christ yet they do not contain in them what they exhibit at least not before the actual receiving 3. Of the Lutherans who hold a presence of Christs Body in the Sacrament as real proper and substantial as Catholics do but deny an exclusion of Bread For Bread say they remains as before but to and with it the Body of our Lord every where present is in a sort hypostatically united Yet some among them dâ—ny any reverence is to be exhibited to Christ though indeed substantially present 4. That of Roman Catholics whose sense was let down before whereto this only is to be added That believing a real conversion of Bread into our Lords Body c. they think themselves obliged in conformity to the Ancient Church as to embrace the Doctrine so to imitate their practise in exhibiting due reverence and worship not to the Symbols not to any thing which is the object of sense as Calvinists slander them but to our Lord himself only present in and under the Symbols 7. Now three of these four Opinions that is every one but that of English Protestants speak intelligible sense Every one knows what Zuinglians Lutherans and Roman Catholics mean But theirs which they call a Mystery is Indeed a Iargon a Linsey-Wolsey Stuff made probably to suiâ— with any Sect according to interests They that taught it first in England were willing to speak at least and if they had been permitted to mean likewise as the Catholic Church instructed them but the Sacrilegious Protectour in King Edwards daies and afterward the Privy Council in Queen Elizabeths found it for their wordly advantage that their Divines should at least in words accuse the Roman Church for that Doctrine which themselves believed to be true But now since the last Restitution if that renew'd Rubrick at the end of the Communion be to be esteem'd Doctrinall then the last Edition of their Religion in this Point is meer Zuinglianism to which the Presbyterians themselves if they are true Calvinists will refuse to subscribe Thus the new Religion of England is almost become the Religion of New England 8. 〈◊〉 remains now that I should by a few authorities justifie our Catholic Doctrine of Transubstantiation or real substantial Presence to be far from deserving to be called a Novelty of â—our hundred years standing By Catholic Doctrine I mean the Doctrine of the Church not of the Schools the Doctrine delivered by Tradition not Ratiocination Not a Doctrine that can be demonstrated by human empty Philosophy On the contrary it may be confidently assorted that all such pretended demonstrations are not only not concluding but illusory because that is said to be demonstrated by reason which Tradition tells us is above reason and ought not to be squared by the Rule of Philosophy The presence of Christ in the Sacrament is truly real and Substantial but withall Sacramental that is Mystical inexplicable incomprehensible It is a great mistake among Protestants when they argue that we by acknowledging a Conversion by Transubstantiation pretend to declare the modum conversionis No that is far from the Churches or the Antient Fathers thoughts For by that expression the onely signifies the change is not a matter of fancy but real yet withal Mystical The Fathers to expresse their belief of a real conversion make use of many real changes mentioned in the Scripture as of Aarons Rod into a Serpent of water into wine c. But withal they adde That not any of these Examples do fit or properly represent the Mystical change in the Sacrament Sence or Reason might comprehend and judge of those changes but Faith alone must submit to the incomprehensiblenesse of this When Water was turn'd into Wine the eyes saw and the Palat tasted Wine it had the colour extension and locality of Wine But so is it not when Bread by consecration becomes the Body of Christ For ought that Sence can judge there is no change at all Christs Body is present but without locality It is present but not corporally as natural bodies are present one part here and another there The Quomodo of this presence is not to be inquired into nor can it without presumption be determin'd This is that which the Church calls a Sacramental Mystical presence But that this presence is real and substantial a presence in the Symbols or Elements and not only in the mind of the worthy receiver the Fathers unanimously teach And indeed if it were not so none could receive the Body of Christ unworthily because according to Protestants it is not the Body of Christ but meer Bread that an impenitent Sinner receives And St. Pauls charge would be irrational when he saies such An one receives judgment to himself in that he does not discern the Body of our Lord. Besides if the change be not in the Elements but in the Receivers Soul what need is there of Consecration What effect can Consecration have Why may not another man or woman as well as a Priest administer this Sacrament What hinders that such a Presence may not be effected in the mind every Dinner or Supper and as well when we eat flesh and drink any other Liquor besides Wine at our own Table as at that of our Lord. 9. Now whether their Doctrine or ours be a Novelty let Antiquity judge If I should produce as he knows I may hundreds of Testimonies that by conversion a change is made of the Bread into
A thing which neither any Canon nor Custom hath deliver'd that those who have no power of offering should give the Body of Christ to those who offer Whole volums may be transcribed to this effect I will only therefore refer him to St. Hierom on Titus and St. Chrysostom on the Acts where he will find the Eucharist not only a Sacrifice but a Sacrifice for remission of sins a Sacrifice for the Priest that offers a Sacrifice for the multitude a Sacrifice for the procuring of plenty c. sutably to the modern and ancient Liturgies 4. If after all this he will not allow any of these expressions in Doctors Canons Liturgies c. to be proper and litteral St. Augustin will contradict him Who saies Presbyters and Bishops are now in the Church properly called Sacerdotes sacrificing Priests And because the fancy which Protestants have entertained against the term Sacrifice Oblation c. proceeds from a mistake of the true sense in which the Church intends it for ordinarily the conception of a Sacrifice is supposed to import an immolation shedding of blood killing c. and no such matter appearing here but only a commemoration of a former real immolation and shedding of Christs blood therefore generally among all Sects divided from the Church the title of Sacrifice will not be endured 5. To prevent therefore for the future such a mis-understanding let them be pleased to take notice that all the Sacrifices of the Law were shadows and types of the Sacrifices of our Lord and the Legal Priest-hood a type of his Priest-hood But above all other Sacrifices and functions of Priest-hood those were most lively figures of our Lord which were perform'd on a certain day only once every year for the sins of the whole Congregation In the solemn celebration of which Sacrifice besides the immolation of it on the Altar the High Priest alone was appointed to carry of the blood of that Victime into the most holy place within the Veile and there to sprinkle it before the Propitiatory or Mercy-Seat This is that Sacrifice which St. Paul especially applies to our Lord and shews that Christ as a Victime was once and but once immolated on the Altar of the Cross for the sins of all mankind And that for the merit of his obedience to the death even of the Cross he was raised from death and made a Priest after the order of Melchisedech a Kingly Priest a Priest who had power given him in Heaven and Earth to apply the merits of his own Sacrifice And that the proper function of his Regal Priesthood was the entring with his immolated Body into the Sancta Sanctorum the highest Heavens there appearing before his heavenly Fathers Throne and presenting that most precious Victime to him This function of Priest-hood far more august than the immolation he does and will continually exercise to the end of the World By vertue of this he is made Head of the Church he has the power of sending the Holy Ghost c. and hereby he perfects Redemption 6. And withal knowing of what infinite value and vertue this function of his Priest-hood is he has been pleased to execute as it were by proxy the same function on Earth that himself immediately performs in Heaven For which purpose he has instituted Bishops and Priests to be not only his Ministers but Substitutes and Vice-gerents on Earth giving them power to consecrate and by cosecrating to place upon the Altar that very Body and Blood which was immolated on the Cross and is now present before his Father in Heaven This body and blood they Sacrifice this they offer this they with the People participate It is not a Sacrifice of immolation in that mistaken sense for nothing is slain the Victime suffers nothing It is but a Commemorative Sacrifice of Immolation But it is in the most proper rigorous sence an Oblation the very same of the very same body and blood that our Lord now offers in Heaven And the same vertue it has the same effects it produces propitiation remission of sins participation of the graces of Gods holy Spirit and all blessings both spiritual and temporal So that in a word as under the Law the Legal propitiation was said to perfected by the High Priests offring the blood in the most holy place So by this Oblation of Christs bood in the Heavenly Sanctuary perfect Redemption iâ— obtained and by the Commemorative Oblation of the same body and blood by his Priests in our earthly Sanctuaries an application of the benefit and vertue of that only meritorious Sacrifice once offered on the Cross is then procured unto us for remission of our sins and the donation of all other benefits spiritual and temporal 7. In regard of this sublime function of the Priest it is that the holy Fathers exalt his office before that of Princes yea even of Angels in this regard they call the oblation it self the most dreadful Mystery at which the Angels themselves assist with reverence and astonishment To which purpose I will content my self with only one or two passages of St. Chrysostâ—m When the Sacrifice saith he is brought out of the Quire Christ himself the Lamb of our Lord immolated When thou shalt hear the Deacons voyce crying Let us pray all in common when thou seest the Curtains and Veyls of the Gates drawn then think the Heavens are opened and the Angels descend And in an other place When the Priest has invâ—cated the Holy Spirit and perfected the Sacrifice full of terrour and reverence touching and handling with his Fingers him who is Lord of all things to how sublime a rank is he elevated c. In that time the Angels assist the Priest and all the Celestical powers send forth cryes of Ioy all the places about the Altar are filled with Quires of Angels in honour of him who is offered This we may have ground to believe if we only consider the super-eminent greatness of the Sacrifice then performed But moreover I have heard from the report of one who learnt the story from the mouth of an admirable old man to whom many revâ—lations of divine Mysteries have been revealed from Heaven How God was graciously pleased to honor him with a Vision of these things and how in the time of the Sacrifice he sau suddenly appear with as much splendor as human sight could support a multitude of Angels cloathed with white Robes encompassing the Altar and having their heads enclined in the same posture as we oft see the Souldiers in the presence of the Emperour Thus Saint Chrysostom CHAP. XIV Of Veneration of Images The Roman-Churches approved practise of it most suitable to Reason 1. THe seventh Novelty produced by the Preacher is the worshipping of Images but it being only named without any proofs or quotations I will spare them too And to shew that the term of worshipping is none of ours but invented by Protestants to render a most innocent
Doctrin odious and moreover to demonstrate the no grounds such Preachers as he have to accuse the Catholic Church of I know not what Idolatry in this matter of Images I will presume to borrow from an Author who will not be angry with me for it a passage touching this Point by which he will see that Catholics do no more than every mans own reason wil justify in the respect they give to sacred Images It is the namelesse Author of an Answer to Mr. Bagshaw's Treatise of Infallibility where he will find this following passage in which there are some glances that regard only such furious impertinents as Mr. Bagshaw which therefore I am far from thinking applyable to Doctor Pierce 2. â—hus then writes that Author intending to demonstrate that in the veneration of Images taught by the Catholic Church there is nothing at all swerving from common reaâ—on Give me leave saith he to propose to such a sober man as you are altogether compounded of Reason some few Questions First then suppose there were represented to you while you were thinking of other matters or talking a Picture of our Lord haâ—gâ—ng on the Cross couâ—d you pâ—ssibly avoid the calling to mind who our Lord was and what he had done or suffered for you And if not being able to forbid the entrance of such thoughts into your mind on such an occasion would your reason dictate to you that you had done ill in changing your thoughts from the World to God would you repent of it asking pardon of God and praying that such a tentation might never befall you aâ—terwards Does your enlightned reason suggest â—his to you Truly it iâ— do I believe you are of a temper of mind almost specifically different from all mankâ—â—d besides and they must change their nature before you make them of your perswasion or Church And yours is no a common sense if it either tell you that by your beating down of Crosses and breaking Church windows our good Countrymen think more of God than they did while those Remembrances were standing or if they think less that it is better for them to forget him 3. To make a step further Let it he supposed that at the same time you saw before you several Pictures of several Persons in a contrarâ— manner regarded by you as of St. Peter and Iudas of our late Severaign and Bradshaw Or put case you had in one hand a Bible and in the other the infamous story of Pantagruel does not your common sense and reason tell you that such Pictures or Books force upon you quite contrary thoughts and affections which regard those Pictures or Books not simply considered but as representing such Persons and containing such matters Which thoughts being just and not at all harmfull to you and withall almost impossible to be avoided I cannot find any reason why Reason should forbid them I am sure common sense will not 4. If then it be according to reason and common sense and likewise unavoidably to admit such different thoughts will not reason also warrant you to express outwardly by words or actions whatever you may without any fault think inwardly For my part I cannot imagin any scruple in this If then I may and must think reverently or contemptuously of the Objects I may as well speak or behave my self externally after the same manner to them respectively For whatsoever is ill or good in words or actions is so likewise in thoughts 5. Now to shew that such thoughts or affections regard not the Persons only but the Pictures also as representations of such Persons ask your own heart and you will find that you would not place St. Peter's picture or the King 's in an unclean dishonest place If any one should spit upon either of them your heart would rise against him and tempt you to strike him â— which it would not do if the same contemptuous usage were shewed to the picture of Iudas or Bradshaw Now this is so naturally imbibed in the hearts of all Mankind that in all Kings Courts a respect and outward mark of reverence is requird to the Chamber of Presence or Chair of State and a refusal of it much more a contemptuous behaviour would be criminal To apply this to the forementioned Books You could not bring your reason to permit you to tear out a leaf of the Bible for an unclean use as you could without the least remorse do to the story of Pantagruel or Aesop's fables 6. Let us now consider what kind of respect this is that we expresse to such Images Comparing the Images of St. Peter and our Sovereign's together we find that a respectful regard is had to both and a contemptuous usage of either would displease us Yet it is not the same kind of respect For St. Peter's Image we consider as of a man that puts us in mind of Heaven ann Heavenly things one highly favour'd by Almighty God a principal Courtier in his Kingdom and one that by his writings and example has been a great instrument of promoting our eternal happinesse We do not so esteem of every good King Therefore to shew the difference of our respect to each we would choose to give St. Peter's picture a place in our Oratory and the Kings in our Gallery But what Names to give these different respects is not easie to determin It is plain that which is given to the King's picture is purely a civil respect But what shall we call that which is given to St. Peters If we say it is Religious you will quarrel as derogating from God Let us therefore call it a sacred Veneration or honor For since all things that are appointed on purpose to mind us of God of Heaven and the salvation of our Souls we call Sacred this Name may well be applyed to such a Picture But moreover because there are not invented such variety of Names as there are things and there are far fewer sorts of outward postures of our Bodys denoting respect than there are Names or Words Hence it comes to passe that when we would expresse a Civil and a Sacred yea a Religious respect we are forced to to use the same outward behaviour of bowing kneeling c. to Fathers and Magistrates which we do to God himself Yea we find in the Scripture Kings adored and a prostration of Bodies paid to them Yet for all this no man will suspect that thereby any dishonor was intended to God or the Honor due onely to him was paid to Creatures 7. In the next place let reason and common sense give judgement of the distinction between the respect that may be paid to the Picture of St. Peter and that which ought to be paid to Himself in case he appear'd to us glorified as he is A Divine respect we pay to neither though sometimes we use such postures as we do when we pray or worship God It is then a Sacred Veneration only But yet there are
easily misled Soulâ— should be instructed in their Duâ—ies both as Christians and Subjects by plain Catechisms and Instructions prudently and sufficiently with all plainnesse gather'd out of Scripture then that the Bible should be put into their hands a Book the tenth part whereof scarce concerns them to know and in which the several Points wherein they are concern'd are so dispersed in several places so variously and somtimes so obscurely and so dubiously expressed that all the learning and subtilty of Doctors since it was written till these daies have been exercised in enquiring comparing discussing several Texts and clearing the true Doctrine of them fit for the conception of vulgar capacities The whole Direction necessary to govern Pastors in their permiting others to read the Holy Scriptureâ— is fully and excellently containd in that on Text of the Second Epistle of St. Peter 3. 16. Wherein the Epistles of St. Paul there are certain things hard to be understood which the unlearned and unstable pervert as also the other Scriptures to their own perdition Two sorts of Reaâ—ers are here plainly forbidden by the Apostle for certainly none oâ— them who we know are apt to pervert the Scriptures should be permitted to read them Consider then how far these two words reach unlearned and unstable I doubt to ninety nine of every hundred in England Which if admitted not above one in a hundred were good discipline observ'd would be allowed to read the Bible Nor can it be Objected as usually Protestants do that the Scriptures are safely clear to every one in Fundamentals and mistakable onely in Points of lesser consequence since the very Text saies they are both hard to be understood and pervertible to the perdition of their Readers and if such Points as import Salvation or Damnation be not Fundamental I 'm utterly ignorant of the meaning of that word Let then the Learned and the steâ—dy Christian read and study and meditate thâ— Bible as often and as long as he will every Catholic will commend him but by no means should that liberty be given to the unlearned and unstable lest the Scripture it self condemn it as a boldnesse that may endanger their eternal Salvation And 't is observeable in King Henry the 8 th who after he had caused the English Bible to be publish't so as to be read by all without any restraint was forc't again after three years experience wherein he saw the many strange and horrid opinions rising among the ignorant people by occasion thereof by a new Act of Parliament to abridge the liberty formerly granted and to prohiâ—it upon the penalty of a months Imprisonment toties quoties that any Woman Husbandman Artificer Yeoman Servingman Apprentice or Iourny-man Labourer c. should read them to themselves or to others privatly or openly See Stat. 34 35. Hen. 8. 1. Because saith the Preface of that Statue his Highness perceived that a great multitude of his Subjects most especially of the lower sort had so abused the Scriptures that they had thereby grown and increased in diverse naughtie and erroneous Opinions and by occasion thereof fallen into great Divisions and Dissentions among themselves And if you say the Opinions the King calls here erroneous were the Protestant Doctrines discovered by the Vulgar from the new light of the Scriptures you may see the very Opinions as the Bishops collected them in Fox pag. 1136. un-ownable by any sober Protestant or Christian. A thing perhaps not unworthy the serious consideration of the present Governors who have seen the like effects in these daies 5. But as for other Lay-persons of better judgement and capacities and of whose submission to the Churches Authority and aversion from Novelties sufficient proofs can be given our Ecclesiastical Governors are easily enough entreated yea they are well enough enclin'd to exhort them to read the Scriptures themselves in their vulgar Tongues and are forward to assist them in explaining difficulties and resolving doubts that may occurr 6. And now let Doctor Pierce speak his Conscience if he dare do it Is not this way of managing the Consciences of Christs Flock and this prudent dispensing of Scripture very desireable yea actually in their hearts here in England that it may be in practise among them But it is now too late Their first Reformers found no expedient so effectual to call followers to them out of God's Church as by wastfully powring this Treasure into their hands and accusing the Church for not doing so not fore-seeing or not caring if in future times that which was an instrument of their Schism from the true Church would be far more effectual to multiply Schisms from their false one For the making an ill use of Scripture by ignorant or passionate Laicks is not altogether so certain or probable to follow in the Catholic Church where men are bred up in a belief and most necessary Duty of Submission even of their minds to her Authority for the delivering of the only true sence of Scripture Whereas in such Churches as this in which not any one Person ever was or can be perswaded that the sence of Scripture given by them can challenge an internal assent from any or that it may not without sin be contradicted to give the Scripture indefinitly to all who can read or are willing to hear it read without a Guide to tell them the true sense which they are bound to believe is to invite them to ascend into Moses Chair which such Reformer's themselves have made empty and vacant for them 7. The second Part of this pretended Novelty concerns Public Praying in an unknown tongue which says he may be fetcht indeed as far as from Gregory the Great that is ever since this Nation was Christian But is as scandalously opposite to the plain sence of Scriptures as if it were done in a meer despight to 1. Cor. 14. 13. c. And besides Origen it is confess'd by Aquinas and Lyra that in the Primitive times the public Service of the Church was in the common Language too And as the Christians of Dalmatia Habassia c. and all Reformed parts of Christendom have God's service in their vulgar tongues so hath it been in divers places by approbation first had from the Pope himself 8. I will acknowledge to Dâ—ctor Pierce that this is the only Point of Novelty as he calls it of which he discourses sensibly and as it were to the purpose But withall I must tell him it is because he mistakes our Churches meaning For he charges the Catholic Religion as if one of its positions were That Gods publick Service ought to be in an unknown Tongue or as if it forbad people to understand it And truly if it were so we could never hope to be reconciled with that passage of Scripture out of St. Paul 1 Cor. 14. 13 c. But all this is a pure mis-understanding Therefore I desire him to permit himself for once to be informed how the
matter stands in this Point with the Roman Catholic Church 9. We Roman Catholics I. do willingly acknowledge that in the Primitive times the Public Service of God was generally speaking perform'd in a Tongue better understood than now it is yet not then for many places and Countries in their vulgar or native or best understood tongue For it is evident by St. Augustin that in Afric it was in the Latin tongue not in the Punic which yet was the only Tongue the Vulgar understood So the Liturgy of St. Basil was used in the Greek Tongue in most parts of the Eastern Churches And yet it appears as well out of later History as out of the Acts 2. 8 9 10. c. 14. v. 11. That Greek was not in those antient times the vulgar tongue of many of those Eastern Countrys no more than Latin was of the Western 2. We professe it was not nor yet is the intention of the Church that the Public Devotions should therefore be in Latin because it is not vulgarly understood but this has hapned as it were by accident besides her intention and onely because the Latin Tongue in which it was first written by revolution of times and mixture of Barbarous Nations in Europe has been corrupted and ceased to be a so commonly understood Language by unlearned people for indeed probably it was never so well understood as that other native Language which they used before it or with it 10. Matters standing thus yet the Church does not think fit to change with the times but continues Gods publick Service as it was at first And this we may conceive she does 1. Because no example can be found in antiently-established Churches that any of them changed the Language of Gods public Service entirely The Greeks now use the Antient Masse of St. Chrysostom written in pure Greek as much differing from the Vulgar as Latin from the Italian Spanish c. The like may be said of the Syrian Cophtites c. among whom the Mass is celebrated in the oâ—d Language far from being vulgarly understood Yea the Iews continue their Devotions to this day in the Hebrew understood by few among them 2. Because though the Latin be not now in any place a vulgar Language yet there is no Language so universally understood in Europe as that And a great fitnesse there is that the most Public Service should be in the most public Language in which all Nations may joyn every where And by those who most frequently recite the Divine Service in the Catholic Church viz. the Clergy and other Religious for whose proper use a great part of this Service was composed the Latin Tongue is well understood 3. Because the Latin â—ongue now that it is not vulgar being thereby becom unchangeable the Churches Doctrins contain'd in her Litâ—rgies are so much the more freed from the danger of being innovated Whereas vulgar Languages almost in every age become un-intelligible or at least sound very unpleasing in mens ears as we now see in King Edward the sixth's Common-prayer-book would it not seem an odd translation now to read that Saint Philip baptiz'd the Gelding and Paul the Knave of Iesus Christ yet this was once the English Scripture Nay more within this twenty years we find many words and phrases have quite changed their former sense So that all Nations must be ever and anon altering their Liturgies to the great danger of changing the Churches belief And which is not altogether inconsiderable for the present good husbandry of the world to the infinite expenâ—es of moneys in printing c. 11. I doubt not but he will reply that not any one or all these commodities can answer and satisfie for an express and as he calls it a scandalous opposition to the plain sense of Scripture 1 Cor. 14. I grant it All these commodities are to be despised rather than so to oppose the Apostles Doctrin But what is his Doctrin For I evidently perceive the Doctor has not well search'd into it much lesse rightly apply'd it The Apostle says If I pray in an unknown tongue my Spirit prays but my understanding receives no benefit c. And how can an unlearned Person say Amen to such Prayers In which passage seems involved a tacite prohibition at least of publick Prayers in an unknown tongue All this is granted but yet with this exception mention'd by the Apostle himself unless either he that prays or some other interpret Therefore before he took on him to charge the Catholic Church with a scandalous opposition to this passage of Scripture he ought to have examin'd better her doctrin and practise otherwise he himself will be found guilty of a Scandalous opposition to God's Church Now for a tryal of the Churches sence let him observe the Ordinance of the Council of Trent touching this very Point the words are these Though the Mass contain instruction for Gods faithful people yet it seem'd not expedient unto the Fathers that it should be celebrated every where in the vulgar tongue wherefore retaining in all places the Churches antient Rite approved by the holy Roman Church the Mother and Mistresse of all Churches lest Christ's Sheep should hunger and Children asking bread none should be found to break it to them the Holy Synod commands all Pastours and all that have care of Souls that during the celebration of Mass they should frequently either by themselves or others expound some part of those things which are read in it and among other things let them explain the mystery of this most Holy Sacrifice especially on Sundays and Feasts The Preacher here may see that the Church does not make such a secret even of the most sublime Mysteries of her Office as the Court believ'd upon his report 12. Likewise between this speaking in an unknown tongue mention'd by St. Paul and the Churches publick Latin Service there is this great disparity that this later is always a known Language to several of those present if not to all and there are alwayes those who understandingly say Amen And again being a known set-form in one set-language recurring continually the same according to the Feast those who are ignorant of it at first need not continue so but by due attention and other diligence may arive to a sufficient knowledge at least of the chief parts thereof they having also in their Manuals Primers Psalters c. ready translated both the Psalms Hymns and Prayers c. and there being several Books both in English and all vulgar languages that expound the Church-service even to the meanest capacity Neither is the Latin tongue by reason of its affinity with many vulgar tongues and of the constant use hereof a language unknown to such a degree in Catholick Conntries as our English Nation imagin it and therefore is so much scandalized Neither is there the same motive for some dispensation of a change in those places as perhaps would be in a Country less
would make petitions to these Saints to exercise their Rhetorick and yet without any cautioning their hearers that they did it in such a manner which if done seriously would have been an injury to God to Christ our Redeemer yeâ— Idolatry c. And lastly since the Doctor may find Vossius and Forbes for some of them at least condemning this evasion 11. To these Testimonies I may adjoyn the expresse confessions of Protestants That Invocation of Saints was commonly in use in the Greek Church long before the 3 d. and 4 th General Councils For which besides the confession of Chemnitius Vossius also is clear whose words are About the year of Christ 370. those to whom the care of instructing the people was committed did by their practise lead them to invocate the Saints departed And indeed in the Greek Church the first or at least very near the first of those which gave such Examples were Basil Nyssen Nazianzen And in the West at the same time Ambrose of Millain a diligent Reader and Imitater of the Greeks followed the same custom Now since Dr. Pierce professes so ready a submission to the Judgment of the four first General Councils and must grant that several of these Fathers whom Vossius acknowledges to have been Patrons of Invocation and to have used it even in the publick Assemblies for which they were never censured did precede many years two of these General Councils I would gladly know if such a Question had been made before the third or fourth Council concerning Invocation of Saints as was before that of Trent Whether he can perswade himself that those Fathers would not have justified such Invocation for lawful in those Councils which they practised as lawful out of and before them and would not have produced at least as high a stating of that Point as the Council of Trent did And indeed a particular knowledg and agency of Saints deceased in in human affairs seems to be acknowledged in the fourth General Council and Invocation in the third Person Whose words are Let Flavian be had in everlasting memory Behold Vengeance i. e. on his murderers Behold the Truth Flavian lives after death Let Flavian the Martyr pray for us 12. It remains in the last place that an Answer be given to the only Aâ—gument out of Antiquitie produced by the Doctor against this Doctrine and to prove it's Noveltie For saies he St. Augustin denies invocation of Saints to have been in his daies And his only proof that he does so is from those words of his The men of God that is Sainâ—s departed are named indeed in their due place and order but they are not invoked by the Priest who Sacrifices 12. To this passage our Answer it 1. That sure the Preacher had forgot he was to reckon presently after the Sacrifice of the Masse among Novelties introduced after the fourth General Council when he produced this Testimony that expresly proves the contrary Here is a Sacerdos brought in and here he is brought in both praying and Sacrificing and yet saies the Doctor no such thing as any Christian Sacrifice Or if a Sacrifice only a Sacrifice perhaps of praise and thanksgiving But St. Augustin will contradict him who as hath been said calls this indeed a Sacrifice of Thanksgiving in regard of glorified Saints commemorated in it but a Sacrifice propitiatory in regard of the faithful departed with some stains of sins remaining 2. The same thing St. Augustin means here i. e. That Saints are not soveraignly invocated by way of Sacrifice as the Supream Donors and Fountain of all good that descends to mankind is taught by the Catholic Church even where she professes Invocation of Saints in the same sense as St. Augustin allows it that is as of our fellow-members and citizens making efficacious intercessions for us to this Supream Deity to whom we Sacrifice For thus saies the Council of Trent Although the Church be accustomed to celebrate Masses somtimes in the honour and memory of Saints yet she does not teach that the Sacrifice should be offered to them but to God alone who has crown'd them And hence it is that the Priest is never wont to say O Peter O Paul I offer this Sacrifice to thee but to God to whom he gives thanks for their Victories and implores their patronage that they may vouchsafe to intercede for us in Heaven whole memory we celebrate on earth A part of which Decree is taken out of S. Augustin himself in the same Treatise quoted by the Preacher 3. Dr. Pierce could not possibly have made a worse choice of a place from whence to select a Testimony as he would have us believe denying all Invocation of Saints whenas in the two Chapters of the same Book immediately preceding this many stories are largely recounted to certifie the great good that Christians had found by the intercession of Saints and all this whilst in their Oratories they begg'd their intercession 4 Perhaps he will not yet be content but with Bishop Andrews will urge it is not here said by St. Austin That the Saints are not Sacrificed to but that they are not so much as invocated at the Altar And if it be unlawful to invocate them there it will be as well unlawful any where else Hereto it is answered That all this taken in a right sense is granted For first To this day in the Masse there is no kind of Invocation of Saints yea more according to the Council of Carthage till the Consecration be perfected there are no Prayers directed to the Son of God nor to the Holy Ghost but only to God the Father 2. But this argues not that if the Church had so order'd it it might not have been lawful even at the Altar to have Invocated the Saints by such an inferiour Invocation or Compellation as the Church has determined which is only according to Card. Perron prier pour prier to desire them to pray for us As even in the Masse it self the Priest requests the Assistants saying Orate fraires ut meum ac vestrum Sacrificium acceptabile fiat apud Deum c. To whom the people Answers Suscipiat Dominus Sacrificium de manibus tuis c. 3. But as for the Supream sort of Invocation which St. Austiâ— only intended in this passage and which he calls Culium latriae this is only due to God and without impiety cannot be made to Saints And thus St. Austin writing against Faustus the Manichean fully justifies what he saith in this passage 5. But after all this that St. Austin allows Invocation of Saints in an inferior way do but examin only these places in him c. 4. De curâ pro mortuis a Book which he wrote in Answer to a Quere of Paulinus Whether it doth benefit any one after his death to have his body buried in the Memorial of some Saint When as saith he such consolations of the living are
continency 9. Catholicks therfore though they confesse this continence to be a special Gift of God not bestow'd on all because all do not use the means yet resolve it is such a special gift as is denyed to none who rightly seek it and conceive it also may be made the matter of a vow by those who have a steddy purpose to use the necessary means to attain and conserve it and by those who by humble and due examining themselves are perswaded that God calls them to a state of greater Perfection and being in that state depend on his grace for performing their Vow seeking his assistance by constant Prayers watchfulnesse and necessary penitential austerities Now those may be confident they are called to such a state either in a Monastical or Ecclesiastical Profession who betake themselves thereto not out of any worldly respects for gaining a subsistence or preferment or other temporal invitations but purely to avoid the tentations solicitudes and distractions of the world and flesh and to devote themselves more to the service of God and advancing their Souls in vertue and piety In this state of Perfection and in complying with this Council of Perfection those who duly undertake that state may as undoubtedly promise to themseves Gods assistance whilst they use the means to obtain it as generally all Christians may after the vow of Baptism St. Augustin writes thus David vow'd as having the matter in his own power And yet he beggs withall â—f God that he may perform what â—e vow'd Here is the devotion of one that vows here is the humity of one that prays Let no man presume on his own strength as if he were able of himself to perform what he shall vow He that exhorts thee to vow saying Vovete reddite the same God helps thee to perform what thou hast vow'd 10. If then it be lawfull for private persons to vow Celibacy surely it is lawful for the Church to enjoyn it her Doctrin being That Goddenies not the gift of Chastity to them who ask it aright nor suffers us to be tempted above what we are able Which Doctrin is the ground why the Church enjoyns Celibacy to Priests So that Chastity is called a special Gift not in this sence as it all men though using what means â—oever are not capable of it But it is such a Gift as many men never actually receive from God because they do not use the means and such a Gift as few also will endeavour to use the means to attain because these means are harder than those by which other Gifts may be attained That the undertaking by Vow such a life of Chastity and abstinence from Marriage yea in Marriage it self has been approv'd commended and practised in Gods Church from the very beginning if the Preacher will not believe us let him not suspect at least partiality in his own best Friends We are not ignorant says Chemnitius that the Fathers did approve the vows of perpetual Celibacy and acknowledge them to be obligatory Profession and Vows of Chastity says Peter Martyr were extant among Christians in the time of Clement of Alexandria that is about the year 170. Again I know says he that Epiphanius with many of the Fathers erred in this that they said it was a sin to violate such a Vow when it was requisite and that he did ill in referring it to Apostolic Tradition Danaeus says confidently That St. Augustin and all the Bishops in the Council of Carthage abused manifestly the word of God saying upon the Apostles words If any widows how young soever have vowed themselves to God c. and afterwards shall go to secular Marriage they shall according to the Apostle have damnation because they dared to make void the vow of Chastity made to God The Centurists affirm it to be manifest by the Epistles of Ignatius that in those times men began to have too much liking of the Profession of Virginity for he says Let Virgins consider to whom they have consecrated themselves 11. And as for the Doctrin of Devils mentioned by the Preacher he may do well to sit him down and consider the words of the Apostle and the comments of the Fathers on them a little better First he will find the Apostle in his opposing those who in the latter times should forbid to marry and command to abstain from meats to argue against them thus That every Creature and Ordinance of God is good according to Gen. 1. 31. 2. 23 24. and therefore being sanctified first by the word of God and Prayer may lawfully be used See 1 Tim. 4. 3 4 5. which plainly shews that St. Paul means such Apostates as abstain from or prohibit Marriage and Meats as in themselves unlawful and unclean and contaminating Which thing can neither be objected to the antient nor modern Church-practise using abstinence from some meats for the chastisement of the body not for any uncleanesse in the food and not forbidding Marriage to any single person absolutely but only upon his voluntary undertaking such an employment with which they imagin a married condition not so well to sute In which case if necessary abstinence from Marriage be a fault the Apostle himself may seem to comply with it in those expressions of his forementioned concerning the Widows 1 Tiâ— 5. 11 12. 2ly He will find it manifest by experience that this prophecy of the Apostle was most eminently fulfilled in other persons of these latter times whom these Fathers even in these points most vehemently resisted they affirming downright all Marriage especially with reference to procreation of children therefore the married were advised by them in such manner to use their Wives as to avoid this See S. Aug. De Morib Manich. c. 18. to be unlawful and the work or dedesign of the Devil as likewise flesh-diet to be unclean and defiling They forbid living Creatures as detesting them saith Epiphanius not in respect of preserving continency or a vertuous life but out of fear and fancy that they might be defiled by eating such living Creatures Wine they use not at all saying 't is Diabolical And S. Austin Contra Faust. l. 30. c. 5. Ye call the Creature unclean because the Devil ye say frames flesh out of the more feculent part of natural matter Such were some of the Gâ—osticks Eucratites Mâ—ntanists Marcionites and in the last place the Manichees who not holding all things to have been created by the same good God but this lower world by an evil Principle or by the Prince of Darkness as they call him affirmed in the begetting of a man that the Soul which they account to be a part of the substance of God himself becomes fertered and imprisoned in the walls or handy-work of the Devil i. e. the body and therefore was marriage as occasioning such imprisonment forborn by all their Elect and though this was permitted to their Auditors yet saith S. Austin it
be a sin so unpardonable that no ignorance unless supposed such as is invincible which I fear much fewer then is ordinarily imagined of those who have any liberal Education can pretend to in that great evidence and light which they have of the continued succession unity of Doctrine perfect obedience to their spiritual Superiours penances and retirements from the world and several other signal marks of the One Holy Catholick Apostolick Church no ignorance I say no surreption provocation c. can excuse it Some may be more deeply guilty and obnoxious to a heavier damnation then others as Ring-leaders more then followers but damnation is by the Fathers generally denounced as the portion of all 4. The true Reason whereof may be deduced from the example of all other Governments whatsoever The greatest offence a Subject can commit against Monarchy is an actual attempt or rather the attempt executed by which Monarchy is disolved Inwardly to condemn the Laws of such a Government to entertain Principles which if put in practise would withdraw Subjects from their due Obedience is an offence of an high nature but the actual cantonising of a Kingdom and the raising in it Courts or Iudicatories independent on and opposite to the Common Tribunal of the Country is the utmost of all crimes both the Seducers and Seduced are not only deprived of the priviledges belonging to good Subjects but pursued by Arms as the worst of all enemies 5. It is so in God's Church The main thing our Creed teaches us to believe of it is its unity without which it is not a Church Now if Vnity then Order then Subordination of Governours c. what therefore is the great sin against this fundamental constitution of the Church but Schism a dissolving the Communion and connexion that the members of this great Body have among themselves and with relation to the whole We all willingly acknowledge that the great sin of the Synagogue the sin that fill'd up the measurâ— of the crimes of the Iews was their murdering our Lord. Now sayes St. Chrysostom We shall not merit and incurâ—d less cruel punishment if we divide the unity and plenituâ— of the Church the mystical Body of our Lord then those have done which pierced mangled and tore his own Body And the very like expression hath St. Cyprian 6. There are very few Heresies that is only such Errors as are formally destructive to those very few verities or Articles of Faith without an explicite belief whereof no man can be saved which do in themselves simply as false opinions universally destroy Salvation Indeed if they have the formality of Heresie joyned to them and be maintained with a knowledge that they are contrary to the sence and authority of the Church then they have involved in them something of Schism or at least they are in an immediate disposition to Schism and in that regard all Heresies though in Points of themselves less important are damnative But Schism alone though there be no Heresie joyned with it immediately divides from the Body of Christ and consequently from Christ himself 7. But may not ignorance excuse the guilt of Schism No on the contrary in some regard it aggravates it For though Pride and Malice be far greater in the Leading Schismaticks persons of wit and learning yet ignorant souls and ideots seem more to contradict human reason because the more ignorant they ought to know they are and being confessedly no Pastors the more ought they to submit their judgments to Authority and consequently the preferring their own conduct or the conduct and direction of particular men or Churches before the universal Authority of the Church the excommunicating as it were the whole Church of God the esteeming all Christians both Pastors and Flocks as Heathens and Publicans is a presumption so contrary to human nature and reason that their want of learning is that which will most condemn them I speak not now of persons absolutely ideots who scarce know there are any other Pastors or any other Church then their own who pretend not at all to pass their judgements on other Religions but know only what their Pastors teach them having no ability by reason of their condition to examine Scriptures and Churches For such no doubt may by their simplicity and absolute invincible ignorance escape the malignity of Schism But I speak of inferiour Tradesmen of Gentlemen and Gentlewomen who have a capacity of being rightly instructed and better informed of that spiritual authority to which they owe their subjection and yet who by their own perversness become troubleâ— of the Church and who because they caâ— read the Scriptures take upon them to judge of the sence of them both for themselves and their Pastors c. Such as these no doubt have drunk in the very gall of Schism by usurping an authority which express Scripture sayes belongs only to Pastors 8. Some learned persons particularly Doctor Steward attribute much to the temper of the English Church which he sayes is like St. Cyprians Neminem condemantes aut a communione separantes and this alone they suppose will exempt Protestants as it did St. Cyprian from the imputation and penalty of Schism to which other violent Calvinistical Congregations are more obnoxious But the case is not the same This indeed did exempt St. Cyprian because as St. Augustin sayes the Church had not then decided the dispute to whose decision St. Cyprian would certainly have submitted The case of Protestants is evidently different If a Province in England had withdrawn it self from the publick civil authority would this excuse serve them to say We do not intend to quarrel with those that continue in obedience to the King we mean neither him nor them any harm they shall be welcom to come among us if they will we will be good friends we will not meddle with their doings But we will be govern'd only by our own Laws and Magistrates c I believe not Their civility in their rebellion will not change the Title of their crime nor free them from the punishment due to it it may perhaps qualifie the Princes resentment but the civillest Treason is Treason 9. Being to examine the Doctor 's Plea touching the Point of Schism I thought requisite to premise this consideration of its heynousness that both he and my self also should consider it as the most important of all other in which the least mistake will prove mortal I will add a bold word and undertake to justifie it Though it were far more probable that the Catholick Church had been guilty of Innovation in all the Points mentioned by the Doctor yet since by the Protestants confession those Points are not fundamental their voluntary separating themselves from her Communion will be in God's esteem very Schism CHAP. XX. How the Preacher vainly endeavours to excuse his Church from Schism Of the Subordination of Church Governors and Synods The breach of their Subordination is the
Novelties we readily grant they are not obliged to subscribe them And it being supposed by the Archbishop c. that without such a certainty it would have been unlawfull for Protestants to question or censure such former Doctrins of the Church The Doctor is bound and â—here adjure him to declare expresly as in the presence of Him who is Supreme Head of the Church and will revenge severely all calumnious persecutions of it that he is demonstratively certain that in all these Points charged by him on the Church of later times as Novelties and Errors introduced since the four first Councils she is manifestly guilty and that nothing appears in this or any other Catholic book of his Acquaintance which deserves to be esteem'd so much as a probable proof to the contrary For my part I here protest on the other side that I find not any one concluding allegation in his Sermon nor believe there can any be produced which can warrant him to make such a Declaration 10. The second Condition is That in like manner he professe he can or hath demonstratively proved by Scripture or Primitive Antiquity the main grounds upon which they pretend to justifie their separation to be no Schism to wit these 1. That the universal Church â—epresented in a Lawful General Council may in points of doctrin not fundamental so mislead the Church by errors that a particular Church c. discovering such errors may be obliged to separate externally 2. That a particular Chrâ—stian or a Congregation Diocesan may lawfully reverse Decisions formerly made by a Nationaâ— Synod and assented to by it and that a Nationaâ— Council may do the like in regard of a Patriarchical or any of them in regard of an Oecumenical formerly accepted and admitted If these Assâ—riâ—ous he Innovations as in our perswasion they are it is clear they destroy all possible unity If they be not let some demonstrative Proofs and Examples be produced out of Antriquity that a reversing of such order and subordination has been practised and approved in the Catholic Church 3. That a particular Church c. in opposition to the Vniversal can judg what Doctrines are fundamental or necessary to all Persons 〈◊〉 Communities c. and what not And that a Catalogue of such Doctrines be given by the Respondent or demonstrative reasons alledged why such an one is not necessary 11. Thirdly if he will deny the Church of England has separated externally from the present Vniversal Church but only from the Roman then to make this good he is obliged to name what other visible Member of the Vniversal Church they continue in Communion with in whose public Service they will joyn or can be admitted and to whose Synods they ever have or can repair And since at the time of their first Separation they were only in Communion with the Roman-Catholic Church and the Members of it be must shew how when and where they entered into any other new Communion Lastly Since the English Church by renouncing not only several Doctrines but several Councils acknowledged for General and actually submitted to both by the Eastern and Western Churches hath thereby separated from both these he must find out some other pretended Members of the Catholic Church divided from both these that is some that are not manifestly heretical with whom the English Church communicates 12. A fourth Condition is that he must either declare other Calvinistical Reformed Churches which manifestly have no succession of lawflly Ordained Ministers enabled validly to celebrate and administer Sacraments to consecrate confirm preach God's Word c. to be no heretical or Schismatical Congregations Or if they be he must demonstrate how the English Church can acquit her self from Schism since her Bishops and Divines have authoritatively repaired to their Synods and a general permission is given to any Protestant Writers to acknowledg them true reformed and sufficiently Orthodox Congregations 13. The last shall be that he abstain from imputing to the Catholic Church the opinions or sayings of particular Writers The Church her self having sufficiently declared her Doctrines in her Councils especially that of Trent If he will combate against her there he has a fair and open field and charity requires that he affix to her Decisions the most moderate and best qualified sense Otherwise he will declare himself as one who is sorry his Mother should not be ill reputed Now in exchange I for my part am extreamly willing to proceed in the same manner with the English Church I would sain charge her with nothing but her own declared Doctrines and Decisions But truly I know not where to find them except only in the little Primmer and Catechism for Children For the 39. Articles being almost all Negatives may as well be reputed the Doctrines of Iewish or Turkish Congregations since these also deny the Sacrifice of the Masse Purgatory Infallibility of Councils c. other Reformed Churches have published reasonably large Professions of their Faith they have declared their own positive sense in almost all Points of Christian Belief as the Huguenots in France c. the Lutherans in Germany c only the English Church seems to have made a secret of her Faith upon what motive I am unwilling to guess 14. These Conditions in themselves so reasonable and even according to Protestants grounds also so necessary if the Replyer shall refuse to perform he will in the judgment of all discerning Readers be himself the Answerer and Conâ—uter of his own Reply and withall will shew it is not Truth or Peace he aims at but the satisfying his own or others interests passions and revenge against those who least deserve it All subterfuges all involved intricacies in answering all discourses which are not open candid and sincere will be confessions of guilt He may perhaps hide the weaknesse of his cause from credulous Women Trades-men or possibly the more unlearned part of our Gentry but to all considering Readers his Art of hiding will be his most manifest discovery Aristotle saies the Sepiâ— is the wisest of all Fishes because she conceals her self by casting forth round about her a black humour which hinders the sight of her But on the contrary Iulius Caesar Scaliger affirms she is of all Fishes the most imprudent Quia cum se putat latere prodit seipso latibâ—lo for the Fishermen are sure to find her under her inky humour 15. And now having finished our Answer to the substance wherein we differ let us conclude with the Name that distinguishes us He puts us in mind of the reason why the Lutherans and from them other Reformerd took the name Protestants for protesting against the bloody Edict of Worms Spires c. we find little ground why the Reformers in England should borrow that title Against what Armes or Armies did they ever protest What Edicts were made against them We Catholics might rather assume such a title if it were of any special honor having