it is to no more purpose to shew us the word Tradition in other places of St. Paul's Writings particularly in the third Chapter of the same Epistle v. 6. where by Tradition St Chrysâ—ston understands the Apostles Example which he had given them and so it follows v. 7. For your selves know how you ought to follow us c or it may refer to the commandment he had given them in his former Epistle 4. 11. which the Reader may be pleased to compare with this but cannot with any colour be expounded to signifie any Doctrine of Faith about which the Roman Church now contends with us For it is plain it hath respect to their good manners and orderly living for the information of which we need go no where but to the holy Scriptures wherein we are taught full enough how we ought to walk and please GOD in all things The same may be said of that place 1 Cor. 11. 2. Now I praise you Brethren that you remember me in all things and keep the Traditions or Ordinances as we render it or Precepts as the vulgar Latine it self hath it as I have delivered them unto you For we are so observant of what he hath delivered that we are confident if Saint Paul were now alive and in this Church he would praise us as he doth the Corinthians for keeping the Traditions as be delivered them and on the contrary reprove and condemn the Roman Church for not keeping them as they were first delivered And we have good ground for this confidence there being an instance in that very Chapter which demonstrates our fidelity in preserving the very first Traditions and their unfaithfulness in letting them go For he tells us v. 23. that he had delivered to them what he had received of the Lord and that which he received and delivered was about the whole Communion as you may read there and in the following verses 24 25. in both kinds the Cup as well as the Bread Thus he saith the Lord appointed it and thus he delivered it and this Tradition we keep intire as he received it of the Lord and delivered it to his Church in this Epistle which is a part of the holy Scripture whereas they do not keep it but have broken this Divine Tradition and give the Communion of Christ's Body and Blood otherwise than St. Paul delivered keeping the Cup from the People By which I desire all that love the Lord Jesus in sincerity to judge which Church keeps closest to the Apostolical Tradition foâ— so St. Paul calls this Doctrine of the Communion in both kinds that which he delivered or left as a Tradition with them they that stick to what is unquestionably the Apostolical Doctrine or they that leave it to follow those Doctrines or Presumptions rather which at the best are very dubious and uncertain And farther I desire all that read this Paper to consider whither it be reasonable to think that those Riâ—es which have no Authority in the holy Scripture but were instituted perhaps by the Apostles have been kept pure and uncorrupâ—ed according to their first intention when these sacred Rites for instance the holy Eâ—charist are not preserved intire which are manifestly ordained in the holy Writings And so much may serve for the first thing for it would be too long to explain all the rest of the places of holy Scripâ—ure which they are wont to alledge though the word Tradition be not mentioned in them to give a colour to their present pretences how pertinently may be judged by these places now considered II. Secondly then That Word of God which was once unwritten being now written we acknowledge our selves to be much indebted to the Church of God in all foregoing Ages which hath preserved the Scriptures and delivered them down to us as his Word which we ought to do unto those that shall succeed us as our Church teacheth us in its Twentieth Article where the Church is affirmed to be a Witness and a keeper of holy Writ This Tradition we own it being universal continued uninterrupted and undenied Though in truth this is Tradition in another sense of the word not signifying the Doctrine delivered unto us but the manner and means of its delivery And therefore if any Member of our Church be pressed by those of the Romish Perswasion with this Argument for their present Traditions that Scripture it self is come to us by Tradition let them answer thus Very right it is so and we thank God for it therefore let this be no part of our dispute it being a thing presupposed in all Discourses about Religion a thing agreed among all Christian people that we read the Word of GOD when we read the holy Scriptures Which being delivered to us and accepted by us as his Word we see no necessity of any other Tradition or Doctrine which is not to be found there or cannot be proved from thence for they tell us they are able to make even the men of God wise unto Salvation And if they press you again and say How do you know that some Books are Canonical and others not is it not by a constant Tradition Answer them again in this manner Yes this is true also and would to GOD you would stand to this universal Tradition and receive no other Books but what have been so delivered But know withal that this universal Tradition of the Books of Scripture unto which you have added several Apocryphal Writings which have not been constantly delivered as tâ—â—se we receive is no part of the Tradition or Doctrine delivered That is no Doctrine distinct from the Scriptures but only the instrument or means of conveying that Doctrine unto us In short it is the fidelity of the Church with whom the Canon of Scripture was deposed but is no more a Doctrine not written in the Scripture then the Tradition or delivery of the Code or Book of the Civil Law is any Opinion or Law not written in that Code And we are more assured of the fidelity of the Church herein then the Civilians can be assured of the Faithfulness of their Predecessours in preserving and delivering the Books of their Law to them because these holy Books were alwayes kept with a greater care then any other Books whatsoever and in the acceptance of them also we find there was a great caution used that they might not be deceived all Christians looking upon them to be of such importance that all Religion they thought was concerned in them Of which this is an Argument that they who sought to destroy the Christian Religion in the Primitive times sought nothing more then to destroy the Bible Which they were wont to demand of those who were suspected to be Christians to be delivered up to them that they might burn it And according as men behaved themselves in this trial so they were reputed to be Christians or not Christians And the Traditours as they were called that is they who delivered
the holy Scriptures into the hands of the Pagans were look'd upon by Christians as men that were content to part with their Religion For which there could be no reason but that they thought Christian Religion to be therein contained and to be betrayed by those who delivered them to be burnt By which I have proved more then I intended in this part of my Discourse that in the holy Scriptures the whole Will of God concerning our Salvation is contained Which is the true Question between us and the Church of Romeâ— Not whither the Scripture be delivered to us as the Word of GOD or no in this our People ought to tell them we are all agreed but whither they have been delivered to us as the whole Will of GOD. And from that Argument now mentioned and many more we conclude that Universal Tradition having directed us unto these Books and no other they direct us sufficiently without any other Doctrines unto GOD and to our everlasting rest And if they urge you farther and say that the very Credit of the Scripture depends upon Tradition tell them that it is a Speech not to be endured if they mean thereby that it gives the Scripture its authority and if they mean less we are agreed as hath been already said for it is to say that Man gives authority to GOD's Word Whereas in truth the holy Scriptures are not therefore of Divine Authority because the Church hath delivered them so to be but the Church hath delivered them so to be because it knew them to be of such authority And if the Church should have conceived or taught otherwise of these Writings then as of the undoubted Oracles of GOD she would have erred damnably in such a Tradition I shall sum up what hath been said in this second particular in a few words Christ and his Apostles at first taught the Church by word of mouth but afterward that which they preach'd was by the commandment of GOD commited to writing and delivered unto the Church to be the ground of our Faith Which is no more then Irenaeus hath said in express words L. 3. C. 1. speaking of them by whom the Gospel came unto all Nations Which they then preached but afterward by the Will of GOD delivered unto us in the Scriptures to be in time to come the Foundation and Pillar of our Faith III. And farther we likewise acknowledge that the sum and substance of the Christian Religion contained in the Scriptures hath been delivered down to us even from the Apostles dayes in other wayes or forms besides the Scriptures For instance in the Baptismal Vow in the Creed in the Prayers and Hymns of the Church Which we may call Traditions if we please but they bring down to us no new Doctrine but only deliver in an abridgment the same Christianity which we find in the Scriptures Upon this there is no need that I should enlarge but I proceed farther to affirm IV. That we reverently receive also the unanimous Tradition or Doctrine of the Church in all Ages which determines the meaning of the holy Scripture and makes it more clear and unquestionable in any point of Faith wherein we can find it hath declared its sense For we look upon this Tradition as nothing else but the Scripture unfolded not a new thing which is not in the Scripture but the Scripture explained and made more evident And thus some part of the Nicene Creed may be called a Tradition as it hath expresly delivered unto us the sense of the Church of GOD concerning that great Article of our Faith That JESUS CHRIST is the Son of GOD. Which they teach us was alwayes thus understood the Son of GOD begotten of his Father before all worlds and of the same substance with the Father But this Tradition supposes the Scripture for its ground and delivers nothing but what the Fathers assembled at Nice believed to be contained there and was first fetch'd from thence For we find in Theodoret L. 1. C. 6. that the famous Emperour Constantine admonished those Fathers in all their Questions and Debates to consult only with these heavenly inspired Writings Because the Evangelical and Apostolical Books and the Oracles of the old Prophets do evidently instruct us what to thiâ—k in Divine matters This is so clear a Testimony that in those dayes they made this compleat Rule of their Faith whereby they ended Controversies which was the reason that in several other Synods we find they were wont to lay the Bible before them and that there is nothing in the Nicene Creed but what is to be found in the Bible that Cardinal Bellarmine hath nothing to reply to it but this Constantine was indeed a great Emperour but no great Doctor Which is rather a Scoff than an Answer and casts a scorn not only upon him but upon the great Council who as the same Theodoret witnesseth assented unto that speech of Constantine So it there follows in these words That most of the Synod were obedient to what he had discoursed and embraced both mutual Concord and sound Doctrine And accordingly St. Hilary a little after extols his Son Constantius for this that he adhered to the Scriptures and blames him only for not attending to the true Catholick sense of them His words are these in his little Book which he delivered to Constantius I truly admire thee O Lord Constantius the Emperour who desirest a Faith according to what is writen They pretended to no other in those dayes but as he speaks a little after look'd upon him that refused this as Antichrist It was only required that they should receive their Faith out of God's Books not merely according to the words of them but according to their true meaning because many spake Scripture without Scripture and pretended to Faith without Faith as his words are and herein Catholick and constant Tradition was to guide them For whatsoever was contrary to what the whole Church had received and held from the beginning could not in reason be thought to be the meaning of that Scripture which was alledged to prove it And on the other side the Church pretended to no more then to be a Witness of the received sense of the Scriptures which were the bottom upon which they built this Faith Thus I observe Hegesippus saith in Euseb his History L. 4. C. 22. that when he was at Rome he met with a great many Bishops and that he received the very same Doctrine from them all And then a little after tells us what that was and whence they derived it saying That in every succession of Bishops and iâ— every City so they held as the Law preached and as the Prophets and as the Lord. That is according to the Doctrine of the Old and New Testament I shall conclude this particular with a pregnant passage which I remember in a famous Divine of our Church Dr. Jacksons in his Treatise of the Catholick Church Chap. 22. who writes
or Papists but yet heartily desire to do good to them both But there is a more mischievous suggestion then this that the design of such Papers is only to raise a new cry and noise about Popery and to alarm the People and disturb the Government with new Fears and Jealousies Truly if I thought this would be the effect of it I would burn my Papers presently for I am sure the church of England will get nothing by a Tumultuary and clamorous Zeal against the Church of Rome and I had much rather suffer under Popery then contribute any thing towards raising a Popular Fury to keep it out We profess our selves as irreconcilable Enemies to Popery as we are to Phanaticism and desire that all the World may know iâ— but we will never Rebell nor countenance any Rebellion against our lawful Soveraign to keep out either we leave such Principles and Practices to Papists and Phanaticks But when we find our People Assaulted by the Agents of Rome and do not think our selves secure from Popish Designs we think it our Duty to give them the best Instructions we can to preserve them from such Errors as we believe will destroy their Souls and cannot but wonder that any men who are as much concerned to take care of Souls as we are should think this a needless or a scandalous undertaking I wish such men would speak out and tell us plainly what they think of Popery themselves If they think this Design not well managed by those who undertake it it would more become them to commend the Design and do it better themselves I know no man but would very gladly be excused as having other work enough to imploy his time but yet I had rather spend my vacant minutes this way then in censuring the good that other men do while I do none my self The Words of the Paper which was sent to me are these IT is my Opinion that the infinite Goodness of our Legislator has left to us a means of knowing the true sense and meaning of the Holy Scriptures which is the Church Now J judge this Church must be known to be the true Church by its continual visible Succession from Christ till our Dayes But I doubt whither or no the Protestant Church can make out this continual visible Succession and desire to be informed ANSWER THAT Christ has lest a means of knowing the true sense and meaning of the Holy Scriptures I readily grant or else it had been to no purpose to have left us the Scriptures But the latter Clause is very ambiguous for the meaning may either be that we may understand by the Scriptures which is the Church or that the Church is the means whereby we must understand the true sense and meaning of the Scripture The first is a true Protestant Principle and therefore I presume not intended by this Objector For how we should know that there is any Church without the Information we receive by the Scripture I cannot Divine and yet we may as easily know that there is a Church as we can know which is the true Church without the Scripture For there is no other means of knowing either that there is a Church or what this Church is or what are the Properties of a True and Sound and Orthodox Church but by Revelation and we have no other Revelation of this but what is contained in the Holy Scriptures As for the Second That the Church is the means of knowing the true sense and meaning of the Scriptures it is in some sense very true in some sense very false 1. It is in some sense true and acknowledged by all sober Protestants As 1. If by the Church we understand the Universal Church of all Ages as we receive the Scriptures themselves handed down by them to our time so what ever Doctrines of Faith have been universally received by them is one of the best means to find out the true sense of Scripture For the nearer they were to the times of the Apostles the more likely they were to understand the true sense of their Writings being instructed by the Apostles themselves in the meaning of them And thus we have a certain Rule to secure us from all dangerous Errors in expounding Scripture For the great and fundamental Doctrines of the Christian Religion are as plainly contained in the Writings of the first Fathers of the Church and as unanimously asserted by them as the Authority of the Scriptures themselves and therefore though we have not a Traditionary Exposition of every particular Text of Scripture yet we have of the great and fundamental Doctrines of Faith and therefore must never expound Scripture so as to contradict the known and avowed sense of the Catholick Church And this course the Church of England takes she receives the Definitions of the four first General Councils and requires her Bishops and Clorgy to Expound the Scriptures according to the profest Doctrines of those first and purest Ages of the Church 2. We ought to pay great deference to and not lightly and want only oppose the Judgement and Authority of the Particular Church wherein we live when her Expositions of Scripture do not evidently and notoriously contradict the sense of the Catholick church especially of the first and best Ages of it For it does not become private men to oppose their Sentiments and Opinions to the Judgement of the church unless in such plain cases as every honest man may be presumed a very competent Judge in the matter and no church nor all the churches in the World have such Authority that we must renounce our senses and deny the first principles of Reason to follow them with a blind and implicite Faith And thus the church that is the sense and Judgment of the catholick church is a means for the finding out the true sense of Scripture and though we may mistake the sense of some particular Texts which the Romanists themselves will not deny but that even infallible councils may do who tho' they are infallible in their conclusions yet are not alwayes so in the Arguments or Mediums whither drawn from Scripture or Reason whereby they prove them yet it is Morally impossible we should be guilty of any dangerous mistake while we make the catholick Doctrine of the church our Rule and in other matters follow the Judgment and submit to the Authority of the church wherein we live which is as absolutely necessary as Peace and Order and good Goverment in the church 2. But then this is very false if we mean that the church is the only means of finding out the true sense of the Scriptures on if by the church we understand any particular church as I suppose this Person does the Roman Catholick that is the particular universal church of Rome or if we mean the church of the present Age or by Means understand such a Decretory sentence as must determine our Faith and command out Assent that we must seek
Governed by Apostolical Men when we cannot reasonably suspect any Deviation from the Primitive Practice and this is the Rule which the Church of England owns in such matters and by which she rejects and confutes both the Innovations and corruptions of the Church of Rome and the wild pretences of Phanaticism So that we do in the most proper sense own the Belief and Practice of the Primitive Church to be the best means for Expounding Scripture We do not leave every man to Expound Scripture by a private Spirit as our Adversaries of the Church of Rome reproach us we adhere to the ancient Catholick Church which the Church of Rome on one side and the Phanaticks on the other have forsaken And though we reject the new invention of an infallible Judge yet we are no Friends at all to Scepticism but can give a more Rational account of our Faith then the Church of Rome can Had we no other way of understanding the sense of Scripture but by Propriety of the Language and the Grammatical construction of the Words and the scope and design of the Texts their connexion and Dependence on what goes before and what follows and such like means as we use for the understanding any other Books of humane composition I doubt not but honest and diligent Inquirers might discover the true meaning of Scripture in all the great Articles of our Faith but yet this alone is a more uncertain way and lyable to the Abuses of Hereticks and Impostors The Socinians are a famous Example what Wit and Criticism will do to pervert the plainst Text and some other Sectaries are as plain a demonstration what wâ—rk Dullness and Stupidity and Enthusiasm will make with Scripture but when we have the practice of the Catholick Church and an ancient and venerable summary of the Christian Faith which has been the common Faith of Christians in all Ages to be our Rule in Expounding Scripture though we may after all mistake the sense of some particular Texts yet we cannot be guilty of any great and dangerous mistakes This use the Church of England makes of the Catholick Church in Expounding Scripture that she Religiously maintains the ancient Catholick Faith and will not suffer any man to Expound Scriptures in opposition to the ancient Faith and Practice of the Catholick Church But though the Belief and Practice of the Catholick Church be the best means of understanding the true sense of Scripture yet we cannot affirm this of any particular Church or of the Church of any particular Age excepting the Apostolick Age or those Ages which immediately succeeded the Apostles Notwithstanding this the Church of Rome may be no good Expositor of Scripture for the Church of Rome though she usurp the name of the Catholick Church as presuming her self to be the Head and Fountain of catholick Unity yet she is but a part of the catholick Church as the Church of England and the Churches of France aind Holland are and has no more right to impose her Expositions of Scripture upon other Churches then they have to impose upon her If there happen any controversie between them it is not the Authority of either Church can decide it but this must be done by an appeal to Scripture and the sense of the Catholick Church in the first and purest Ages of it For when we say that the belief and Practice of the Catholick Church is the best means to find out the true sense of Scripture we do not mean that the Church is the Soveraign and absolute Judge of the sense of Scripture but the meaning is that those Churches which were founded by the Apostles and received the Faith immediately from them and were afterwards sor some Ages governed by Apostolical men or those who were taught by them and convers'd with them are the best Witnesses what the Doctrine of the Apostles was and therefore as far as we can be certain what the Faith of these Primitive Churches was they are the best Guides for the Expounding Scripture So that the Authority of the Church in Expounding Scripture being only the Authority of Witnesses it can reach no farther then those Ages which may reasonably be presumed to be Authentick and credible Witnesses of the Doctrines of the Apostles and therefore if we extend it to the four first general councils it is as far as we can do it with any pretence of Reason and thus far the Church of England owns the Authority of the Church and commands her Ministers to Expound the Scriptures according to the Catholick Faith owned and profess'd in those days but as for the later Ages of the church which were removed too far from the Apostles dayes to be Witnesses of their Doctrine they have no more Authority in this matter then we have at this day nor has one church any more Authority then another 3. And therefore if by the church being the means of knowing the sense and meaning of the Holy Scriptures be understood the Judgment and Sentence and Decree of the church that we must seek no farther for the reason of our Faith then the infallible Authority of the church in Expounding Scripture this also is absolutely false and absurd This is more then Christ and his Apostles assumed to themselves while they were on Earth they were indeed infallible Interpreters of Scripture but yet they never bore down their Hearers meerly with their Authority but Expounded the Scriptures and applied ancient Prophesies to their Events and took the vail off of Moses's Face and shewed them the Gospel state concealed under those Types and Figures they confirmed their Expositions of Scripture by the force of Reason and appealed to the Judgments and consciences of their Hearers whither these things were not so Christ commands the Jews nor meerly to take his own word and to rely on his Authority for the truth of what he said but to study the Scriptures themselves and the Bereans are commended for this generous temper of mind that they were more noble then those of Thessalonica for they daily search'd the Scriptures to see whither the Doctrine the Apostles preach'd were to be found there or not Now I think no Church can pretend to be more infallible then Christ and his Apostles and therefore certainly ought not to assume more to themselves then they did and if the Church of Rome or any other Church will convince us of the truth of their Expositions of Scripture as Christ and his Apostles convinc'd their Hearers that is by enlightning our Understandings and convincing our Judgments by proper Arguments we will gladly learn of them This course the Primitive Christians took as is evident in all the Writings of the ancient Fathers against Jews and Hereticks they argue from the Scriptures themselves to prove what the sense of Scripture iâ— they appeal indeed sometimes to the sense of the Catholick Church not as an infallible Judge of Scripture but as the best Witnesses of the Apostolical Doctrine Thus
same Doctrines which she does and she looks upon it as a just prejudice against any Expositions of Scripture if they contradict the common Faith of the first Christians and therefore when the words of Scripture are fairly capable of different senses she chooses that sense which is most agreeable with the Catholick Faith and practice of the Primitive Church but should any Doctrines be imposed upon her as Articles of Faith which are no where to be found in Scripture or which are plainly contrary to it as the new Trent Creed is whatever pretence there be for the Antiquity of such Doctrines she utterly rejects them she will not put out her Eyes to follow any other Guide and thanks be to God she needs not reject any truly Catholick Doctrine in this way We still retain the Faith of the Primitive Church and are greatly confirmed in it from that admirable consent there is between the Scriptures as Expounded by us and that Faith which was anciently owned and received by all Christians Having thus shewn in what sense the Church is the Interpreter of Scripture I proceed now to the Second thing contained in this Paper That this Church must be known to be the true Church by its continual visible Succession from Christ till our dayes Now these few words contain a great many and very great mistakes The subject of the inquiry is how we may find out such a Church whose word we may safely take for the true sense and meaning of Scripture Now 1. The Author of this Paper whither ignorantly or designedly I know not alters the state of the Question and in stead of a Church which is an unerring and Infallible Interpreter of Scripture which would be very well worth finding he tells us how we may know a true Church now I take a true Church and and an infallible Interpreter of Scripture to be very different things A Church may be guilty of Schism and Heresie and yet may be a true Church though not a sound Orthodox and Catholick Church for a true Church is such a Church as has all things necessary and essential to the Beeing and Constitution of a Church this a Church may have and superadd other things which are destructive of the Christian Faith and very dangerous and fatal mistakes as we believe and are able to prove the Church of Râ—me has done and yet we acknowledge her a true Church because she retains the true Christian Faith though miserably Corrupted by Additions of her own as a man is a true man though he be sick of a mortal Disease Now if a true Church may corrupt the Christian Faith we have no reason to rely on the Authority of every true Church for the true sense and meaning of Scripture 2. Let us suppose that by a true Church he means an Infallible Church whose Authority we may safely rely on in Expounding Scriptures this Church he sayes is to be known by a continual visible Succession from Christ till our dayes Now if this visible uninterrupted Succession be the mark of such a true Church as is an infallible Interpreter of Scripture then 1. The Greek Church is an infallible Interpreter of Scripture for she has as visible uninterrupted a Succession from Christ and his Apostles to this day as the Church of Rome has and so we have two infallible Churches not to instance in any more at present who have as good a Succession as either of them which are directly opposite to each other and what shall we do in this Case Must we believe Contradictions or must we dis-believe infallible Churches 3. If a visible Succession from Christ and his Apostles makes aâ—y church an infallible Interpreter of Scripture then all the churches which were planted by the Apostles were infallible All the churches which were planted by the Apostles have an equally visible Succession from Christ those churches which were planted by the Apostles may be presumed as infallible while the Apostles were present with them as they were afterwards and those churches which succeeded these Apostolical churches at the distance of an Age or two may be supposed as infallible as any church of this Age is for if a visible Succession from Christ makes a church infallible why should not a Succession of a hundred or two hundred years make them as infallible as a Succession of sixteen hundred years unless they think that Infallibility increases with the Age of the Church which I could wish true but we see very little sign of it Now according to these Principles all the churches which were planted by the Apostles and have a continual visible Succession from Apostolical Churches through all Ages since the time of the Apostles must be infallible for if a continual visible Succession confers Infallibility and is the mark whereby we must know it then every Church which ever had or has to this day this visible Succession must have Infallibility also which it seems is entailed on Succession And thus we have found out a World of infallibility and it is wonderful how any Apostolical Church came to be over-run with so many Errors and Heresies and to grow so corrupt and degenerate as to provoke GOD to root them up if every Apostolical Church was infallible I cannot imagine how whole Churches which visibly succeeded the Apostles should be infected with Heresie for if Infallibility it self will not secure a Church from Heresie the LORD have mercy upon us 3. This mark he gives how to find out such a true Church at is an infallible Interpreâ—er of Scripture viz. A continual visible Succession from Christ till this day includes another great mistake for it supposes that there is some church now in being on whose Authority we must rely for the sense of Scripture for otherwise there can be no use of a visible Succession to this day in this Controversie If as I have already Proved at large we must rely only on the Authority of the Primitive Church not of the church of this present Age for the sense of Scripture and that not as an infallible Judge buâ— as the most Authentick Witness of the Apostolical Doctrine and Practice then we cannot find out this church by a visible Succession to this day but by examining the ancient Records of the Primitive Church where we shall find what the Faith and Practice of the Church in those dayes was which is the safest Rule to guide us in the Exposition of Scripture Though there were no Church in the World at this day which could prove a continual visible Succession from Christ and his Apostles yet while we have the Scriptures and the Records of the Primitive church we have very sufficient means for the understanding the true meaning of Scripture So that of whatever use this talk of a continual visible Succession may be in other cases it is wholly impertinent in this A church which cannot prove such a continual visible Succession which was not founded by any Apostle
our Church for a certain Truth which hath been demonstrated by many of our Writers who have shewn that the ancient Doctors universally speak the language of St. Baul 1. Cor. 4. 7. Not to think above that which is written I will mention only these memorable words of Tertullian who is as earnest an Advocat as any for ritual Traditions but having to deal with Hermogenes in a question of Faith Whither all things in the beginning were made of nothing urges him in this manner I have no where yet read that all things were made out of a subject matter If it be written let those of Hermogenes his shop shew it if it be not written let them fear thâ—◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is alloted to such â—â— adde or take away The very same Answer should our People make to those that would have them receive any thing as an Article of Faith which is not delivered to them by this truly Apostolical Church wherein we live If it he written let us see it if it be not take heed how you adde to the undoubted Word of GOD. We receive the holy Scriptures as able to make us wise to Salvation So they themselves tell us and so runs the true Tradition of the Church which you of the Romish perswasion have forsaken but we adhere unto 3 And we have this farther reason so to do because if part of God's Word had been written and part unwritten we cannot but believe there would have been some care taken in the written Word not onely to let us know so much but also inform us whither we should resort to find it and how we should know it if it be absolutely necessary for us to be acquainted with it But there is no such notice nor any such directions left us nor can any man give us any certain Rule to follow in this matter but onely this To examine all Traditions by the Scripture as the supreme Rule of Faith and to aâ—mit only such as are conâ—ormable thereunto 4. For which we have still this farther reason that no sooner were they that first delivered and received the holy Scriptures gone out of the world but we find men began to adde their own fancies unto the Catholick Truth which made it absolutely necessary to keep to the Tradition in the holy Scriptures all other growing uncertain This is observed by Hegesippus himself in Euseb l. 3. c. 32 that the Church remained a chast Virgin and the spouse of Christ till the Sacred Quire of the Apostles and the next Generation of them who had had the honour to be their Auditonrs were extinct and then there began a plain Conspiracie of impious atheistical errour by the fraud of Teachers who delivered other Doctrine Which was a thing Saint Paul feared even in his own life time about the Church of Corinth 2 Cor 1. 3. lest the Devil like a wily Serpent should beguil them and corrupt their minds from the original simplicity of the Christian Doctrine wherein they were first instructed And if it were attempted then it was less difficult and therefore more endeavoured afterward as shall appear anone by plain History which tells how several persons pretended they received this and that from an Apostle Some of which Traditions were presently rejected others received and afterwards found to be impostures Which shews there was so much false dealing in the case that it was hard for men to know what was truely Apostolical in those dayes if it came to them this way onely and therefore impossible to be discerned by us now at this great distance of time from the Apostles who we know delivered the true Faith but we have no reason to rely upon mere Tradition without Scripture for any part of that Faith when we see what Cheats were put upon men by that means even then when they had better helps to detect them then we have It is true the Fathers sometime urge Tradition a as proof of what they say But we must know that the Scriptures were not presently communicated among some barbarous Nations and there were some Hereticks also who either denied the Scriptures or some part of them and in these cases it was necessary to appeal to the Tradition that was in the Church and to convince them by the Doctrine taught every where by all the Bishops But that mark this I pray you of which they convinced them by this Argument was nothing but what is taught in the Scripture 5. With which we cannot suffer any thing to be equalled in authority unless we would see it confirmed by the same or equal Testimony This is the great reason of all why we cannot admit any unwritten Traditions to be a part of the Word of GOD which we are bound to believe because we cannot find any truths so delivered to us as those in the holy Scriptures They come to us with as full a Testimony as can be desired of their Divine Original but so do none of those things which are now obtruded on us by the Romish Church under the name of Tradition or unwritten Word of God For the Primitive Church had the very first Copies and authentick Writings of those Books called the New Testament delivered by the Apostles own hands to them And those Book confirm the Scriptures of the Old Testament and they were both delivered to Posterity by that Primitive Church witnessing from whom they received them who carefully kept them as the most precious Treasure so that this written Word hath had the general approbation and testimony of the whole Church of Christ in every Age untill this day witnessing that it is Divine And it hath been the constant business of Doctors of the Church to expound this Word of GOD to the People and their Books are full of Citations out of the Scripture all agreeing in substance with what we now read in them Nay the very Enemies of christianity such as Celsus Porphyry Julian never questioned but these are the Writings of which the Apostles were the Authors and which they delivered Besides the Marks they have in themselves of a Divine Spirit which indited them they all tending to breed and preserve in men a sense of GOD and to make them truly vertuous Not one word of which can be said for any of those unwritten Traditions which the Roman Church pretend to be a part of GOD's Word For we have no testimony of them in the holy Scriptures Nor doth the Primitive church affirm she received them from the Apostles as she did the written Word Nor have they the perpetual consent and general approbation of the whole church ever since Nor are they frequently quoted as the words of Scripture are upon all occasions by the Doctors of the Church Nor do we find them to be the Doctrine which was constantly taught the People Nor is there any notice taken of them by the enemies of our Faith whose Assaults are all against the Scriptures In short they are
penalties then of temporal death and Eternal damnation And therefore to undeceive if possible these deluded souls it will be necessary to examine the pretended grounds of so false a Doctrine and to lay open the monstruous absurdity of it And in the handling of this Argument I shall proceed in this plain method I. I shall consider the pretended grounds and reasons of the Church of Rome for this Doctrine II. I shall produce our Objections against it And if I can shew that there is no tollerable ground for it and that there are invincible Objections against it then every man is not only in reason excused from believing this Doctrine but hath great cause to believe the contrary FIRST I will consider the pretended grounds and reasons of the Church of Rome for this Doctrine Which must be one or more of these five Either 1. The Authority of scripture Or 2ly The perpetual belief of this Doctrine in the Christian Church as an belief of of this Doctrine in the Christian Church as an evidence that they alwayes understood and interpreted our Saviour's words This is my body in this sense Or 3ly The authority of the present Church to make and declare new articles of Faith Or 4ly The absolute necessity of such a change as this in the Sacrament to the comfort and benefit of those who receive this Sacrament Or 5 ly To magnify the power of the Priest in being able to work so great a Miracle 1. They pretend for this Doctrine the Authority of Scripture in those words of our Saviour This is my Body Now to shew the insufficiency of this pretence I shall endeavour to make good these two things 1. That there is no necessity of understanding those words of our Saviour in the sense of Transubstantiation 2. That there is a great deal of reason to understand them otherwise First That there is no necessity to understand those words of our Saviour in the sense of Transubstantiation If there be any it must be from one of these two reasons Either because there are no figurative expressions in Scripture which I think no man ever yet said or else because a Sacrament admits of no figures which would be very absurd for any man to say since it is of the very nature of a Sacrament to represent and exhibit some invisible grace and benefit by an outward sign and figure And especially since it cannot be denied but that in the institution of this very Sacrament our Saviour useth figurative exressions and several words which cannot be taken strictly and literally When he gave the Cup he said This Cup is the new Testament in my Bloud which is shed for you and for many for the remission of Sins Where first the Cup is put for Wine contained in the Cup or else if the words be literally taken so as to signifie a substantial change it is not of the Wine but of the Cup and that not into the bloud of Christ but into the new Testament or new Covenant in his bloud Besides that his bloud is said then to be shed and his body to be broken which was not till his Passion which followed the Institution and first celebration of this Sacrament But that there is no necessity to understand our Saviour's words in the sense of Transubstantiation I will take the plain concession of a great number of the most learned Writters of the Church of Rome in this Controversie a de Euch. l. 3. c. 23. Bellarmine b in 3. dis 49. Qu. 75. Sect. 2. Suarez and c in 3. part dis 150. Qu. 75. art 2. c. 15. Vasquez do acknowledge Scotus the great Scholman to have said that this Doctrine cannot be evidently proved from Scripture And Bellarmine grants this not to be improbable and Suarez and Vasquez acknowledge d in sent l. 4. dist 11. qu. 1. n. 15 Durandus to have said as much e in 4. sent Q. 5. quod 4. q. 3. Ocham another famous schoolman sayes expresly that the Doctrine which holds the substance of the Bread and Wine to remain after the consecration is neither repugnant to Reason nor to Scripture f in 4 sent Q 6. art 2. Petrus ab Alliaâ—â— Cardinal of Cambray say plainly that the Doctrine of the substance of Bread and Wine remaining after Consecration is more free from absurdity more rational and no wayes repugnant to the authority of scripture nay more that for the other Doctrine viz. of Transubstantiation there is no evidence in scripture g in canon Miss Lect. 40. Gabriel Biel another Schoolman and Divine of their Church freely declares that as to any thing express'd in the Canon of the scripture a man may believe that the substance of Bread and Wine doth remain after Consecration and therefore he resolves the belief of Transubstantiation in to some other Revelation besides scripture which he supposeth the Church had about it Cardinal h in Aquin 3. part Qu. 74 art 1. Cajetan confesseth that the Gospel doth no where express that the Bread is changed into the Body of Christ that we have this from the authority of the Church nay he goes farther that there is nothing in the Gospel which enforceth any man to understand these words of Christ this is my body in a proper and not a metaphorical sense but the Church having understood them in a proper sense they are to be so explained Which words in the Roman Edition of Cajetan are expunged by order of Pope i Aegid â—â—nink de sacrâ—â—â— Q. 75. art 1. n. 13. Pius V. Cardinal k de sacram l. 2. c. 3. Contarenus and l Loc. Theolog l. 3. c. 3. Melchior Canus one of the best most judicious Writers that Church ever had reckon this Doctrine among those which are not so expresly found in scripture I will add but one more of great authority in the Church and a reputed Martyr m contra captiv Babylon c. 10 n. 2. Fisher Bishop of Rochester who ingenuously confesseth that in the words of the Institution there is not one word from whence the true presence of the flesh and blood of Christ in our Mass can be proved So that we need not much contend that this Doctrine hath no certain foundation in Scripture when this is so fully and frankly acknowledged by our Adversaries themselves Secondly If there be no necessity of understanding our Saviours words in the sense of Transubstantiation I am sure there is a great deal of reason to understand them otherwise Whither we consider the like expressions in scripture where our Saviour sayes he is the door and the true Viue which the Church of Rome would mightily have triumph'd in had it been said this is my true Body And so likewise where the Church is said to be Christ's body and the Rock which followed the Israelites to be Christ 1 Cor. 10. 4. They drank of that Rock which followed them and that Rock was
is to all the ends and purposes of a Miracle as if it were not and can be no testimony or proof of any thing because it self stands in need of another Miracle to give testimony to it and to prove that it was wrought And neither in scripture nor in profane Authours nor in common use of speech is any thing call'd a Miracle but what falls under the notice of our senses A Miracle being nothing else but a supernatural effect evident to sense the great end and design whereof is to be a sensible proof and conviction to us of something that we do not see And for want of this Condition Transubstantiation if it were true would be no miracle It would indeed be very supernatural but for all that it would not be a Sign or Miracle For a Sign or Miracle is alwayes a thing sensible otherwise iâ— could be no Sign Now that such a change as is pretended in Transubstantiation should really be wrought and yet there should be no sign and appearance of it is a thing very wonderfull but not to sense for our senses perceive no change the bread and wine in the sacrament to all our senses remaining just as they were before And that a thing should remain to all appearance just as it was hath nothing at all of wonder in it we wonder indeed when we see a strange thing done but no man wonders when he sees nothing done So that Transubstantiation if they will needs have it a Miracle is such a Miracle as any man may work that hath but the confidence to face men down that he works it and the fortune to be believed And though the Church of Rome may magnify their Priests upon account of this Miracle which they say they can work every day and every hour yet I cannot understand â—he reason of it for when this great work as they call it is done there is nothing more appears to be done then it there were no Miracle Now such a Miracle as to all appearance is no miracle I see no reason why a Protestant Minister as well as a Popâ—sh Priest may not work as often as he pleases or if he can buâ— have the patience to let it alone it will work it self For surely nothing in the world is easier then to let a thing be as it is and by speaking a few words over it to make it just what was before Every Man every day may work ten thousand such Mâ—racles And thus I have dispatch'd the First part of my Discourse which was to consider the pretended grounds and Reasons of the Church of Rome for this Doctrine and to shew the weakness and insufficiency of them I come in the SECOND place to produce our Objections against II. it Which will be of so much the greater force because I have already shewn this Doctrine to be destitute of all Divine warrant and authority of any other sort of Ground sufficient in reason to justifie it So that I do not now object against a Doctrine which hath a fair probability of Divine Revelation on its side for that would weigh down all objections which did not plainly overthrow the probability and credit of its Divine Revelation But I object against a Doctrine by the mere will and Tyranny of men impos'd upon the belief of Christians without any evidence of Scripture and against all the evidence of Reason and Sense The Objections I shall reduce to these two Heads First the infinite scandal of this Doctrine to the Christian Religion And Secondly the monstrous and insupportable absurdity of it First The infinite scandal of this Doctrine to the Christian Religion And that upon these four accounts 1. Of the stupidity of this Doctrine 2. The real barbarousness of this Sacrament and Rite of our Religion upon supposition of the truth of this Doctrine 3. Of the cruel and bloudy consequences of it 4. Of the danger of Idolatry which they are certainly guilty of if this Doctrine be not true 1. Upon account of the stupidity of this Doctrine I remember that Tully who was a man of very good sense instanceth in the conceit of eating God as the extremity of madness and so stupid an apprehension as he thought no man was ever guilty of * De Nat. Deorum l. 3. When we call sayes he the fruits of the earth Ceres and wine Bacchus we use but the common language but do you think any man so mad as to believe that which be eats to be God It seems he could not believe that so extravagant a folly had ever entered into the mind of man It is a very severe saying of Averroes the Arabian Philosopher who lived after this Doctrine was entertained among Christians and ought to make the Church of Rome blush if she can * Dionys Carthus in 4. dist 10. art 1. I have travell'd sayes he over the World and have found divers Sects but so sottish a Sect or Law I never found as is the Sect. of the Christians because with their own teeth they devour their God whom they worship It was great stupidity in the People of Israel to say Come let us make us Gods but it was civilly said of them Let us make Gods that may go before us in comparison of the Church of Rome who say Let us make a God that we may eat him So that upon the whole matter I cannot but wonder that they should chuse thus to expose Faith to the contempt of all that are endued with Reason And to speak the plain truth the Christian Religion was never so horribly exposed to the scorn of Atheists and Infidels as it hath been by this most absurd and senseless Doctrine But thus it was foretold that †2 Thess 2. 10. the Man of Sin should come with power and Signs and Lying Miracles and with all deceiveableness of unrighteousness with all the Legerdemain and jugling tricks of falsehood and imposture amongst which this of Transubstantiation which they call a Miracle and we a Cheat is one of the chief And in all probability those common jugling words of hocus pocus are nothing else but a corruption of hoc est corpus by way of ridiculous imitation of the Church of Rome in their trick of Transubstantiation Into such contempt by this foolish Doctrine and pretended Miracle of theirs have they brought the mosâ— sacred and venerable Mystery of our Religion 2. It is very scandalous likewise upon account of the real Barbarousness of this Sacrament and Rite of our Religion upon supposition of the truth of this Doctrine Literally to eat the flesh of the Son of man and to drink his bloud St. Austine as I have shewed before declares to be a great Impiety And the impiety and barbarousness of the thing is not in truth extenuated but only the appearance of it by its being done under the species of bread and Wine For the thing they acknowledge is really done and they believe that they
Palaestinians Egyptians Thebaeans Libyans Mesopotamians a Persiaâ— a Socrat. â— Hâ—l c. 8. p. 19. Scythian Bishop and many others from other Countries But there was but one Bishop for Africa one for Spain one for Gaul two Priests as Deputies of the infirm and Aged Bishop of Rome Whilst for Instance sake there were seventeen Bishops for the small Province of * V. Concil Labb Tom. 2. p. 50. c. Isauria yet such Councils are very useful such we reverence but God did not set them up as the only and the infallible Guides of Faith If there were such Guides what Guided the Church which was before them By what rule was Ebion judged before the Council of Nice How can we be infallibly Guided by them in Controversies of Faith not determined by them nay not brought before them nay scarce moved till these latter dayes Such for the purpose are the Controversies about the vertue of the Sacrifice of Christ and of Justification by the Faith of meere recumbence upon his Merits Or how shall a private Man who erres in the Faith be delivered from his Heresy seing he may die some years ere a Council can assemble or being assembled can form its decrees Arius vented his Heresie about ten years before the Council of Nice was called for the suppressing of it And soon after he had given vent to it it spread throughout Egypt and Lybia and the upper Thebes as Socrates †has reported And in a short time many other Provinces and Cities were Socr. Eccl. Hist l. 1. c. 6. p. 9. infected with the contagion of it And in the pretended Council of Trent no less then five Popes were successively concerned and it lasted in several places longer then two legal lives of a Man * From A. 1545. to A. 1563. There was indeed a Canon in the Western Church †V. Council Const sess 39. for the holding of a Council once in the space of each ten years But that Canon has not been hitherto obeyed and as affairs stand in the Church it is impracticable For the Pope will exclude all the Greek and Reformed Bishops He will crowd the Assembly with Bishops of his own Creation and with Abbots also he will not admit of former Councils unless they serve his purpose not so much as that of Nice it self * V. Greg. magn Ep. 6. 31. Leo. 1. Ep. 53. Gelas 1. Ep. 13. He will be the Judge though about his own Supremacy He will multiply Italians and others who upon Oath †Concil Labb Tom. 10. p. 23. 379. Pontific Roman owe their votes to him He will not hold a Council upon the terms approved by all Romish Princes Nor did they agree at their last Council the Emperour would noâ— send his Bishops to Bologna nor the French King his to Tren ' And though the French Church believed the Doctrines of that Synod yet they did not receive them from the Authority of it but they embraced them as the former Doctrines of the Roman Church And the Parisian ' Faculty a A. D. 1542 in coll Soâ—b See Richer H. conc general vol. 4. p. 162 163. c. prepared the way to the Articles of Trent Notwithstanding all this we firmly believe that at least the first four general Councils did not err in Faith and it is pious to think that God would not suffer so great a temptation in the Church on Earth Yet still we believe those Councils not to be infallible in their constitution but so far as they followed an infallible rule For the greaâ—est Truth is not alwayes with the greatest number And great numbers may appear on contrary sides The Council of Constantinople under Constantine Copronymus consisting of three hundred thirty eight Bishops decreed against the use of Images in Churches Yet the 2d Synod of Nice consisting of about three hundred and fifty Bishops determin'd for it And a while after in the West the council of Frankford consisting of about three hundred Bishops reversed that decree And after that the council of Trent did re-establish it though there the voting Persons were not fifty With such uncertain doubts of belief must they move who follow a Guide in Religion without reference to a farther rule But here there is offered to us by the Guide in Controversiâ—â— * an Objection of which this is the sum The fifth Canon of the Church of England does declare Object R. H. Annot. on D. Stil Answer p. 82 83. that the thirty nine Articles were agreed upon for the avoidance of the diversities of opinions and the establishing of consent touching true Religion Consent touching true Religion is consent in Matters of Faith Establishing of consent relateth both to Layety and Clergy The third and fourth Canons of 1640. Decree the Excommunication of those who will not-abjure their holding Popery and Socinianism The Reformed Churches in France teach the like Doctrine threatning to cut them off from the Church who acquiesce not in the resolution of a National Synod ‡ Art 31. ch 5 du consisâ—â—ire si un ou plusieurs c. The same course was taken with the Remonstrants in the Synod of Dort * Syn. Dord sess 138. Wherefore Protestants ought not to detract from the Authority of general Councils whilst they assume to themselves so great a Power in their particular Synods The force of this Objection is thus removed Answer Every Church hath Power of admitting or excluding Members else it hath not means sufficient to its end the order and concord of its Body Every particular Church ought to believe that it does not erre in its deflnitions for it ought not to impose any known error upon its Members But though it believes it does not erre it does not believe it upon this reason because God hath made it an infallible Guide but rather for this because it hath sincerely and with Gods assistance followeth a rule which is infallible And upon this supposition it imposeth Doctrines and excludeth such as with coâ—umacy dissent from them a See Artic. 20. 21 22. 4. This Guide is not the present Church declaring to particular Christians the sense of the church of former Ages How can this declaration be made seing Churches differ and each Church calls it self the true one and pretendeth to the Primitive pattern The Church of Rome hath on her side the suffrages of all the Councils and Fathers the first the middle the last if Campiain the Jesuite may be believed b camp Rat. 3. p. 180. Rat. 5. p. 185. On the other hand Monsieur Larroque hath Written a Book of the confirmity of the Protestant churches in France with the Discipline of the Christian Ancient church taking it for granted that their Doctrine was catholick And we likewise pretend both to the Doctrine and Discipline of it All of us cannot be in the right The Roman church without any proof calleth her self the church catholick and she pretendeth to
conveigh to us the sense of the Ancient Fathers and councils which sense was that they understood formerly by the word Tradition * Lib. diurn Pontif p. 35. etenâ—m hujus Apostolicae Traditinis normam quam venerandam Sanctorum 318. Paâ—rum concilium quod in Nicaea c. p. 43. hujusmodi Evangelicam Traditionem And in this sense a Romanist said of Pope Honorius †Ant. Dezallier in Histor Monoth p. 123. that he had broken the rule of Tradition But how can we esteem that church a faithful representer of the sense of the Ancients whilst the Reformed consult the Ancients with equal ability and find a contrary sense in them Whilst the church of Rome * conc â—rid Sess 4. decr 1. by a kind of Ecclesiastical coinage stampeth Divine Authority upon Bâ—â—ks esteemed by the councils and Fathers to be Apochryphal †V. constit Apost can Apost conc Laod. conc Nic. 1. S. Hieron prolog c. Euseb E. H. l. 4. c 26. p. 149. cron l. 2. c. Whilst it hath forged decrees of Popes * V. Blondelli Pseudo Isodorum and like a deceitful Gibeonite rendred that which was really new in appearance old and mouldy on purpose to promote imposture How doth it give us the sense of the Ancients when it owneth what it formerly disowned as canonical the Epistle to the Hebrews †V. S. Hieron in Isai c. 6 8. When it taketh away the cup which Pope Gelasius called a grand Sacriledge * Gratian in de consecr dist 2. cap. 2. When it now rejecteth the communicating of Infants which in former times was esteemed by many a very necessary point When a former Pope Gregory condemns the Title of Universal Pastor as Anti-christian and a latter insists upon it as the choicest flower in the Papal prerogative When St. August a S. Aug. tract 30. in Joh. tract 50. and from him the very Breviary b Brev. Rom. Dom infra oct Asc 3. noct lect 7. p. 440. shall expound Christs promise of being alwayes with his Church of the presence of his Divinity and of his Spirit and not of his Body And Pope Innocent the third shall interpret them as meant also of his corporal presence c Innoc. 3. Myst miss l. 4. p. 196. And if the Roman Church falsifieth written Tradition how shall we trust her for Oral And how and at what time did that Oral Tradition remove from Greece to Rome where the Greek church which it alloweth to have been once possessed of the true Tradition is accused of Heresie At the same time I suppose that the chappel of the Virgin removed from Nazareth to Loretto This principle of Oral Tradition is most uncertain to thâ—ir Judges and to those to whom they offer it it is most obscure It is a principle on which they can serve a purpose in justifying novel Doctrines as Oral Traditions not known to any but the Roman church which pretendeth to the custody of them 5. GOD hath not set up any one Person in the Catholick Church in the Quality of an unerring Guide in the Christian Faith The Bishops of Rome who pretend to this Prerogative do but pretend It is a tender point and the Popes Legates in the Council of Trent * H. conc Trid. l. 2. were enjoyned to give forth this Advertisement that the Fathers upon no account whatsoever should touch it or dispute about it They who examine it will soon reject it as false and useless And 1. Whither the Pope be or be not the Guide Arg. I the Men of the Roman Communion are exposed to dangerous uncertainty For it is not yet determined amongst them whither they are to follow the Pope with or without or against a Council Yet a Pope hath owned a Council which deposed other Popes and by decree set it self above them or rather vindicated the superiority due to it Thus Martin the fifth received the Papal Mitre from the Council of Constance after it had deposed Gregory the twelfth Beuedict the thirteenth and John the twenty third Again there have been by the account given us in their own Historians †See the Index of Onuphrii vit Pontif. ed. colon 1610. more then twenty formed Schisms in that Church two or more Popes pretending at the same time to the infallible chair and each of them not being without their followers and giving Holy Orders And at this time there is risen an Apologist * Steph Baluz in miscellan l. 3. p. 471. to 514. for Mauritius Burdin or Gregory the eight though he was ejected by the Roman church which received Gelasius into his place Burdin being disliked by them as a creature of Henry the Emperour This Schism saith S. Bernard †S. Bern. Ep. 219. distracted that church and gave it a wound only not incurable And Baluzius * Baluz ibid. p. 514. difficile tum erat c. professeth that it was then difficult to understand which of the two Gregory or Gelasius was the Legitimate successor of of Pope Paschal Now how useless to them is the pretence of a Guide when they want some other Guide who should tell them which of the Pretenders they may securely follow Arg. II. Secondly the Popes themselves in â—heir solemn profession suppose themselves liable to the misleading of the People even in Matters of Faith For having owned the Faith of the Six general councils * Lib. diurn Pontif. 2. professio fidei p. 43. Vnde districti Anathematis interdictioni subjicimus siquis unquam seu nos sive est alius qui novum aliquid praesumat contra hujusmodi Evangelicam Traditionem Orthodoxae fidei Christianaeque Religionis integritatem c. Arg. III. They further profess themselves and others to be subject to an Anathema if they advance novelty contrary to the aforesaid Evangelical Tradition and the integrity of the Orthodox and Christian Faith Thirdly If the Pope challengeth this Power of infallible Guidance he must lay claim to it by his succeeding of S. Peter in the chair Apostolical But then by equal reason the successors of each Apostle may challenge the office of an infallible Guide For the Power which Christ gave to St Peter he gave to the rest It was not special And for the Bishops of Antioch who first succeeded S. Peter they have a much fairer pretence then those of Rome The Truth is Hierusalem was properly the Mother-church Though Rome was the Imperial city and if by this means the Popes had not sate higher they would not have pretended to see farther then others Arg. IV. Fourthly Those who have considered the writings of many Popes and the decrees made by them have found no reason to lay their Faith at their Golden Sandal It is manifest to every Learned Man that the Eyes of the Pope are not metaphorically like those of Augustus in which it is said there appeared a brightness like that of the Sun If
Tertulliâ—â— argues against Hereticks in his Book De Praescriplionibus â—â—t when they reason about the sense of Scripture they never direct us to any infallible Judge but use such Arguments as they think proper to convince Gain-sayers Nay this is the way which was observed in all the Ancient Councils the Bishops of the church met together for common counsel and advice and in matters of Discipline and Government which were subject to their Authority they considered what was ' most for the publick benefit of the church and determined them by their Authority not as infallible Judges but as Supreme Governours of the church In the disputes of Faith they reason from Scripture and the sense of the catholick church not from their own Authority and what upon a serious debate and inquiry they found to be most agreeable to the sense of Scripture and the Doctrine of the church of former Ages that they determined and decreed to be received in all churches as the catholick Faith That this is so is evident from all the Histories of the most Ancient and celebrated councils which any man may consult who pleases Now I would ask some few Questions about this matter 1. Whither-these councils took a sure and safe way to find out Truth If they did not what reason have we to believe that they determined right If they did then we may use the same way which they did for that which is a good way in one Age is so in another and then there is no necessity of an Infallible Judge to find out the sense of Scripture because we have other certain wayes of doing this the same which all the ancient Councils observed 2. I would know whither it be not sufficient for every Christian to receive the Decrees and Determinations of these councils upon the same Reason and Authority which moved the Fathers assembled in council to make these Decrees Whither for instance we must not believe the Eternal God-head of Christ and that he is of the same substance with his Fatherâ— for the same Reasons for which the Nicene Fathers believed this and required all christians to believe it If we must then Scripture and the sense of the catholick church not the Authority of a general council or any Infallible Judge is the Reason of our Faith For the Nicene Fathers who were the first that met in a General council could not believe this upon the Authority of any other General council much less upon their own Authority unless we will say that they first Decreed this then believed it because they themselves Decreed it If Scripture and the sense of the Catholick Church antecedently to the determinations of a General council or any other pretended Infallible Judge be not a sufficient foundation for our Faith then the whole christian World before the council of Nice which was the first general council had no sufficient Foundation for their Faith for there was no particular Bishop or church in those dayes which pretended to be the Infallible Interpreter of Scriptures We Protestants have the same way to understand the Scriptures have the same Reason and Foundation of our Faith which the Nicene Fathers themselves had or which any christan could have before there was any general council and if the church of Rome do not think this enough we cannot help that we are abundantly satisfied with it The Authority of a general council in those dayes was deservedly sacred and venerable not as an infallible Judge which they never pretended to but as the most certain means they could possibly have to understand what was and in all Ages had been the received Doctrine of the catholick church They met together not to make new Articles of Faith which no council in the World ever had any Authority to do but to declare what was the truly ancient and. Apostolick Faith and to put it into such words as might plainly express the catholick sense and meet with the distempers of that Age. For this end Grave and Reverend Bishops assembled from all parts of the christian World not meerly to give their private Opinions of things but to Declare what was the received Doctrine oâ— those churches over which they presided and I know no better Argument of an Apostolick Tradition then the consent of all churches as remote from each other as East and West which were planted by several Apostles and differed very much from each other in some External Rites and Usages but yet all agreed in the same Faith And this is the true Authority of those ancient councils that they were most likely to understand the true sense of Scripture and of the Catholick Church This is the Protestant Resolution of Faith and the Nicene Fathers themselves had no other way nor pretended to any other Nay the church of Rome her self as much as she talks of Infallibility makes very little use of it She has never given us an infallible comment on Scripture but suffers her Doctors to write as fallible comments and in many things as contrary to each other as any Protestant Divines do And I cannot imagine what good Infallibility does if an infallible Church has no better means of understanding Scripture then the comments of fallible men that is no better means then every fallible Church has for no man can understand the Scripture ever the better for the Churches being infallible unless this infallible Church improve this glorious Talent of Infallibility in Expounding Scripture which she has not done to this day and I believe never will Indeed it is apparent that infallibility as it is pretended to by the church of Rome can be of no use either in the Refolution of Faith or in confuting Hereticks who deny this Infallibility and then I cannot imagine what it is good for but to multiply Disputes instead of ending them As for the Resolution of Faith suppose I ask a Papist why he believes such Articles as the Divinity of Christ or the Resurrection of the dead to be contained in Scripture If he answer as he must do Because he is taught so by the church which is infallible my next Question is How he knows the Church to be infallible If he says he learns this from Scripture I ask him how he comes to understand the Scripture and how he knows that this is the sense of it If he know this by the infallible interpretation of the church then he runs round in a circle and knows the Scripture by the church and the church by the Scripture as I observed before if he can find out the Churches infallibility by the Scripture without the help of an infallible Judge then it seems the Scripture is to be understood without the infallible interpretation of the Church and if men can find out infallibility in Scripture without the Church I am confident they may find out any thing else in Scripture as well without the Churches infallibility For there iâ— no Article of our creed so hard to be
Disciples but also of their more Learned Writers who whatever strength they really fancy may be in the Argument it self think it a very proper Weapon to attempt the Vulgar and the Weak withall to amuse and dazle the less discerning eve at least when backâ— and set off with the stately Names of Infallibility Succession Anâ—iquity and the like and they tell us roundly our Faith was but yesterday our Religion is new and upstart as only Henry the Eights and â—romwels contrivance they may truly say as much as their Treason was Cecils Plot That our Faith began only in the year 1517 in Saxony by one Martin Luther an Apostate Fryar who for the sake of a fair Nun and other designs renounc'd the Ancient Faith and set up his new Device of Protestantism at Spires which did not quietly last much above seven years for in the year Bellar. Tom. lib. 4. p. 287 1. 25. starts up Zuinglius after two years more he Anabaptists who change and correct Luther's Religion and draw great numbers of his disciples from him and himself for his reward dyed a strange Death great Noises and Crackings were heard in his Tomb which being opened neither Body nor Bones were found and the smell of Brimstone was ready to stifle the standers by And therefore they say we ought to look from whence we are faln to repent of our Heresie and returne to our first Love and not stick so close to our Religion the new invention of so ill a Man That we may therefore keep those firme that are members of our Religion and bring those back that have revolted from us into the Romish Communion we have endeavour'd to give a satisfactory Answer to this their Question Where was your Religion before the times of Luther Not to trouble our selves with such Legends as these and Uncharitableness along with them the Answer is thus 1. Telling them plainly where our Religion was before Luthers time 2. By shewing what Errors and Mistakes are included in the Question 3. To turn the Question upon themselves and ask them some others of the like nature 1. The plain Answer to the Question is this That our Religion was long before the times of Luther and believed and setled in many Kingdoms and Nations of the World and hath neither Novelty nor Singularity in it 'T is an old Religion I am sure 't is of Age and can speak for it self It hath lasted now these 1600 years and more founded at first by Christ and his Apostles handed down to us through many Sufferings and Persecutions and here it is preserved It contracted indeed in the coming down a great deal of rust by the Falseness and Carelesness of its keepers particularly by the Church of Rome we scowr'd off the rust and kept the mettal that 's the Romish Religon this is the English They added False Doctrines to the Christian Faith we left the one and kept to the other this is Ancient those are New Our Religion is the same with that of the Early Christians Martyrs and Confessors believed in the first 300 years and defended by all Councils truely General Our Religion in those first Ages was in Palestine and Greece in Egypt in Antioch where the Discâ—â—les Acts 11. 26. were fiâ—st called Christians and in Rome it self and wherever the great labours of her first Apostles carry'd her to the different and reâ—ote Countries of the World Then and there our Religion lâ—v'd where Peter Linus and Cletus and all the first and Pious Bishops of Rome did It suffered indeed great variety of changes and conditions by the interest and wickedness of men sometimes more Adulterated and sometimes more Pure it flitted from Country to Country sometimes greater and sometimes smaller in its number sometimes in a dejected and sometimes in a more flourishing state but somewhere or other it was intire and without mixture as it was at first given unto the world and such an old Religion as this we are of holding fast neither more nor less neither adding to nor diminishing what Christ and his Apostles taught and iâ— Antiquity must evidence the Truth of our Religion we are safe and secure that we have right on our side And this will appear if we consider these following things 1. What Conformity our Religion carries to that of Christ and his Apostles Let any impartial eye compare them both together and he will find the features and complexion the whole body of Religion the same in both Whatever they delivered out at first as Fundamental to Salvation whatever they instituted as parts of Devotion Discipline and Order we still faithfully retain in our Church and if any Truth of moment hitherto by Fraud or Negligence be concealed from her she is ready to receive it when ever it is made plain not having stopt up the way of Truth by a pretence of Infallibility or want of Modesty to confess an error She hath the same sense of the Nature Offices the Design and whole Undertakings of Christ that the truly Ancient Church had She receives the Creed and Bible and any Traditions that can be made out to be truly Divine in the same meaning and understanding that Christ and his Apostles gave to the first Christians and they to us What their thoughts of Saints and holy Souls departed were ours are thoughts of respect remembrance and imitation not divine Worship Christ instituted proper Figures and Symbols of Bread Wine to represent and confirm to conveigh and commemorate his bloudy Passion and Benefits to Mankind in this sense She preserves the Institution sacred and doth not really Sacrifice or Crucifie the LORD of Life again Christ commanded good works under the penalty of eternal Damnation She doth the same and in our Masters language bids the doers of them call themselves unprofitable Servants beating down Pride and Merit Christ and his Apostles told the World what departing Souls must expect Her sense is the same that there are no second Ventures and Trials to be made neither can a kind Friend with a good Estate left for Masses or Monks compound for a Life ill spent Run through the whole constitution of our Church in Articles of Faith and Rules of Manners you may trace them to Christ and his Apostles time and all other parts of her Government and Order are truly Primitive And it must needs be so if She sincerely folloâ—s her rule of Faith the holy Scriptures so Ancient so Divine and whatever is declared there essential to Salvation She brings into her Creed and resolves to keep it like a mighty Treasure faithfully unto death And indeed the Church of Rome confesses that what we do retain is ancient and Apostolical but pretends that we are defective in many things and want some necessaries which they have to make an entire Faith But we challenge them to prove that those opinions wherein we differ from them were delivered by Christ or any men divinely inspired in those times
but had great numbers of Disciples a visible Society of Christians who followed their Judgements Some of these sadly bewailed the degenerate state of the Roman church others petitioned for and advised not only the correction of the abuses of good Doctrines and innocent Institutions but the Reformation of gross Errours and scandalous Additions to the christian Faith and others in great Authority promised an amendement and to reduce the whole frame of christianity to its Primitive sense Model And the famous council of Trent was promis'd and begun to rectifie Errours and Abuses creept into the Romish Faith and Government yet after a long Sitting it fatally concluded confirming those corruptions which was hop'd after so many complaints and addresses with strong reasons for them should have been throughly redrest and reform'd The Original of their barbarous Inquisition will be a standing record of the frequent and stout oppositions that were made against the Romish Innovation in the christian Faith And so long as the Blood of the numerous Albigenses and Waldenses cryes to Heaven for Vengeance against the Papal cruelty we have a cloud of Witnesses for this Truth who resisted unto Death the new Doctrines of Rome The carriage of old Wicliff and his Followers tells us plainly in story that the corruptions of Rome had no such quiet possession but ever and anone some or other inconsiderable numbers did endeavour to eject them out of their hold though they paid dear for it And so long as the Treachery of their council of Constance about the safe conduct granted to poor Huss and his Disciples in number above forty thousand remains upon record never to be forgotten or forgiven so long we have clear evidences of strong resistance made to the Romish Religion before the times of Luther And in most Countries and times where and when the Romish corruptions began from small and obscure beginings to be gross and plain some or other in greater or lesser numbers began to Renounce and Protest against them What though some of these early Reformers might hold some erroneous Opinions which we our selves condemn yet however they opposed the Romish Church in her corruptions and these tended to a Reformation which was compleated only by degrâ—eâ—â— and 't is no wonder some Stumbled in such a night of Ignorance And have not the Agents of Rome destroyed the Papers and Records disguis'd their Adversaries and falsify'd their Opinions to serve the power and Interest of their great Mistriss They therefore branded the Waldenses with the name of Manichaism and that they affirmed two Principles or Originals of all things because they asserted that the Emperour was independent of the Pope and that they denyed CHRIST to be the Son of GOD because they could not believe a crust of Bread to be CHRIST And they have fram'd as lewd stories against many excellent Men of the latâ—r Ages who withstood the approaches of their Doctrine and Government which we certainly know and the more ingenuous among them confess to be notoriously false Though we have reason to believe because of the severity and industry of the Romish Factors ever warm against those who opposed her Practises a great number of Honest and Learned Men as those Ages would afford are buried in obscurity and their names unknown there being an Expurgatorian Index for the merits of such Men as well as Books and Editions yet we have a sufficient Catalogue of them who kept up the Title and claim of old Christianity would not suffer their new Errors to plead prescription 2. By shewing what Errours and Mistakes are included in the Question 1. That these new Errors of Rome are absolutely necessary to the being of a Christian Church For though we believe all that Christ and his Apostles taught all things that are contain'd in the Holy Scriptures all things that undoubted Tradition or good Reason proves to drive themselves from both or either yet because we do not assent and Subscribe to the new Articles of Faith that Rome hath invented for us we cease to be a Christian Church are mark'd for Hereticks which are worse than Pagans with them and must be certainly damn'd Nay should we embrace all the other Doctrines of Rome and deny only the Popes Authority and Supremacy that Epitome of their Christianity it would avail us little we are Heathens still Should we reject but one Article of Pope Pius's Creed suppose the Doctrine of Purgatory or Merit yet because this questions Infallibility the centâ—e of all their Religion we are in the state of Damnation still Should we receive their Doctrines as probable and in a larger and more favâ—urable meaning yet because we do not entertain them as Articles of Faith in the sense of the Church our case is not mended we shall meeâ— with Fires here and hereafâ—er for our reward Should we wink and swallow them all down with a good Catholick stomach yet iâ— the Bishop of Rome should give out a new Edition of Faith enlarged with many more monstrous Doctrines and Opinions yet if we boggle and kick at them all our former Righteousness shall not not be remembred we are Apostates worse than Truks and Infidels and who can tell what this Infallible and powerful Guide of â—â—â—â—stendom will do For when things obscure or of an indifferent Nature when things wherein they differ among themselves and only serve a temporal Interest when Opinions which they can dispense withal upon occasion when only the modes and manner of Truth when Contradictories and Doctrines directly leading unto impiety and things Barbarous and Blasphemous have been christened Articles of Faith and Fundamentals of Religion have we not just reason to suspect as ill or worsé may be done again And the intrigues of Trent may be acted once more and as many new Articles of Faith as Titular Bishops by the same Spirit moving in the same manner were not the first and early Christians sound Members of Christs Body though they never thought of such wild Opinions as these and publish'd truths directly contrary to them And could I suppose them to have known these Innovations out of Zeal and Fidelity to their trust would have detested and abhor'd them Was Christ negligent in the discharge of his mighty Office and his Apostles defective in their Duties and Ministry not to acquaint the first Christians with these great truths and were they reveal'd in the Tridentine Council only to us upon whom the ends of the world are come These Primitive Disciples of Christ thought themselves secure of Heaven by this short Creed that Jesus was the Christ the Son of God And the contrary was the character of the Man of Sin that denied that Jesus was come in the Flesh that he was the God incarnate and the true Messiah and were scandalized at his meanness and obscurity S. Paul told the Jaylor that certainly he would be saved if he believed that Jesus was the Christ all other Fundamentals of Christianity one
they are sure they are great Truths by vertue of Infallibility which is one of the Miracles of Rome which can change the nature of things Fowlis hist Preface p. 1. which may be true in England and the quite contrary at Rome as Father Cotton and other Jesuites affirmed at Paris For it 's plain to all impartial judgements that their Doctrine of Purgatory Transubstantiation and the like are not to be found in the Scriptures are utterly unknown to the truely ancient Fathers and the eldest and purest times of Christianity and contrary to the reason of mankind They may as well tell us that the City of Rome was never sackt and spoil'd because some Flatterers humour'd her Pride and arrogance calling her Vrbs aeterna immobile saxum Grot in Apoc. c. 17. the immortal city and impregnable Rock as that these gross errors never invaded and ruin'd the Christian faith because of the fine name of Infallibility which they arrogate to themselves And may as well put out our eyes and then bid us see if we can discover any errours in the Romish Church And St. Peter's being at Rome proves no more that he left Infallibility behind him then consecrated clouts sent from Rome that the Infant that wears them shall ever after be a firm defender of the Romish Faith 4. This Question will serve any Heresies or errours that have got some Antiquity on their side against a Reformation If it be true in this case 't is so in all others and then what a shelter have they provided for all Heresies if they chance to live long to be safe and secure in and escape correction And there are many errours contemporary with Christianity it self in its first plantation in the World at least followed it very close at the heels such were the Ancient Gnosticks the Carpocrations or Ebionites the spawn of Magus and others who can plead great Antiquity on their side and as properly ask any Reformer of their Heresies Where was his Religion before such a time as the inconstant World began to favour his new Faith and Innovation And so Errours once superinduced upon the Truth will become by Age Truth it self and are never to be mended for fear of this pert Question and charge of Innovation And it 's plain that new and old are but uncertain Characters to judge of Truth and Falshood by there being sometimes a new Truth that is lately discovered to be so but really old and an old errour kept up a long time by force or art and walking in the garb of Truth but truly new having come in after the Truth it vies with Time like a River many times bringing down Straw and Trash leaving weightier things behind which when they come to be retriev'd are called new Fashions and Inventions When Abraham restored the true Worship of GOD and stript it of Idolatry and Superstition the Chaldean Priests whose Power and Interest was shaken by it were very brisk and ready to charge this pious and mighty Man from the East with Novelty and Singularity in his Religion the false service of GOD in Isaiah 41. 2. these Countries being then ancient and almost universal though the Patriarchs Religion did derive it self from a very ancient stock that of Adams in Paradise kept up by an Enoch and a Noah in single Families when all Flesh had corrupted their wayes and now delivered unto Abraham and now all the Gen. 6. 11. sticklers for a false Religion began to upbraid the Sons and Followers of Abraham's Faith with Novelty and askt them Where was your Religion before the times of Abraham who set up his but yesterday and scorns and uncharitably damns all his Forefathers who of old liv'd beyond the River in our Religion The same Objection might have been cast in the teeth of Moses when he was settlling a Religion delivered to him by GOD in opposition to the Idolatries and false Devotions of the World and to serve his farther designs of providence that he affected Novelty and Singularity that all the World stood against him in this and one of his Disciples afterward was inhumane and uncharitable in praying Psalm 79. 6. GOD to pour out his indignation upon the Heathen who had not known his Laws And his Successor Joshua might have met Josb 24. 15. with the same fare when he bids his People choose whom they will serve either the Gods beyond the Floud and in Egypt or the Gods of the Amorites Old and great Nations who might have had this Objection in its full strength on their side or the GOD of Abraham and stoutly tells them Let that plausible Argument weigh withthem what it will as for my self and his Family they would serve the LORD And as this Religion might degenerate in descending Ages so any Restorer of it might be set upon by the same frivolous Objection and so it hapned to our Messias and his fore-runner who was to restore all things who when he began to reform the false glosses and corrupt senses which the Scribes and Pharisees had put upon the Law of Moses and cry down their Traditions which made the Commands of GOD of none effect was look'd upon as an Enemy to Moses a Blasphemer of the Law a Prophaner of the Temple and a Changer of all their Religion whose Design was onely to fill up their Law and restore it to its Natural Beauty and Perfection and before Abraham was I am not only in his Divine Nature and designation to his Office but in his Religion also which now he was going to to teach the jew and Gentiâ—e too And Heb. 9. 10. now the times of a general Reformation being come and the Apostles were Preaching this excellent Religion unto all the World Jew and Gentile conspire together in the same Language and call them setters forth of strange Gods and new Acts 24. 14. Acts 28. 22 Heresies Heads and Contrivers of new Sects and Wayes and are whipt for Vagrants and Impostors who would cheat the World out of their old paternal Religions that were entail'd upon them teach them to speak ill of the Gods of their Fathers and Predecessors and to think they all dyed in a false Religion and to embrace a new-fangled Faith of a few illiterate and rambling fellows who had turn'd the World upside down And had this Argument prevail'd then as much as the Romanists do desire it should new we should have had no Christianity among us the Idol-Gods of our Ancestors in this Island their Woodens and Twisters would have prescribed against Christ himself 3. To turn the Question upon them and ask them some others of the like nature Men that are insolent and ever boasting of the Antiquity of their Family and upbraiding others with their obscure Birth and Extraction do many times meet with some cross Questions about the Head and Fountain of their Families which many times proves onely to be a Shepheard or meaner Original made
Faith of Christ they shall not teach nor any thing at all whereby the unskilful multitude may be inflaâ—ed either to the study of Novelty or to Contention VI. But though nothing may be taught as a piece of Religion which hath not the forenamed Original yet I must add that those things which have been universally believed and not contrary to Scripture though not written at all there nor to be proved from thence we do receive as pious Opinions For instance the perpetual Virginity of the Mother of GOD our Saviour which is so likely a thing and so universally received that I do not see why we should not look upon it as a genuine Apostolical Tradition VII I have but one thing more to adde which is that we allow also the Traditions of the Church about matters of Order Rites and Ceremonies Only we do not take them to be parts of GOD's worship and if they be not appointed in the holy Scriptures we believe they may be altered by the same or the like authority with that which ordained them So our Church hath excellently and fully resolved us concerning such matters in the XXXIV Article of Religion where there are three things asserted concerning such Traditions as these First It is not necessary that Traditions and Ceremonies they are the very first words of the Article be in all places one or utterly alike for at all times they have been divers and may be changed according to the diversities of countries times and mens manners so that nothing be ordained against God's Word But then to prevent all disorders and confusions that men might make in the Church by following their own private fancies and humours the next thing which is decreed is this Secondly That whosoever through his own private judgment willingly and purposelie doth openlie break the Traditions and Ceremonies of the Church which be not repugnant to the Word of GOD and be ordained and approved by common authority ought to be rebuked openlie that others may fear to do the like as he that offendeth against the common Order of the church and hurteth the Authority of the Magistrate and woundeth the consciences of the weak Brethren Lastlie It is there declared That every particular or National church hath authority to ordain change and abolish ceremonies or Rites of the church ordained only by man's authority so that all things be done to edifying This is sufficient to shew what we believe concerning Traditions about matters of Order and Decency VIII As for what is delivered in matters of Doctrine or Order by any private Doctor in the church or by any particular church it appears by what hath been said that it cannot be taken to be more then the private Opinion of that man or the particular Decree of that church and can have no more authority then they have that is cannot oblidge all christians unless it be contained in the holy Scripture Now such are the Traditions which the Roman church would impose upon us and impose upon us after a strange fashion as you shall see in the Second Part of this Discourse unto which I shall proceed presently when I have left with you this brief Reflection on what hath been said in this First Part. Our people may hereby be admonished not to suffer themselves to be deceived and abused by words and empty names without their sense and meaning Nothing is more common then this especially in the business of Traditions About which a great stir is raised and it is commonly given out that we refuse all Traditions Then which nothing is more false for we refuse none truly so called that is Doctrines delivered by Christ or his Apostles No we refuse nothing at all because it is unwritten but merely because we are not sure it is delivered by that Authority to which we ought to submit Whatsoever is delivered to us by our LORD and his Apostles we receive as the very word of God which we think is sufficiently declared in the holy Scriptures But if any can certainly prove by any Authority equal to that which brings the Scriptures to us that there is any thing else delivered by them we receive that also The Controversie will soon be at an end For we are ready to embrace it when any such thing can be produced Nay we have that reverence for those who succeeded the Apostles that what they have unanimously delivered to us as the sense of any doubtful place we receive it and seek no farther There is no dispute whither or no we should entertain it To the Decrees of the Church also we submit in matters of Decency and Order yea and acquiesce in its authority when it determines doubtful Opinions But we cannot receive that as a Doctrine of Christ which we know is but the Tradition of man nor keep the Ordinances of the ancient Church in matters of Decency so unalterably as never to vary from them because they themselves did not intend them to be of everlasting obligation As appears by the changes that have been made in several times and places even in some things which are mentioned in the holy Scriptures being but Customs suted to those Ages and Countries In short Traditions we do receive but not all that are called by that name Those which have sufficient Authority but not those which are imposed upon us by the sole authority of one particular Church assuming a power oâ—er all the rest And so I come to the Second Part. PART II. What Traditions we do not receive AND in the first place we do not believe that there is any Tradition which contains another Word of God which is not in the Scripture or cannot be proved from thence In this consists the main difference between us and them of the Romish Perswasion who affirm that Divine Truth which we are all bound to receive to be partly written partly delivered by word of mouth without writting Which is not only the affirmation of the Council of Trent but delivered in more express tâ—rms in the Bresace to the Roman Catechism drawn up by their order where we finde these words towards the conclusion of it The whole Doctrine to be delivered to the faithfull is contained in the Word of GOD which Word of GOD is distributed into Scripture and Tradition This is a full and plain declaration of their mind with which we can by no means agree for divers unanswerable reasons 1. Not only because the Scriptures testifie to their own perfection which they assirm to be so great as to be able to compleat the divinest men in the Church of CHRIST in all points of heavenly wisdom 2 Tim. 3. 15. 16. 17. but 2. Because the constant Tradition of the Church even of the Roman Church anciently is that in the Scriptures we may find all that is necessary to be known and believed to salvation I must not fill up this Paper with Authorities to this purpose but we avow this unto the people of
either there or indeed any where else Which is no reproach to other Churches who do not pretend to more then is written but reflâ—cts much upon them and discredits them who challeng the power of the whole Church intirely and would pass not onely for the sole Keepers and Witnesses of Divine Truth but for careful preservers of it For of what should they have been more careful then of these useful things whereof they can tell us nothing when of unprofitable Ceremonies they have most devoutly kept if we could believe them a very great number 3. They tell us indeed of some doctrinal Traditions also which they have religiously preserved but mark I beseech you with what sincerity For to justifie these they have forged great numbers of Writings and Books under the name of such Authors aâ— it is evident had no hand in them which is another reason why we cannot give credit to their reports if we have no other authority There are very few persons now that are ignorant how many Decretal Epistles of the ancient Bishops of Rome have been devised to establish the Papal Empire and how shamefully a Donation of Constantine hath been pretended wherein he gave away the Roman Empire and all its Rights to the Pope Which puts me in mind as a notorious proof of this of the Forgeries that are in the Breviary it self where we read of Constantine's Leprosie and the cure of it by Sylvester's baptizing him which are egregious Fables and of the Decrees of the second Roman Synod under that Pope Sylvester wherein the Breviary affirms Photinus was condemned when all the world knows that Photinus his Heresie did not spring up till diverse years after the death of Sylvester And there are so many other Arguments which prove the Decrees of that Synod to be a vile forgery that we may see by the way what reason they have to keep their Liturgy in an unknown Language least the people perceiving what untruths they are taught instead of God's Word should abhor that Divine Service as justly they might which is stuffed with so many Fables It would be endless to shew how many passages they have foisted into ancient Writers to countenance their Traditions particularly about the Papal Supremacy by which so great a man as Thomas Aquinas was deceived who frequently quotes Authorities which are mere Forgeries though not invented by him I verily think but imposed upon him by the fraud which had been long practised in that Church For we find that the Canons of so famous and universally known Council as that of the first at Nice have been falsely alledged even by Popes themselves Boniface for instance and Zosimus alledged a counterfeit Nicene Canon to the African Bishops in the sixth Council of Carthage who to convince the false dealing of these Popes sought out with great labour and diligence the ancient and authentick Copies of the Nicene Canons and having obtained them both from Alexandria and from Constantinople they found them for number and for sense to be the very same which themselves already had but not one word in them of what the Popes pretended The same I might say of Pope Innocent and others whom I purposely omit because I study brevity 4. And have this farther to adde that as they have pretended Tradition where there is none so where there is they have left that Tradition and therefore have no reason to expect that we should be governed by them in this matter who take the liberty to neglect as they please better Tradition then they would impose upon us None are to be charged with this if it be a guilt more then themselves For instance the three Immersions i. e. dipping the Persons three times in Baptism was certainly an ancient practice and said by many Authors to be an Apostolical Tradition and to be ordained in signification of the blessed Trinity into whose name they were baptized And yet there is no such thing now in use in their Church no more then in ours who justifie our selves as I shewed above by a true opinion that Rites and Ceremonies are not unâ—lterable which it is impossible for them to do unless they will cease to press the necessity of other Traditions upon us which never were so generally received as this which is now abolished To which may be added the custome of giving the Eucharist to Infants which prevailed for several Ages and is called by St. Austin an Apostolical Tradition the custome of administring Baptism onely at Easter and Whitsontide with a great heap more which would be too long to enumerate Nor it is necessary I should trouble the Reader with them these being sufficient to shew the partiality of that Church in this matter and that we have no reason to be tied to that merely upon their Authority which they will not observe though having a far greater Nay all discreet persons may easily see what a wide difference there is between them who have abrogated such Traditions as had long gone even in their Church under the name of Apostolical and us who therefore do not follow pretended Traditions now because we believe them not to be Apostolical but merely Roman He is strangely blind who doth not see how much more sincere this Church is then that in this regard 5. Besides this we can demonstrate that as in these things they have forsaken Traditions so in other cases they have perverted and abused them turning them into quite another thing As appears to all that understand any thing of ancient Learning in the business of Purgatory which none of the most ancient Writers so much as dream'd to be such a place as they have now devised but only asserted a Purgatory-Fire through which all both good and bad even the blessed Virgin her self must pass at the great and dreadful day of Judgement This was the old Tradition as we may call it which was among Christians which they have changed into such a Tradition as was among the Pagans 6. But it is time to have done with this else I should have insisted upon this a while which I touched before and is of great moment That the Tradition which now runs in that Church is contrary to the certain Tradition of the Apostles and the universal Church particularly in the Canon of Scripture In which no more Books have been numbered by the Catholick Church in all Ages since the Apostles time then are in the VI. Article of Religion in the Church of England till the late council of Trent took the boldness to thrust the Apoeryphal Books into the holy Canon as nothing inferiour to the acknowledged Divine Writings This hath been so evidently demonstrated by a late Reverend Prelate of our Church in his Scholastical History of the Canon of the Scriptures out of undoubted Records that no fair answer can be made to it But I must leave a little room for other things that ought to be noted III. And the next is a consequence
first General Councils are received with great Veneration and a particular a In libro canonum in Synodo Londinensi an 1571. titulo de concionatoribus Imprimis videbunt ne quid unquam doceant pro concione quod a populoreligiose teneri credi velint 〈◊〉 quod consentaneum sit doctrinae Veteris Novi Testamenti quodquo ex illa ipsa doctrina catholici Patres Veteres Episcopi collegerint Injunction was laid upon its Ministers to press upon none the necessary belief of any Doctrine but what may be proved from Scripture and the generall current of the Expositions of the Fathers thereupon So carefull it hath been in all points to keep within the bounds of catholick Principles in those first instilled into its young Disciples in the catechisms and in those delivered in its Articles to be subscribed by such to whom it entrusts any Office that the positive part of them will hardly be disowned by our very Adversaries and can scarce appear otherwise to any then the common Faith of all christians of Orthodox repute in all Ages And for other determinations in the Negative she only declares thereby how little concerned she is to receive or own the false or corrupt additions to the first unalterable Rule No church hath professed and evidenced a more awful and tender regard to Antiquity next to the express Word of GOD. Both which she oft appeals to desires to be ruled by and where their footsteps are not sufficiently clear chooses not to impose upon her own Children nor censure her Neighbours keeps within the most safe and modest boundaries is not forward in determining nice and intricate disputes which have perplexed and confounded many in their hasty and bold Positions particularly about the Divine Decrees and such like sublime Points In which few understand where the main stress of the Controversie lies It may be none can comprehend the depth of the matters upon which the Decision ought to grounded But alas how many have been forward to lay down and fiercely contend for on each side their private opinions herein as the first Rudiments of Theology to be placed in their very Creeds or Catechisms and so a foundation must be laid for endless Contests and Divisions But most cautious hath our Church been in not laying such occasions to fall in the way of any So that both sorts of Adversaries have made their complaints against her for not being positive and particularly in such Declarations though none can charge her justly with defect in any point of Faith so owned in the best Ages of the Church 2. As clear and unexceptionable hath been her proceeding in Church Government preserving that form which from all Testimonies of Antiquity hath continued in the Church from the very Apostles under the conduct and happy Influence of which Christianity hath been propagated and continued throughout the World whatever different measures some other Reformed Churches have taken whither forc'd by necessity or swayed by particular inclination or prejudice The Church of England kept up the universally received distinct prime Orders of Bishops Priests and Deacons not desiring to censure others who can best answer for themselves but endeavouring to confine her self to what was most Canonical and Regular and to shew how little affected she was to alteration from any establishment except in notorious corruptions and abuses And how necessary she thought due Order and Subordination in the Church to prevent Schisms and Heresies and to give the greater Authority and advantage to her Ministrations and finally to free her self from all suspicion of irregularity in her Succession derived down from Christ and his Apostles which she as much as any Church in the World may pretend unto And though some intermediate Ages have been blemished with much degeneracy yet she was concerned only to separate this but retain and convey down to others whatsoever good and wholsome provision she received from those before Farther to evince this particular care was taken by express Law a See the Statute 25 of Henry the 8. cap. 19. Sect. 7 expresly revived 1 Eliz c. 1. sect 6. to confirm the Rules of Government or Canon Law before received in the Church till some better provision could be made so far as it contradicts not the Law of the Land or the Word of GOD making as few changes in the outward face of the Church as was possible and sensibly proving it her design properly not to destroy but build nor yet therein to erect a new but reform an old Church 3. Alike Canonical and orderly hath been her Constitution in matters of Worship Her Forms of Prayer and Praise with the whole order of her Liturgy are composed with the greatest temper and expressed in the most plain and comprehensive terms to help forward uniform devotion pious Affection the most Orthodox Profession and catholick communion So that I think it may be universally affirmed that there is not any thing required in her publick Service necessary to those who communicate with her which any that own the name of christians or are owned for such by the general body of them can almost scruple unless because it is a Form by one sort and because it is ours by another sort But how unreasonable herein are both So careful she hath been to lay the ground of most catholick Unity and to remove whatever might obstruct it This our Adversaries the Romanists confirmed by their own practice when for several years as we have been told a Camdeni Eliz. an 1570 in the beginning of Queen Elizabeths Reign they frequented our churches joyn'd in our Prayers and Praises attended on our Sermons and other Instructions and received as some add our Sacraments according to the order for substance the same as now and had it is like done so still having nothing to object against them but from the after-prohibition of the Pope who had reason to fear they who were so well provided of all needfull supply and defence at home might thus by degrees be withdrawn from subjection to his Authority abroad that darling point never to be dispensed or parted with whatever else might have been yielded b Camd. Eliz. an 1560. Our Reformers who composed our Liturgy carefuly collected the remainders of true Primitive Devotion a camdeni Eliz an 1560. then in use and separated from them all those corrupt additions which ignorance superstition and crafty policy had mixed therewith Therefore it is so far from being an objection that any part of our Liturgy was translated from the Roman Offices that while nothing is retained contrary to wholsome Doctrine and sound Piety it is a convincing argument of her impartial Sincerity and desire to preserve Uniformity as much as possible with all christians abroad as well as at home in her own Members securing all the Substantials of Worship according to the plain sense of Scripture and the pattern of the Primitive church And as to Circumstantials
Bread and that to be Wine and we see thy body to be distinct from both we see thy body not broken and thy bloud not shed From all which it must needs be very evident to any man that will impartially consider things how little reason there is to understand those words of our Saviour this is my body and this is my bloud in the sense of Transubstantiation nay on the contrary that there is very great reason and an evident necessity to understand them otherwise I proceed to shew 2ly That this Doctrine is not grounded upon the perpetual belief of the Christian Church which the Church of Rome vainly pretends as an evidence that the Church did alwayes understand and interpret our Saviour's words in this sense To manifest the groundlesness of this pretence I shall 1. shew by plain testimony of the Fathers in several Ages that this Doctrine was not the belief of the ancient Christian Church 2. I shall shew the time and occasion of its coming in and by what degrees it grew up and was established in the Roman Church 3. I shall answer their great pretended Demonstration that this alwayes was and must have been the constant belief of the Christian Church 1. I shall shew by plain Testimonies of the Fathers in several Ages for above five hundred years after Christ that this Doctrine was not the belief of the ancient Christian Church I deny not but that the Fathers do and that with great reason very much magnify the wonderfull mystery and efficacy of this Sacrament and frequently speak of a great supernatural change made by the divine benediction which we also readily acknowledge They say indeed that the Elements of bread and Wine do by the divine blessing become to us the body and bloud of Christ But they likewise say that the names of the things signified are given to the Signs that the bread and Wine do still remain in their proper nature and substance and that they are turn'd into the substance of our bodies that the body of Christ in the Sacrament is not his natural body but the sign and figure of it not that body which was crucified nor that bloud which was shed upon the Cross and that it is impious to understand the eating of the flesh of the Son of man and drinking his â—loud literally all which are directly opposite to the Doctrine of Transubstantiation and utterly inconsistent with it I will select but some few Testimonies of many which I might bring to this purpose I begin with Justin Martyr who sayes expresly that * Apol. 2. p. 98. Edit Paris 1636. our bloud and Flesh are nourished by the conversion of that food which we receive in the Eucharist But that cannot be the natural body and bloud of Christ for no man will say that is converted into the nourishment of our bodies The Second is * Lib. 4. c. 34. Irenoeus who speaking of this Sacrament sayes that the bread which is from the earth receiving the divine invocation is now no longer common bread but the Eucharist or Sacrament consisting of two thingâ— the one earthly the other heavenly He sayes it is no longer common bread but after invocation or consecration it becomes the Sacrament that is bread sanctified consisting of two things an earthly and a heavenly the earthly thing is bread and the heavenly is the divine blessing which by the invocation or consecration is added to it And * lib. 5. c. 2. elsewhere he hath this passage when therefore the cup that is mix'd that is of Wine and Water and the bread that is broken receives the word of God it becomes the Eucharist of the bloud and body of Christ of which the substance of our flesh is increased and consists But if that which we receive in the Sacrament do nourish our bodies it must be bread and wine and not the natural body and bloud of Christ There is another remarkable Testimony of Irenoeus which though it be not now extant in those works of his which remain yet hath been preserv'd by * Comment in 1 Pet. c. 3. Oecumenius and it is this when sayes he the Greeks had taken some Servants of the Christian Catechumeni that is such as had not been admitted to the Sacrament and afterwards urged them by violence to tell them some of the secrets of the Christians these Servants having nothing to say that might gratify those who offered violence to them except only that they had heard from their Masters that the divine Communion was the bloud and body of Christ they thinking that it was really bloud and flesh declar'd as much to those that questioned them The Greeks taking this as if it were really done by the Christâ—â—ns discovered it to others of the Greeks who hereupon put Sanctus and Blandina to the torture to make them confess it to whom Blandina boldly answered How would they endure to do this who by way of exercise or abstinence do not eat that flesh which may lawfully be eaten By which it appears that this which they would have charged upon Christians as if they had literally eatten the flesh and bloud of Christ in the Sacrament was a false accusation which these Martyrs denied saying they were so far from that that they for their part did not eat any flesh at all The next is â—ertullian who proves against Marcion the Heretick that the Body of our Saviour was not a mere phaâ—â—asm and appearance but a real Body because the Sacrament is a figure and image of his Body and if there be an image of his body he must have a real body otherwise the Sacrament would be an image of an image His words are these * Advers Marcionem l. 4. p. 571. Edit Rigalt Paris 1634 the bread which our Saviour took and distributed to his Disciples he made his own body saying this is my body that is the image or figure of my body But it could not have been the figure of his body if there had not been a true and real body And arguing against the Scepticks who denied the certainty of sense he useth this Argument That if we question our senses we may doubt whither our Blessed Saviour were not deceived in what he heard and saw and touched * Lib. de Anima p. 319. He might sayes he be deceived in the voice from heaven in the smell of the ointment with which he was anointed against his burial and in the taste of the wine which he consecrated in remembrance of his bloud So that it seems we are to tâ—ust ouâ— senses even in the matter of the Sacrament and if that be true the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is certainly false Origen in his * Edit Huetii Comment on Matth. 15 speaking of the Sacrament hath this passage That food which is sanctified by the word of God and prayer as to that of it which is material goeth into the belly and is cast out into the
and the Council at Rome in these words * Gratian. de consecrat distinct 2. Lanfranc de corp sang Domini c. 5. Guitmund de sacram l. i. Alger de sacram l. 1. c. 19. that the bread and wine which are set upon the Altar after the consecration are not only the Sacrament but the true body and bloud of our Lord Jesus Christ and are sensibly not onlie in the Sacrament but in truth handled and broken by the hands of the Priest ground or bruised by the teeth of the faithful But it seems the Pope and his Council were not then skilful enough to express themselves rightly in his matter for the Gloss upon the Canon Law sayes expresly †Gloss Decret de conse crat dist 2. in cap. Ege Berengarius that unless we understand these words of BERENGARIVS that is in truth of the Pope and his Council in a sound sense we shall fall into a greater Heresie then that of BERENGARIVS for we do not make parts of the body of Christ The meaning of which Gloss â— cannot imagine unless it be this that the Body of Christ though it be in truth broken yet it is not broken into parts for we do not make parts of the body of Christ but into wholes Now this new way of breaking a Body not into parts but into wholes which in good earnest is the Doctrine of the Church of Rome though to them that are able to believe Transubstantiation it may for any thing I know appear to be sound sense yet to us that cannot believe so it appears to be solid non-sense About XX years after in the year MLXXIX Pope Gregory the VII Began to be sensible of this absurdity and therefore in another council at Rome made Berengarius to recant in another * Waldnes Tom. 2. c. 1â— Form viz. that the bread and wine which are placed upon the Altar are substantially changed into the true and proper and quickning flesh and bloud of our Lord Jesus Christ and after consecration are the true body of Christ which was born of the Virgin and which being offered for the Salvation of the World did hang upon the cross and sits on the right hand of the Father So that from the first starting of this Doctrine in the second council of Nice in the year DCCLXXXVII till the council under Pope Gregory the VII th in the year MLXXIX it was almost three hundred years that this Doctrine was contested and before this mishapen Monster of Transubstantiation could be lick'd into that Form in which it is now setled and establish'd in the Church of Rome Here then is a plain account of the first rise of this Doctrine and of the several steps whereby it was advanced by the Church of Rome into an Article of Faith I come now in the Third place to answer the great pretended Demonstration of the impossibility that this Doctrine if it had been new should ever have come in in any Age and been received in the Church and con-consequently it must of necessity have been the perpetual belief of the Church in all Ages For if it had not alwayes been the Doctrine of the Church when ever it had attempted first to come in there would have been a great stir and bustle about it and the whole Christian World would have rose up in opposition to it But we can shew no such time when first it came in and when any such opposition was made to it and therefore it was alwayes the Doctrine of the Church This Demonstration Monsieur Arnauld a very learned Man in France pretends to be unanswerable whither it be so or not I shall briefly examine And First We do assign a punctual and very likely time of the first rise of this Doctrine about the beginning of the ninth Age though it did not take firm root nor was fully setled and establish'd till towards the end of the eleventh And this was the most likely time of all other from the begining of Christianity for so gâ—oss an Errour to appear it being by the confession and consent of their own Historians the most dark and dismal time that ever happened to the Christian Church both for Ignorance and Superstition and Vice It came in together with Idolatry and was made use of to support it A fit prop and companion for it And indeed what tares might not the Enemy have sown in so dark and long a Night when so considerable a part of the Christian World was lull'd a sleep in profound Ignorance and Superstition And this agrees very well with the account which our Saviour himself gives in the Parable of the Tares of the springing up of Errours and Corruptions in the Field of the Church * Matth. 13 24. While the men sleept the Enemy did his work in the Night so that when they were awake they wondered how and whence the tares came but being sure they were there and that they were not sown at first they concluded the Enemy had done it Secondliâ— I have shewn likewise that there was considerable opposition made to this Errour at its first coming in The general Ignorance and gross Superstition of that Age rendered the generality of people more quiet and secure and disposed them to receive any thing that came under a pretence of mystery in Religion and of greater reverence and devotion to the Sacrament and that seemed any way to countenance the worship of Images for which at that time they were zealously concern'd But notwithstanding the security and passive temper of the People the most eminent for piety and learning in that Time made great resistance against it I have already named Rabanus Arch-Bishop of Mentz who oppos'd it as an Errour lately sprung up and which had then gained but upon some few persons To whom I may add Heribaldus Bishop of Auxerres in France Io. Scotus Erigena and Ratramnus commonly known by the name of Beriram who at the same time were imployed by the Emperour Charles the Bald to oppose this growing Errour and wrote learnedly against it And these were the eminent men for learning in that time And because Monsieur Arnauld will not be satisfied unless there some stir and bustle about it Bertram in his Preface to his book tells us that they who according to their several opinions talked differently about the mystery of Christs bodie and bloud were divided by no small Schism Thirdlie Though for a more clear satisfactory answer to this pretended Demonstration I have been contented to unty this knot yet I could without all these pains have cut it For suppose this Doctrine had silently come in and without opposition so that we could not assign the particular time and occasion of its first Rise yet if it be evident from Records of former Ages for above 500. years together that this was not the ancient belief of the Church and plain also that this Doctrine was afterwards received in the Roman Church though we could
verily eat and drink the natural flesh and bloud of Christ And what can any man do more unworthily towards his Friend How can he possibly use him more barbarously then to feast upon his living flesh and bloud It is one of the greatest wonders in the World that it should ever enter into the minds of men to put upon our Saviours words so easily capable of a more convenient sense and so necessarily requiring it a meaning so plainly contrary to Reason and sense and even to Humanity it self Had the ancient Christians owned any such Doctrine we should have heard of it from the Adversaries of our Religion in every page of their writings and they would have desired no greater advantage against the Christians then to have been able to hit them in the teeth with their feasting upon the natural flesh and bloud of their Lord and their God and their best Friend What endless triumphs would they have made upon this Subject And with what confidence would they have set the cruelty used by Christians in their Sacrament against their God Saturn's eating his own children and all the cruel and bloudy Rites of their Idolatry But that no such thing was then objected by the Heathens to the Christians is to a wise man instead of a thousand Demonstrations that no such Doctrine was then believed 3. It is scandalous also upon account of the cruel and bloudy consequences of this Doctrine so contrary to the plain Laws of christianity and to one great end and design of this Sacrament which is to untie christians in the most perfect love and charity to one another Whereas this Doctrine hath been the occasion of the most barbarous and bloudy Tragedies that ever were acted in the World For this hath been in the church Rome the great burning Article and as absurd and unreasonable as it is more christians have been murther'd for the denial of it then perhaps for all the other Articles of their Religion And I think it may generally pass for a true observation that all sects are commonly most hot and surious for those things for which there is least Reason for what men want of Reason for their opinions they usually supply and make up in Rage And it was no more then needed to use this severity upon this occasion for nothing but the cruel fear of death could in probability have driven so great a part of mankind into the acknowledgment of so unreasonable and senseless a Doctrine O blessed Saviour Thou best Friend and greatest Lover of mankind who can imagine thou didst ever intend that men should kill one another for not being able to believe contrary to their senses for being unwilling to think that thou shouldst make one of the most horrid and barbarous things that can be imagined a main Duty and principal Mystery of thy Religion for not flattering the pride and presumption of the Priest who sayes he can make God and for not complying with the folly and stupidity of the People who believe that they can eat him 4. Upon account of the danger of Idolatry which they are certainly guilty of if this Doctrine be not true and such a change as they pretend be not made in the Sacrament for if it be not then they worship a Creature instead of the Creatour God blessed for ever But such a change I have shewn to be impossible or if it could be yet they can never be certain that it is and consequently are alwayes in danger of Idolatry And that they can never be certain that such a change is made is evident because according to the express determination of the Council of Trent that depends upon the mind and intention of the Priest which cannot certainly be known but by Revelation which is not pretended in this case And if they be mistaken about this change through the knavery of crosness or the Priest who will not make GOD but when he thinks fit they must not think to excuse themselves from Idolatry because they intended to worship God and not a Creature for so the Persians might be excus'd from Idolatry in worshipping the Sun because they intend to worship God and not a Creature and so indeed we may excuse all the Idolatry that ever was in the world which is nothing else but a mistake of the Deity and upon that mistake a worshipping of something as God which is not God II. Besides the infinite scandal of this Doctrine upon the accounts I have mentioned the monstruous absurdities of it make it in supportable to any Religion I am very well assur'd of the grounds of Religion in general and of the Christian Religion in particular and yet I cannot see that the foundation of any revealed Religion are strong enough to bear the weight of so many and so great absurdities as this Doctrine of Transubstantiation would load it withall And to make this evident I shall not insist upon those gross contradictions of the same Body being in so many several places at once of our Saviour's giving away himself with his own hands to every one of his Disciples and yet still keeping himself to himself and a thousand more of the like nature But to shew the absurdity of this Doctrine I shall only ask these few Questions 1. Whither any man have or ever had greater evidence of the truth of any Divine Revelation then every man hath of the falshood of Transubstantiation Infidelity were hardly possible to men if all men had the same evidence for the Christian Religion which they have against Transubstantiation that is the clear and irresistible evidence of sense He that can once be brought to contradict or deny his senses is at an end of certainty for what can a man be certain of if he be not certain of what he sees In some circumstances our senses may deceive us but no Faculty deceives us so little and so seldom And when our senses do deceive us even that errour is not to be corrected without the help of our senses 2. Supposing this Doctrine had been delivered in Scripture in the very same words that it is decreed in the Council of Trent by what clearer evidence or stronger Argument could any man prove to me that such words were in the Bible then I can prove to him that bread and wine after consecration are bread and wine still He could but appeal to my eyes to prove such words to be in the Bible and with the same reason and justice might I appeal to several of his senses to prove to him that the bread and wine after consecration are bread and wine still 3. Whither it be reasonable to imagine that God should make that a part of the Christian Religion which shakes the main external evidence and confirmation of the whole I mean the Miracles which were wrought by our Saviour and his Apostles the assurance whereof did at first depend upon the certainty of sense For if the senses of those who say
they saw them were deceived then there might be no Miracles wrought and consequently it may justly be doubted whither that kind of confirmation which God hath given to the Christian Religion would be strong enough to prove it supposing Transubstantiation to be a part of it Because every man hath as great evidence that Transubstantiation is false as he hath that the Christian Religion is true Suppose then Transubstantiation to be part of the Christian Doctrine it must have the same confirmation with the whole and that is Miracles But of all Doctrines in the world it is peculiarly incapable of being proved by a Miracle For if a Miracle were wrought for the proof of it the very same assurance which any man hath of the truth of the Miracle he hath of the falsehood of the Doctrine that is the clear evidence of his senses For that there is a Miracle wrought to prove that what he sees in the Sacrament is not bread but the body of Christ there is only the evidence of sense and there is the very same evidence to prove that what he sees in the Sacrament is not the Body of Christ but bread So that here would arise a new Controversie whither a man should rather believe his senses giving testimony against the Doctrine of Transubstantiation or bearing witness to a Miracle wrought to confirm that Doctrine there being the very same evidence against the truth of the Doctrine which there is for the truth of the Miracle And then the Argument for Transubstantiation and 〈◊〉 Objection against it would just balance one another and consequeâ—â—ly Transubstantiation is not to be proved by a Miracle because thâ— would be to prove to a man by some thing that he sees that he dâ— not see what he sees And if there were no other evidence that Trâ—â—substantiation is no part of the Christian Doctrine this would â—â— sufficient that what proves the one doth as much overthâ—â—â— the other and that Miracles which are certainly the best and higâ—â— external proof of Christianity are the worst proof in the world of Trâ—â—substantiation unless a man can renounce his senses at the same tâ—â— that he relies upon them For a man cannot believe a Miracle withoâ—â— relying upon sense nor Transubstantiation without renouncing it Sâ— that never were any two things so ill coupled together as the Doctriâ—â— of Christianity and that of Transubstantiation because they draw sâ—veral ways and are ready to strangle one another because thâ— main evidence of the Christian Doctrine which is Miracles is resâ—â—ved into the certainty of sense but this evidence is clear and poiâ—â— blank against Transubstantiation 4. And Lastly I would ask what we are to think of the Argumeâ—â— which our Saviour used to convince his Disciples after his Resurrectâ—on that his Body was really risen and that they were not deluded by â— Ghost or Apparition Is it a necessary and conclusive Argâ—ment or not * Luke 24. 3â— 39. And he said unto them why are yâ—â— troubled and why do thoughts arise in your heartsâ— Behold my hands and my feet that it is I my self â—â—â— a Spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me hâ—â— But now if we suppose with the Church of Rome the Doctrine oâ— Transubstantiation to be true and that he had instructed his Disâ—ciples in it just before his death strange thoughts might justly havâ— risen in their hearts and they might have said to him Lord it iâ— but a few dayes ago since thou didst teach us not to believe our senses but directly contrary to what we saw viz. That the bread whicâ— thou gavest us in the Sacrament though we saw it and handled iâ— and tasted it to be bread yet was not bread but thine own natural body and now thou appealest to our senses to prove that thiâ— is thy body which we now see If seeing and handling be an unquestionable evidence that things are what they appear to ouâ— senses then we were deceived before in the Sacrament and if they be not then we are not sure now that this is thy body which we now see and handle but it may be perhaps bread under the appearance of flesh and bones just as in the Sacrament that which we saw and handled and tasted to be bread was thy flesh and bones under the form and appearance of bread Now upon this supposition it would have been a hard matter to have quieted the thoughâ—â— â—f the Disciples For if the Argument which our Saviour used did â—â—rtainly prove to them that what they saw and handled was his â—â—dy his very natural flesh and bones 〈◊〉 because they saw and â—andled them which it were impious to deny is would as strongâ—â— prove that what they saw and received before in the Sacrament was â—ot the natural body and bloud of Christ but real bread and wine â—nd consequently that according to our Saviours arguing after his â—esurrection they had no reason to believe Transubstantiation before â—or that very Argument by which our Saviour proves the reality of his â—ody after his Resurrection doth as strongly prove the reality of bread â—nd wine after consecration But our Saviours Argument was most â—â—fallibly good and true and therefore the Doctrine of Transubstanâ—â—ation is undoubtedly false Upon the whole matter I shall only say this that some other â—oints between us and the Church of Rome are managed with some â—ind of witâ— and subtilty but this of Transubstantiation is carâ—ied out by mere dint of impudence and facing down of Manâ—ind And of this the more discerning persons of that Church are of â—ate grown so sensible that they would now be glad to be rid of this â—odious and ridiculous Doctrine But the Council of Trent hath fastâ—ned it to their Religion and made it a necessary and essential Point of their Belief and they cannot now part with it if they would it is like a Mill-stone hung about the neck of Popery which will sink it at the last And though some of their greatest Wits as Cardinal Perron and of late Monsieur Arnauld have undertaken the defence of it in great Volumes yet it is an absurdity of that monstrous and massy weight that no humane authority or witâ— are able to support it It will make the very Pillars of St. Peter's crack and requires more Volumes to make it good then would fill the Vatican And now I would apply my self to the poor deluded People of that Church if they were either permitted by their Priests or durst venture without their leave to look into their Religion and to examine the Doctrines of it Consider and shew your selves men Do not suffer your selves any longer to be led blindfold and by an implicit Faith in your Priests into the belief of nonsense and contradiction Think it enough and too much to let them rook you of your money for pretended Pardons and counterfeit Reliques but let not the Authority of any Priest or Church perswade you out of your senses
Credulity is certainly a fault as well as Infidelity And he who said blessed are they that have not seen and yet have believed hath no where said blessed are they that have seen and yet have not believed much less blessed are they that believe directly contrary to what they see To conclude this Discourse By what hath been said upon this Argument it will appear with how little truth and reason and regard to the interest of our common Christianity it is so often said by our Adversaries that there are as good arguments for the belief of Transubstantiation as of the Doctrine of the Trinity When they themselves do acknowledge with us that the Doctrine of the Trinity is grounded upon the Scriptures and that according to the interpretation of them by the consent of the ancient Fathers But their Doctrine of Transubstantiation I have plainly shewn to have no such ground and that this is acknowledged by very many learned men of their own Church And this Doctrine of theirs being first plainly proved by us to be destitute of all Divine Warrant and Authority our Objections against it from the manifold contradictions of it to Reason and sense are so many Demonstrations of the falsehood of it Against all which they have nothing to put in the opposite Scale but the Infallibility of their Church for which there is even less colour of proof from Scripture then for Transubstantiation it self But so fond are they of their own Innovations and Errours that rather then the Dictates of their Church how groundless and absurd soever should be call'd in question rather then not have their will of us in imposing upon us what they please they will owerthrow any Article of the Christian Faith and shake the very foundations of our common Religion A clear evidence that this Church of Rome is not the true Mother since she can be so well contented that Christianity should be destroyed rather then the Point in question should be decided against her FINIS A DISCOURSE Concerning the ADORATION OF THE HOST As it is Taught and Practiced in the CHURCH of ROME Wherein an Answer is given to T. G. oâ— that Subject And to Monsieut Boileau's late book De Adoratione Eucharistiae Paris 1685. EDINEVRGH Re-printed by John Reid Anno DOM 1686. A DISCOURSE OF THE ADORATION Of the HOST c. IDolatry is so great a Blot in any Church what ever other glorious Marks it may pretend to that it is not to be wondred that the Church of Rome is very angry to be charged with it as it has alwayes been by all the Reform'd who have given in this among many others as a just and necessary Reason of their Reformation and it must be confessed to be so if it be fully and clearly made good against it and if it be not it must be owned to be great Uncharitableness on the other side which is no good Note of a Church neither as grievous Slander and most uncharitable Calumny which will fall especially upon all the Clergy of the Church of England who by their Consent and Subscription to its Articles and to the Doctrine of its Homilies and to the Book of Common Prayer do expresly join in it For it is not the private Opinion only of some particular and forward men in their Zeal and Heat against Popery thus to accuse it of Idolatry but it is the deliberate and sober and downright Charge of the Church of England of which no honest man can be a Member and Minister who does not make and believe it I might give several Instances to shew this but shall only mention one wherein I have undertaken to defend our Church in its charge of Idolatry upon the Papists in their Adoration of the Host which is in its Declaration about Kneeling at the Sacrament after the Office of the Communion in which are these remarkeable words It is hereby declared that no Adoration is intended or ought to be done either unto the sacramental Bread and Wine there bodily received or unto any corporal presence of Christs natural Flesh and Blood for the Sacramental Bread and Wine remain still in their natural substances and therefore may not be adored for that were Idolatry to be abhorred of all faithful Christians Here it most plainly declares its mind against that which is the Ground and Foundation of their Worshipping the Host That the Elements do not remain in their natural Substances after Consecration if they do remain as we and all Protestants hold even the Lutherians then in Worshipping the consecrated Elements they worship meer Creatures and are by their own Confession guilty of Idolatry as I shall shew by and by and if Christs natural Flesh and Blood â—e not corporally present there neither with the Substance nor Signs of the Elements then the Adoring what there is most be the Adoring some things else then Christs body and if Bread only be there and they adore that which is there they must surely adore the Bread it self in the opinion of our Church but I shall afterwards state the Controversie more exactly between us Our Church has here taken notice of the true Issue of it and declared that to be false and that it is both Unfit and Idolatrous too to Worship the Elements upon any account after Consecration and it continued of the same mind and exprest iâ— is particularly and directly in the Canons of 1640. where it sayes a Canon 7. 1640. about placing the Communion Table under this head A Declaration about some Rites and Ceremonis That for the cause of the Idolatry committed in the Mass all Popish Altars were demolish'd so that none can more fully charge them with Idolatry in this point then our Church has done It recommends at the same time but with great Temper and Moderation the religious Gesture of bowing towards the Altar both before and out of the time of Celebration of the Holy Eucharist and in it and in neither a Ib. can 7. 1â—40 Vpon any opinion of a corporal presence of Christ on the Holy Table or in the mystical Elements but only to give outward and bodily as well as inward worship to the Divine Majesty and it commands all Persons to receive the Sacrament Kneeling b Rubric at Communion in a posture of Adoration as the Primitive Church used to do with the greatest Expression of Reverence and Humility tropo proskynesios kai sebasmatos St. Cyrill of Hierusalem speaks c Cyril Hierosolym Catech. Mystag 5. and as I shall shew is the meaning of the greatest Authorities they produce out of the Ancients for Adoration not to but at the Sacrament so far are we from any unbecoming or irreverent usage of that Mystery as Bellarmine d Controv. de Eucharist when he is angry with those who will not Worship it tells them out of Optatus that the Donatists gave it to Dogs and out of Victor Vticencis that the Arriaâ—s trod it under their Feet
that any other speculative scientifical Doctrine doth little or nothing conduce to a happy and blessed life but that on This our everlasting happiness doth depend and that we cannot reject This without certain Ruine Therefore we ought to take head that cunning Men do not deceive us that we do not hearken to the teachers of New Doctrineâ— which have no foundation in the Scripture their pretences to infallibility and demonstration in matters of Faith are false and unreasonable for they assume these great and unwarrantable privileges only to deceive the Ignorant and to obtrude fictitious articles of Faith upon Mankind Wherefore all that now remains is to make some short Reflections upon the Authours of Purgatory and other new-invented Doctrinâ—â— in the Church of Rome First They may be charged for imposing upon our belief things contrary to reason self-inconsistent and incongruous of this I will give but one instance which is their asserting that the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament is changed into the real and substantial Body and Blood of Christ For this is the hardest thing that ever was put upon men in any Religion because they cannot admit it unless their reason be laid aside as no competent Judge in the matter unless also they give the lye to the report of their senses And if they do this how shall we think that GOD made our Faculties true which if he did not do we are absolutely discharged from all duty to him because we have no faculty that can resolve us that this is of GOD for if our reason must not be trusted we must cease to be Men if our senses are not to be believed the chiefest proof of Christians falls to the ground which was the sight of those who saw our Saviour after he was risen from the Dead Now if I may not believe the reason of my â—â—nd in conjunction with three or four of my senses how shâ—ll I know 〈…〉 that any thing is this or that therefore I say that this Doctrine is a gross invention of Men contrary both to reason and sense Secondly The Truths they do acknowledge are made void by subtile distinctions or equivocations as for example their Doctrine of Probability and of directing the intention if a Man can find any Doctour among them that held such an opinion it makes that Doctrine probable and there is nothing so contrary to the rules of Vertue and Conscience but what some Romish Casuistical Doctour hath resolved to be good and practicable just as Tully sayes there is nothing so absurd or ridiculous which some Philosopher or other hath not maintained and asserted So by directing their intention they may declare that which is false and deny that which is true because they intend the credit of their Church and Religion this mere intention shall excuse them from the guilt of downright falshood and lying They are so well practised in equivocations that you cannot confide in any words they speak they are so ambiguous and of such doubtfull meaning in their evasions their Speech shall bear a double sense whereas no Man ought to use wit and parts to impose upon another or to make a Man believe That which he doth not mean For the Christian Law is plain and obvious void of all ambiguity or ensnaring speeches free from all Sophistications and windings of Language never flies to words of a dubious or uncertain signification but plainly declares the truth to Men therefore these practices are contrary to that simplicity and plain heartedness which ought to be in the conversation of every Christian Thirdly They super-add to Religion things altogether unlikely to be true and dishonorable to GOD which will appear in these following particulars I. The use of Images in the Worship of God an Idolatry they are too guilty of otherwise they would never leave out the second Commandment and divide the Tenth into two to conceal iâ— from the People We find better Doctrine then this among the Philosopeers who say God is to be Worshipped by Purity of Mind for this is a rational service and a worshâ—p most suitable to an immaâ—erial Beeing it being the use of that in us which is the highest and noblest of our Faculties II. The veneration of Reliques a very vain and foolâ—sh thing for there can be no certainty at this distance of time what they are and if they were indeed what they are taken for what veneration is or can be due to them For inanimate â—hings are far inâ—eriour to those that have life and for the living to worshâ—p things that are dead is unaccountable and irrational III. The Invocation or worship of Angels and Saints our Fellâ—w creatures particularly of the Virgin Mary to whom they make more Prayers then to our Saviâ—uâ— himself alâ—hâ—ugh her Name be not mentioned in aâ—l the Epâ—stles of the Apostles altâ—ough Christ himself as foreseeing the degeneracy of the Church in this thing did ever restrain all exâ—ravagant imaginations of honour due to her yet the adoration of her is the most considerable part of their Religion But why should a Man so prostâ—ue himself as to Worship those I am sure God would not have me Worship for he would not have us adore any Creature as the Apostle argues Col. 2. 18. It is but a shew of humility to worship Angels who are placed in the highest order of Creatures and if they are not to be Worshipped sure none below them are and God hath declared there is but one supreme self-existent Beeing and one Mediatour between God and Man the Man Jesus Christ IV. They withhold the use of Scripture from the People because they say Knowledge of the very Oracles of God will make them contentious and disobedient to Authority if this be true then the blame of all this must be laid upon our blessed Saviour for revealing such a Doctrine to the World as this is and thereby we should condemn the Apostles for making known such a Doctrine to Men in a Tongue they understand but I suppose the Papists are not willing to lay all the miscarriages of the World upon Christ and his Apostles Although Men may abuse the Knowledge of the Scripture yet the abuse of a thing that is usefull was never accounted a sufficient reason for the taking it away therefore Men are not to be hindred from the Know-of the Scriptures for fear they should become proud or rebellious for this would be as if one should put out a Man's Eyes that he might the better follow him or that he might not loose his way for there is nothing in the whole Doctrine of out blessed Saviour which is unfite for any Man to know but what is plainly designed to promote holiness and the practice of a good life the Romanists do indeed pretend that the unity and peace of the Church cannot be maintained unless the People be kept in ignorance then the mischief will be that for the end of keeping Peace and Unity in the Church
found there as the Churches infallibility is But however that be after all this boast of infallibility a Papist has no more infallible Foundation for his Faith then a Protestant has nor half so much We believe the Articles of the Christian Faith because we find them plainly taught in Scripture and universally received as the sense of Scripture by the Catholick church in the best and purest Ages of it A Papist believes the Church to be Infallible because he thinks he finds it in Scripture though the Catholick church for many Ages never found it there and the greatest part of the Christian church to this day cannot find it there Now if they will but allow that a Protestant though a poor fallible Creature may reason about the sense of Scripture as well as a Papist and that the Evidence of reason is the same to both then we Protestants stand upon as firm ground as the Papists here and are at least as certain of all those Doctrines of Faith which we find in the Scripture and are ready to prove by it as they are of their Churches infallibility but then we have an additional Security that we Expound the Scriptures right which they want and that is the Doctrine and Practice of the Primitive Church which confirms all the Articles of our Faith and Rules of Worship and Discipline but gives not the least intimation that the Pope or Church of Rome was thought infallible by them and if the Primitive Church was ignorant of this which is the best witness of Apostolical Tradition it is most probable that no such thing is contained in Scripture though some mercenary Flatterers of the Pope have endeavoured to perswade the World that they found it there So that we have a greater assurance of all the Articles of our Religion from Scripture and Catholick Tradition then a Papist can have of the Churches Infallibility and yet he can have no greater assurance of any other Doctrines of Religion which he believes upon the Churches Infallibility then he has of Infallibility it self So that in the last Resolution of Faith the Protestant has much the advantage of the Papist for the Protestant resolves his Faith into the Authority of the Scriptures Expounded by the Doctrine and Practice of the Primitive Church the Papist resolves his into the Infallibility of the Church which he finds out only by Expounding Scripture by a private Spirit without the Authority of any church but that whose Authority is under dispute And as the Doctrine of Infallibility is of no use in the last Resolution of Faith so it is wholly useless in disputing with such Hereticks as we are who deny Infallibility for it is a vain thing to attempt to impose any absurd or groundless and uncatholick Doctrines upon us by the Churches infallible Authority who believe there is no such infallible Judge but are resolved to trust our own Eyes and to adhere to Scripture and the Catholick Faith of the Primitive Church in these matters And therefore the great Advocats for the Church of Rome are forced to take the same course in confuting Heresies as they call them that we do They alledge the Authority of Scripture the Authority of Fathers and Councils to justifie their Innovations and here we willingl joyn issue with them and are ready to prove that Scripture and all true Antiquity is on our side and this has been often and unanswerably proved by the learned Patrons of the Reformation But there are some very material things to be observed from hence for our present purpose For either they think this a good way to prove what they intend and to convince Gain-sayers the Authority of Scripture and Primitive Antiquity or they do not If they do not think this a good way to what purpose are there so many Volumes of Controversie written Why do they produce Scripture and Fathers and Councils to justifie the Usâ—â—pations of their Church and those new Additions they have made to the Christian Faith and Worship If this be not a good way to convince a Heretick why do they give themselves and us such an impertinent trouble If this be a good way then we are in a good way already we take that very way for our satisfaction which by their own Confession and Practice is a very proper means for the conviction of Hereticks and to discover the Truth and after the most diligent inquiries we can make we are satisfied that the Truth is on our side If the Authority of Scripture signifie any thing in this matter then it seems Hereticks who reject â—he Authority of an Infallible Judge may understand Scripâ—ure without an Infallible Interpreter by the Exercise of Reason and Judgment in studying of them otherwise why do they pretend to expound Scripture to us and to convince us by Reason and Argument what the true sense of Scripture is If the Authority of the Primitive Church and first Christian Writers be considerable as they acknowledge it is by their appeals to them then at least the present Pope or Church is not the sole infallible Judge of controversies unless they will say that we must not Judge of the Doctrine or Practice of the Primitive Church by ancient records and then Baronius his Annals are worth nothing but by the Judgement and Practice of the present Church The sum is this There is great reason to suspect that the Church of Rome her self does not believe her own Infallibility no more than we Protestants do for if she does she ought not to suffer her Doctors to dispute with Hereticks from any other Topick but her own Authority when they vie Reasons and Arâ—uments with us and dispute from Scripture and Antiquity they appeal from the infallibility of the present church to every mans private Reason and Judgment as much as any Protestant does and if the Articles of the Christian Faith may be establish'd by Scripture and Antiquity without an infallible Judge as they suppose they may be by their frequent attempts to do it this plainly overthrows the necessity of an infallible Judge In a word not to take notice now how weak and groundless this pretence of Infallibility is it is evident that it is a very useless Doctrine for those who believe the churches Infallibility have no greater assurance of their Faith then we have who do not believe it and those who do not believe the churches Infallibility can never be confuted by it So that it can neither establish any mans Faith nor confute any Heresies that is it is of no use at all The Church of England Reverences the Authority of the Primitive Church as the best witness of the Apostolical Faith and practice but yet resolves her Faith at last into the Authority of the Scriptures She receives nothing for an Article of Faith which she does not find plainly enough taught in Scripture but it is a great confirmation of her interpretation of Scripture that the Primitive church owned the