Fathers but as he is a witness no man hath reason to take his word But to the thing in question Whatever we Protestants think or say yet I. S. saith our constant and avowed doctrine meaning of the Church of Rome is that the testimony of Fathers speaking of them properly as such is infallible If this be the avowed doctrine of the Roman Church then I shall prove that one of the avowed doctrines of that Church is false And secondly I shall also prove that many of the most eminent Doctors of the Church are not of that mind and therefore it is not the constant doctrine as indeed amongst them few doctrines are 1. It is false that the Testimony of the Fathers speaking of them properly as such is infallible For God only is true and every man a lyar and since the Fathers never pretended to be assisted by a supernatural miraculous aide or inspired by an infallible spirit and infallibility is so far beyond humane nature and industry that the Fathers may be called Angels much rather than infallible for if they were assisted by an infallible spirit what hinders but that their writings might be Canonical Scriptures And if it be said they were assisted infallibly in some things and not in all it is said to no purpose for unless it be infallibly known where the infallibility resides and what is so certain as it cannot be mistaken every man must tread fearfully for he is sure the Ice is broken in many places and he knows not where it will hold It is certain S. Austin did not think the Fathers before him to be infallible when it is plain that in many doctrines as in the damnation of infants dying Unbaptiz'd and especially in questions occurring in the disputes against the Pelagians about free will and predestination without scruple he rejected the doctrines of his predecessors And when in a question between himself and S. Hierom about S. Peter and the second chapter to the Galatians he was press'd with the authority of six or seven Greek Fathers he roundly answered that he gave no such honour to any writers of books but to the Scriptures only as to think them not to have erred Ep. S. Aug. ad Hierom. quâ— est 19. Inter operâ— Hierom. 97. multiâ—â—liis locis other Authors he read so as to believe them if they were prov'd by Scriptures or probable reason Not because they thought so but because he thought them prov'd And he appeals to S. Hierom whether he were not of the same minde concerning his own works And for that S. Hierom hath given satisfaction to the world in divers places of his own writings * S. Hierom. l. 2. apelog contr Ruff Epist. 62. ad Theoph. Alex Epist. 65 ad Pammach Ocean Epist. 76. ad Tranquil epist. 13. ad Paulinum praefat in lib. de Hebr. nomin I suppose Origen is for his learning to be read as Tertullian Novatus Arnobius Apollinarius and some writers Greek and Latin that we chuse out that which is good and avoid the contrary So that it is evident the Fathers themselves have no conceit of the infallibility of themselves or others the Prophets and Apostles and Evangelists only excepted and therefore if this be an avowed doctrine of the Roman Church there is no oral tradition for it no first and self evident principle to prove it and either the Fathers are deceiv'd in saying they are fallible or they are not If they be deceiv'd in saying so then that sufficiently proves that they can be deceiv'd and therefore that they are not infallible but if they be not deceiv'd in saying that they are fallible then it is certain that they are fallible because they say they are and in saying so are not deceiv'd But then if in this the Fathers are not deceiv'd then the Church of Rome in one of her avowed doctrines is deceiv'd saying otherwise of the Fathers than is true and contrary to what themselves said of themselves But 2. If it be the avowed doctrine of the Church of Rome as I. S. says it is yet I am sure it is not their constant doctrine Certain it is S. Austin was not infallible for he retracted some things he had said and in Gratians time neither S. Austin nor any of the Fathers were esteemed infallible and this appears in nine chapters together of the ninth distinction of Gratians decree Dist. 9. Decret cap. Nolo meis but because this truth was too plain to serve the interest of the following ages the gloss upon cap. Nolo meis tells us plainly that this was to be understood according to those times when the works of S. Austin and of the other holy Fathers were not authentic but now all of them are commanded to be held to the last title and a marginal note upon the gloss says Scripta Sanctorum sunt ad unguem observanda So that here is plain variety and no constant oral tradition from S. Austins time downwards that his and the fathers writings were infallible till Gratians time it was otherwise and after him till the gloss was written It is as Solomon says There is a time for every thing under the Sun There is a time in which the writings of the Fathers are authentic and a time in which they are not But then this is not setled no constant business Now I would fain know whether Gratian spake the sense of the Church of his age or no If no then the Fathers were of one mind and the Church of his age of a contrary and then which of them was infallible But if yea then how comes the present Church to be of another mind now And which of the two ages that contradict each other hath got the ball which of them carries the infallibility Well! however it come to pass yet the truth is I. S. does wrong to his own Church and they never decreed or affirm'd the Fathers to be infallible And therefore the Glossator upon Gratian was an ignorant man and his gloss ridiculous Ecce quales sunt decretorum glossatores quibus tanta fides adhibetur said A. Castor and Duns Scotus gave a good character of them Mittunt remittunt tandem nihil ad propositum But the mistake of this ignorant Glossator is apparent to be upon the account of the words of Gelasius in dist 15. cap. Sancta Rom. Eccl. where when he had reckon'd divers of the Fathers writings which the Church receives he hath these words Item Epistola B. Leonis Papae ad Flavianum Episcopum C. P. destinatum cujus textum aut unum iota si quisquam idiota disputaverit non eam in omnibus venerabiliter acceperit anathema fit Now although this reaches not neer to infallibility but only to a non disputare and a venerabiliter accipere and that by idiots only and therefore can do I. S. no service yet this which Gelasius speaks of S. Leo's Epistle to Flavianus the
or the authority of plain Scriptures but this will be nothing to I. S. his hypothesis for if a part of the Catholic Fathers did deliver the contrary there was no irrefragable Catholic Oral tradition of the Church when so considerable a part of the Church delivered the contrary as their own doctrine which is not to be imagin'd they would have done if the consent of the Church of that age was against it And if we can suppose this case that one part of the Fathers should say this is the doctrine of the Church when another part of the Fathers are of a contrary judgment either they did not say true and then the Fathers testimony speaking as witnesses of the doctrine of the Church of their age is not infallible or if they did say true yet their testimony was not esteemed sufficient because the other Fathers who must needs know it if it was the Catholic doctrine of the Church then do not take it for truth or sufficient And that Maxime which was received in the Council of Trent that a Major part of voices was sufficient for decreeing in a matter of reformation but that a decree of faith could not be made if a considerable part did contradict relies upon the same reason faith is every mans duty and every mans concern and every mans learning and therefore it is not to be supposed that any thing can be an article of faith in which a number of wise and good men are at difference either as Doctors or as witnesses And of this we have a great testimony from Vincentius Lirinensis Common c. 3. In ipsa item Ecclesia magnopere curandum est ut id teneamus quod ubique quod semper quod ab omnibus creditum est hoc est enim verè propriéque Catholicum Not that which a part of the Fathers but that which is said every where always and by all that is truly and properly Chatholic and this says he is greatly to be taken care of in the Catholic Church From all these premisses it will follow that the Dissuasive did or might to very good purpose make use of the Fathers and if I did there or shall in the following Sections make it appear that in such an age of the Ancient Church the doctrines which the Church of Rome at this day imposes on the world as articles of faith were not then accounted articles of faith but either were spoken against or not reckoned in their Canon and Confessions it will follow that either they can make new articles of faith or at least cannot pretend these to be articles of faith upon the stock of Oral Catholic tradition for this cannot be at all if the Catholic Fathers were though Unequally divided in their testimony The rest of I. S. his last Way or Mine is but bragging and indeed this whole Appendix of his is but the dregs of his sure-footing and gives but very little occasion of useful and material discourse But he had formerly promised that he would give an account of My relying on Scripture and here was the place reserved for it but when he comes to it it is nothing at all but a reviling of it calling of it a bare letter Unsens't outward characters Ink thus figur'd in a book but whatsoever it is he calls it my main most fundamental and in a manner my only principle though he according to his usual method of saying what comes next had said before that I had no Principle and that I had many Principles All that he adds afterwards is nothing but the same talk over again concerning the Fathers of which I have given an account I hope full enough and I shall add something more when I come to speak concerning the justification of the grounds of the Protestant and Christian religion Only that I may be out of I. S. his debt I shall make it appear that he and his party are the men that go upon no grounds that in the Church of Rome there is no sure-footing no certain acknowledged rule of faith but while they call for an assent above the nature and necessity of the thing they have no warrant beyond the greatest Uncertainty and cause their people to wander that I may borrow I. S. his expression in the very sphere of contingency THE SECOND PART OF The Dissuasive from Popery The first Book SECTION I. Of the Church shewing that The Church of Rome relies upon no certain foundation for their faith THat the Scriptures are infallibly true though it be acknowledged by the Roman Church yet this is not an infallible rule to them for several reasons 1. Because it is imperfect and insufficient as they say to determine all matters of Faith 2. Because it is not sufficient to determine any that shall be questioned not onely because its authority and truth is to be determin'd by something else that must be before it but also because its sense and meaning must be found out by something after it And not he that writes or speaks but he that expounds it gives the Rule so that Scripture no more is to rule us then matter made the world until something else gives it form and life and motion and operative powers it is but iners massa not so much as a clod of earth And they who speak so much of the obscurity of Scripture of the seeming contradictions in it of the variety of readings and the mysteriousness of its manner of delivery can but little trust that obscure dark intricate and at last imperfect book for a perfect clear Rule But I shall not need to drive them out of this Fort which they so willingly of themselves quit If they did acknowledge Scripture for their Rule all Controversies about this would be at an end and we should all be agreed but because they do not they can claim no title here That which they pretend to be the infallible Judge and the measure of our faith and is to give us our Rule is the Church and she is a rock the pillar and ground of truth and therefore here they fix Now how little assurance they have by this Confidence will appear by many considerations 1. It ought to be known and agreed upon what is meant by this word Church or Ecclesia For it is a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Church cannot be a Rule or Guide if it be not known what you mean when you speak the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said Suidas His body viz. mystical Christ calls his Church Among the Greeks it signifies a Convention or Assembly met together for publick imployment and affairs 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so Aristophanes understands it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Is there not a Convocation or an Assembly called for this Plutus Now by Translation this word is us'd amongst Christians to signifie all them who out of the whole mass of mankind are called and come and are gathered together by the voice and call of God to
the word Internal every new thing shall pass for the word of God so it shall do also under the Roman pretence For not he that makes a Law but he that expounds the Law gives the final measures of Good or Evil. It follows from hence that nothing but the Scripture's sufficiencie can be a sufficient limit to the inundation of evils which may enter from these parties relying upon the same false Principle My Last argugument is from Tradition it self For 7. If we enquire upon what grounds the primitive Church did rely for their whole Religion we shall find they knew none else but the Scriptures Vbi Scriptum was their first inquiry Do the Prophets and the Apostles the Evangelists or the Epistles say so Read it there and then teach it else reject it they call upon their Charges in the words of Christ Search the Scriptures they affirm that the Scriptures are full that they are a perfect Rule that they contain all things necessary to salvation and from hence they confuted all Heresies This I shall clearly prove by abundant testimonies Of which though many of them have been already observ'd by very many learned persons yet because I have added others not so noted and have collected with diligence and care and have rescued them from Elusory answers I have therefore chosen to represent them together hoping they may be of more usefulness than trouble because I have here made a trial whether the Church of Rome be in good earnest or no when she pretends to follow Tradition or how it is that she expects a tradition shall be prov'd For this Doctrine of the Scripture's sufficiency I now shall prove by a full tradition therefore if she believes Tradition let her acknowledge this tradition which is so fully prov'd and if this do not amount to a full probation then it is but reasonable to expect from them that they never obtrude upon us any thing for tradition or any tradition for necessary to be believed till they have proved it such by proofs more and more clear than this Essay concerning the sufficiency and perfection of the Divine Scriptures I begin with S. Irenaeus * Rectissimè quidem scientes quia Scripturae quidem perfectae sunt quippe à verbo Dei Spiritu ejus dictae lib. 2. cap. 47. We know that the Scriptures are perfect for they are spoken by the word of God and by his Spirit Therefore * Lib. 4. c. 66. Legite diligentius id quod ab Apostolis est Evangelium nobis datum legite diligentius Prophetas invenietis Vniversam actionem omnem doctrinam Domini nostri praedicatam in ipsis read diligently the Gospel given unto us by the Apostles and read diligently the Prophets and you shall find every action and the whole doctrine and the whole passion of our Lord preached in them And indeed we have receiv'd the Oeconomy of our salvation by no other but by those by whom the Gospel came to us which truly they then preached but afterwards by the will of God delivered to us in the Scriptures which was to be the pillar and ground to our Faith These are the words of this Saint who was one of the most ancient Fathers of the Church a Greek by birth by his dignity and imployment a Bishop in France and so most likely to know the sense and rule of the Eastern and Western Churches Next to S. Irenaeus Strom. lib. 7. P. 757 edit Parâ—s 1629. we have the Doctrine of S. Clemens of Alexandria in these words He hath lost the being a man of God and of being faithful to the Lord who hath kicked against Tradition Ecclesiastical and hath turned to the opinions of humane Heresies What is this Tradition Ecclesiastical and where is it to be found That follows But he who returning out of Error obeys the Scriptures and hath permitted his life to truth he is of a Man in a manner made a God For the Lord is the principle of our Doctrine who by the Prophets and the Gospel and the blessed Apostles at sundry times and in divers manners leads us from the beginning to the end He that is faithful of himself is worthy of faith in the Voice and Scripture of the Lord which is usually exercis'd through the Lord to the benefit of men for this Scripture we use for the finding out of things this we use as the rule of judging But if it be not enough to speak our opinions absolutely but that we must prove what we say we expect no testimony that is given by men but by the voice of the Lord we prove the Question and this is more worthy of belief than any demonstration or rather it is the only demonstration by which knowledge they who have tasted of the Scriptures alone are faithful Afterwards he tells how the Scriptures are a perfect demonstration of the Faith Perfectly demonstrating out of the Scriptures themselves concerning themselves we speak or perswade demonstratively of the Faith Although even they that go after Heresies do dare to use the Scriptures of the Prophets But first they use not all neither them that are perfect nor as the whole body and contexture of the Prophecy does dictate but choosing out those things which are spoken ambiguously they draw them to their own opinion Then he tells how we shall best use and understand the Scriptures Let every one consider what is agreeable to the Almighty Lord God and what becomes him and in that let him confirm every thing from those things which are demonstrated from the Scriptures out of those and the like Scriptures And he adds that It is the guise of Hereticks when they are overcome by shewing that they oppose Scriptures Yet still they chuse to follow that which to them seems evident rather than that which is spoken of the Lord by the Prophets and by the Gospel and what is prov'd and confirm'd by the testimony of the Apostles and at last concludes a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pag. 755. they become impious because they believe not the Scriptures and a little before this he asks the Hereticks Will they deny or will they grant there is any demonstration I suppose they will all grant there is except those who also deny that there are senses But if there be any demonstration it is necessary to descend to Questions and b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the Scriptures themselves to learn demonstratively how the Heresies are fallen and on the contrary how the most perfect knowledge is in the truth and the ancient Church But again they that are ready to spend their time in the best things will not give over seeking for truth c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 untill they have found the demonstration from the Scriptures themselves And after this adds his advice to Christians To wax old in the Scriptures and thence to seek for demonstrations These things he spoke not only by way of
their interests or their lusts out of faction or as they are mislead and then report it accordingly These and a thousand things more convince us of the easiness of being deceived by Oral tradition of doctrines which can insensibly and unavoidably be chang'd in great differences and mistakes but can never suffer any considering Person to believe that mouth delivery is a better way of keeping records than writing in a book So that now I wonder that I. S. is pleas'd to call traditions certainty the first principle of controversie the pretence of it is indeed the mother and nurse of controversie for in the world there is not any thing more uncertain than the report of mens words How many men have been undone by mistaken words And it is well remembred that in the last unhappy Parliament a Gentleman was called to the Bar for speaking words of truth and honesty 1641. but against the sense of the House The words were spoken in a great assembly before many witnesses curious and malicious observers spoken at that very time and yet when the words were questioned they could not agree what they were and consequently the sense of them might be strangely altered since a word the misplacing of a word an accent a point any ambiguity any mistake might change the sense well upon this accident the Speaker call'd to a Gentleman whom he had observed to write the words and to him they appealed and he told them that which I supposed was said but wholly differing from them that speak it the traditionary part of the Parliament All the rest which I. S. says in his first Way is nothing but a strange and arrogant bragging which as it is inconsistent with the modesty of a Christian so it is an ill sign of a sober and wise conviction for if he had demonstrated the certainty of Oral tradition he needed no such noises they that speak truest make the least stir and when they are at peace in the truth of the thing they are pleas'd it is well and so they leave it to prevail by it's native strengths But after all this noise made by I. S. why is he so fierce to call me to first and self evident principles Does any school of Philosophy do so in their Systems and discourses Are there not in every Science divers praecognita things to be presupposed and believ'd before we can prove any thing Is it reasonable when I reprove any vitious person for dishonouring God and dissuade him from his wicked courses that he should tell me he will not be dissuaded by my fine words but if I will go to principles and first grounds he will hear me and I must first prove what dishonouring is and how God can be dishonoured and whether it be only by fiction of law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and by way of condescension it is so said and yet after all this I must prove that God does care at all whether the Man say such things or no or lastly I must prove that there is a God before he can suffer me to reprove him upon such ungrounded discourses Theology and the Science of the Scriptures supposes divers grounds laid down before and believ'd and therefore it were a wild demand that in every book we should make a Logical systeme or a formal analysts of all our discourses and make a map describing all the whole passage from the first truth to the present affirmative But if I. S. will but consider what the Design of the Dissuasive was and that the purpose of it was to prove that the doctrine of Popery as such is wholly an Innovation neither Catholic nor Apostolic there was no need of coming to any other first grounds but to shew the time when the Roman propositions were not Catholic doctrines and when they began to be esteemed so These things are matters of fact and need no reduction to any other first principles but the credible testimony of men fit to be believed But yet because I will humor I. S. for this once even here also the Dissuasive relies upon a first and self evident principle as any is in Christianity and that is Quod primum verum And therefore if I prove that the Roman doctrines now controverted were not at first but came in afterwards then I have built the Dissuasive aright and now I have pointed it out and have already in part and in the following book have more largely done it therefore I hope I. S. will be as good as his word and yield himself absolutely confuted But because there are some other reasons inclining me to think he will not perform his promise and particularly because of the ill naturedness of his own principles that I may use his own expression in in his postscript yet if I have fail'd in my proofs it is not for want of clear and evident principles but of right deductions from them and therefore he is mistaken in his first way of mining and whether there be any defect in any thing else will be put to trial in the sequel In the mean time the Lion is not so terrible as he is painted The second Way IN the next place I shall try his second mine and believe I shall finde it big with a brutum fulmen and that it can do no hurt but make a noise and scare the boys in the neighbourhood For now though in the first way he blam'd me for relying upon no first and self evident principle in the second he excludes me from all right of using any unless I will take his He says I have no right to alledge Scriptures or Fathers Councils or reason history or instances But why I pray T is done thus All discourse supposes that certain upon which it builds That is his first proposition what he makes of it afterwards we shall see In the mean time he may consider that though all his discourses suppose that certain on which they build because his Geese are Swans and his arguments are demonstrations yet there are many wiser discourses which rely upon probable arguments And so does a moral demonstration and such a great wit of France Mr. Silhon supposed to be his best way of proving the immortality of the soul. Now this is nothing but a coacervation of many probabilities which according to the subject matter as not being capable of any other way of probation amounts to the effect of a demonstration And however this Gentleman looks big upon it the infallibility of the Church of Rome is by the wisest of his own party acknowledged to rely but upon prudential motives and he is a mad man says Artistotle who in some cases in which yet a man may discourse wisely enough looks for any more than arguments of a high probability But what does I. S. think of arguments ad hominem do they suppose that certain which they build upon or if they do not can there be no good discourses made upon them what
posterity and consequently the very ground of I. S. his demonstration is digg'd up for it was very possible the Fathers might teach something that contradicts the present oral tradition of the Church because when they were alive they believed the contradictory But further yet can I S. affirm that by the oral tradition of the present Church we can be infallibly taught which books were written by the Fathers and which not If he can how haps it that the Doctors of his Church are not agreed about very many of them some rejecting that as spurious which others quote as Genuine If he cannot then we may have a title to make use of the Fathers though we did renounce tradition because by tradition certain and infallible they do not know it and then if either they do not know it at all or know it any others ways than by tradition we may know it that way as well as they and therefore have as good a title to make use of them as themselves But the good man proceeds Since pretended instances of traditions failing depend on history and historical certainty cannot be built upon dead characters but on living sense in Mens hearts deliver'd from age to age that those passages are true that is on Tradition it follows that if the way of tradition can fail all history is uncertain and consequently all instances as being matters of fact depending on history To this I answer that it is true that there are many instances in which it is certain that tradition hath fail'd as will appear in the following Section and it is as true that the record of these instances is kept in books which are very Ancient and written by Authors so credible that no man questions the truth of these instances Now I grant that we are told by the words deliver'd by our Forefathers that these books were written by such men but then it may be our Forefathers though they kept the books safe yet knew not what was written in them and if all the contents of the book had been left only to rely upon the living sense in their hearts and the hearts of their posterity we should have had but few books and few instances of the failing of tradition only one great one would have been left that is the losing of almost all that that is now recorded would have been a fatal sign that Traditions fail was the cause of so sad a loss It is well tradition hath help'd us to the dead characters they bear their living sense so within themselves that it is quickly understood when living men come to read them But now I demand of I. S. whether or no historical certainty relies only on certain and indefectible tradition If it does not then a man may be certain enough of the sacred history though there be no certain oral tradition built on living sense in mens hearts delivered from age to age If he does then I must ask whether I. S. does believe Tacitus or that there was such a man as Agricola or that the Senate decreed that Nero should be punish'd more majorum If he does believe these stories and these persons then he must also conclude that there is an Oral indefectible tradition that Tacitus wrote this book and that every thing in that book was written by him and it remains at this day as it was at first and that all this was not convey'd by dead and unfens'd characters but by living sense in our hearts But now it will be very hard for any man to say that there is such an infallible Tradition delivering all that Roman story which we believe to be true No man pretends that there is and therefore 1. History may be relied on without a certain indefectible oral tradition And 2. The tradition that consigns history to after ages may be and is so most commonly nothing but of a fame that such a book was written by such a famous person who liv'd in that age and might know the truth of what he wrote and had no reason to lie but was in all regards a very worthy and a credible person Now here is as much certainty as need to be the thing it self will bear no more and almost all humane affairs are transacted by such an Oeconomy as this and therefore it is certain enough and is so esteemed because it does all it's intentions and loses no advantage and perswades effectually and regularly engages to all those actions and events which history could do if the certainty were much greater For the certainty of persuasion and prevailing upon the greatest parts of mankind may be as great by history wisely and with great probability transmitted as it can be by any imaginary certainty of a tradition that any dreamer can dream of Nay it may be equal to a demonstration I mean as to the certainty of prevailing For a little reason to a little understanding as certainly prevailes as a greater to a deep and inquisitive understanding and mankind does not need demonstrations in any case but where reason is puzled with an aequilibrium and that there be great probabilities hinc inde And therefore in these cases where is a probability on one side and no appearance of reason to the contrary that probability does the work of a demonstration For a reason to believe a thing and no reason to disbelieve it is as proper a way to persuade and to lead to action as that which is demonstrated And this is the case of history and of instances which though they cannot no not by an Oral tradition be so certain as that the thing could not possibly have been otherwise yet when there is no sufficient cause of suspicion of fraud and imposture and great reason from any topic to believe that it is true he is a very fool that will forbear to act upon that account only because it is possible that that instance might have been not true though he have no reason to think it false And yet this foolish sophisme runs mightily along in I. S. his demonstrations he cannot for his life distinguish between credible and infallible Nothing by him can make faith unless it demonstrate that is nothing can make faith but that which destroys it by turning it into Science His last argument for his second way of mining is so like the other that it is the worse for it Since reasons are fetch'd from the Natures of things and the best nature in what it is abstracting from disease and madness unalterable is the ground of the humane part of Christian tradition and most incomparable strength is supperadded to it as it is Christian by the supernatural assistances of the Holy Ghost It is a wild conceit to think any peice of nature or discourse built on it can be held certain if Tradition especially Christian tradition may be held uncertain In this Jargon for I know not what else to call it there are a pretty company of nothings put
poenitentiam fuerint expurgati do return to God Here then are two senses of the word Church God's sense and Man's sense The sense of Religion and the sense of Government common rites and spiritual union II. Having now laid this foundation that none but the true servants of Christ make the true Church of Christ and have title to the promises of Christ and particularly of the Spirit of truth and having observ'd that the Roman Church relies upon the Church under another notion and definition the next inquiry is to be What certainty there is of finding truth in this Church and in what sense and meaning it is that in the Church of God we shall be sure to find it Of the Church in the first sense 1 Tim. 3. 15 â—6 S. Paul affirms it is the pillar and ground of truth He spake it of the Church of Ephesus or the Holy Catholick Church over the world for there is the same reason of one and all if it be as S. Paul calls it Ecclesia Dei vivi if it be united to the head Christ Jesus every Church is as much the pillar and ground of truth as all the Church which that we may understand rightly we are to consider that what is commonly called the Church is but Domus Ecclesiae verae as the Ecclesia vera is Domus Dei it is the School of Piety the place of institution and discipline Good and bad dwell here but God onely and his Spirit dwells with the good They are all taught in the Church but the good onely are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 taught by God by an infallible Spirit that is by a Spirit which neither can deceive nor be deceived and therefore by him the good and they onely are lead into all saving truth and these are the men that preserve the truth in holiness without this society the truth would be hidden and held in Unrighteousness so that all good men all particular Congregations of good men who upon the foundation Christ Jesus build the superstructure of a holy life are the pillar and ground of truth that is they support and defend the truth they follow and adorn the truth which truth would in a little time be suppress'd or obscur'd or varied or conceal'd and mis-interpreted if the wicked onely had it in their conduct That is Amongst good men we are most like to find the ways of peace and truth all saving truth and the proper spiritual advantages and loveliness of truth Now then this does no more relate to all Churches then to every Church God will no more leave or forsake any one of his faithful servants then he will forsake all the world And therefore here the Notion of Catholick is of no use for the Church is the Communion of Saints where-ever it be or may be and that this Church is Catholick it does not mean by any distinct existence but by comprehension and actual and potential inclosure of all Communions of holy people in the unity of the spirit and in the band of peace that is both externally and internally Externally means the common use of the Symbol and Sacraments for they are the band of peace but the unity of the Spirit is the peculiar of the Saints and is the internal confederation and conjunction of the members of Christs body in themselves and to their head And by the Energy of this state where-ever it happens to be all the blessings of the Spirit are entail'd every man hath his share in it he shall never be left or forsaken and the Spirit of God will never depart from him as long as he remains in and is of the Communion of Saints But this promise is made to him onely as he is part of this Communion that is of the body of Christ Membrum divulsum if a limb be cut off from the union of the body it dies No man belongs to God but he that is of this Communion but therefore the greater the Communion is the more abundance of the Spirit they shall receive as there is more wisdom in many wise men than in a few and since every single Church or Convention receives it in the vertue of the whole Church that is in conjunction with the body of Christ it is the whole body to whom this appellative belongs that she is the pillar and ground of truth But as every member receives life and nourishment and is alive and is defended and provided for by the head and stomach as truly and really as the whole body so it is in the Church every member preserves the saving truth and every member lives unto God and so long as they do so they shall never be forsaken by the Spirit of God and this is to every man as really as to every Church and therefore every good man hath his share in this appellative Apud Euseb. Eccles. hist. lib. 5. c. 1. and the Saints of Vienna and Lyons called Attalus the Martyr a pillar and ground of the Churches and truly he seems to have been a man that was fully grounded in the truth one that hath built his house upon a rock one with whom truth dwels to whom Christ the fountain of truth will come and dwell with him for he hath built upon the foundation Christ Jesus being the chief corner-stone and thus Attalus was a pillar one upon whose strength others were made more confident bold and firm in their perswasion he was one of the Pillars that helped to * Puâ—o quod convenienter hi qui Episcopaâ—um benè administrant in Ecclesiâ Trabes dici possunt quibus sustentatur tegitur omne aedificiâ—m Origen homil in Cantica support the Christian faith and Church and yet no man supposes that Attalus was infallible but so it is in the case of every particular Church as really as of the Catholick that is as to all Churches for that is the meaning of the word Catholick not that it signifies a distinct being from a particular Church and if taken abstractly nothing is effected by the word but if taken distributively then it is useful and material for it signifies that in every Congregation where two or three are gathered in the name of Christ God is in the midst of them with his blessing and with his Spirit it is so in all the Churches of the Saints and in all of them as long as they remain such the truth and faith is certainly preserv'd But then that in the Apostolical Creed the Church is recommended under the notion of Catholick it is of great use and excellent mysterie for by it we understand that in all ages there is and in all places there may be a Church or Collection of true Christians and this Catholick Church cannot fail that is all particular Churches shall not fail for still it is to be observed there is no Church Catholick really distinct from all particular Churches and therefore there is no promise made to a Church in the
things we cannot certainly know that the Church of Rome is the true Catholick Church how shall the poor Roman Catholick be at rest in his inquiry Here is in all this nothing but uncertainty of truth or certainty of error And what is needful to be added more I might tire my self and my Reader if I should enumerate all that were very considerable in this inquiry I shall not therefore insist upon their uncertainties in their great and considerable Questions about the number of the Sacraments which to be Seven is with them an Article of Faith and yet since there is not amongst them any authentick definition of a Sacrament and it is not nor cannot be a matter of Faith to tell what is the form of a Sacrament therefore it is impossible it should be a matter of Faith to tell how many they are for in this case they cannot tell the number unless they know for what reason they are to be accounted so The Fathers and School-men differ greatly in the definition of a Sacrament and consequently in the numbring of them S. Cyprian and S. Bernard reckon washing the Disciples feet to be a Sacrament and S. Austin called omnem ritunt cultus Divini a Sacrament and otherwhile he says there are but two and the Schoolmen dispute whether or no a Sacrament can be defin'd And by the Council of Trent Clandestine Marriages are said to be a Sacrament and yet that the Church always detested them which indeed might very well be for the blessed Eucharist is a Sacrament but yet private Masses and Communions the Ancient Church always did detest except in the cases of necessity But then when at Trent they declar'd them to be Nullities it would be very hard to prove them to be Sacraments All the whole affair in their Sacrament of Order is a body of contingent propositions They cannot agree where the Apostles receiv'd their several Orders by what form of words and whether at one time or by parts and in the Institution of the Lord's Supper the same words by which some of them say they were made Priests they generally expound them to signifie a duty of the Laity as well as the Clergy Hoc facite which signifies one thing to the Priest and another to the People and yet there is no mark of difference They cannot agree where or by whom extreme Unction was instituted They cannot tell whether any Wafer be actually transubstantiated because they never can know by Divine Faith whether the supposed Priest be a real Priest or had right intention and yet they certainly do worship it in the midst of all Uncertainties But I will add nothing more but this what Wonder is it if all things in the Church of Rome be Uncertain when they cannot dare not trust their reason or their senses in the wonderful invention of Transubstantiation and when many of their wisest Doctors profess that their pretended infallibility does finally rely upon prudential motives I conclude this therefore with the words of S. Austin Remotis ergo omnibus talibus De Vnit. Eccles cap. 16. c. All things therefore being remov'd let them demonstrate their Church if they can not in the Sermons and Rumors of the Africans Romans not in the Councils of their Bishops not in the Letters of any disputers not in signs and deceitful Miracles because against these things we are warned and prepar'd by the word of the Lord But in the praescript of the Law of the Prophets of the Psalms of the Evangelists and all the Canonical authorities of the Holy Books And that 's my next undertaking to show the firmness of the foundation and the Great Principle of the Religion of the Church of England and Ireland even the Holy Scriptures SECTION II. Of the sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures to Salvation which is the great foundation and ground of the Protestant Religion THis question is between the Church of Rome and the Church of England and therefore it supposes that it is amongst them who believe the Scriptures to be the Word of God The Old and New Testament are agreed upon to be the word of God and that they are so is deliver'd to us by the current descending testimony of all ages of Christianity and they who thus are first lead into this belief find upon trial great after-proofs by arguments both external and internal and such as cause a perfect adhesion to this truth that they are Gods Word an adhesion I say so perfect as excludes all manner of practical doubting Now then amongst us so perswaded the Question is Whether or no the Scriptures be a sufficient rule of our faith and contain in them all things necessary to salvation or Is there any other word of God besides the Scriptures which delivers any points of faith or doctrines of life necessary to salvation This was the state of the Question till yesterday And although the Church of Rome affirm'd Tradition to be a part of the object of faith and that without the addition of doctrine and practises deliver'd by tradition the Scriptures were not a perfect rule but together with tradition they are yet now two or three Gentlemen have got upon the Coach-wheel and have raised a cloud of dust enough to put out the eyes even of their own party Vid. hist. â—oncil Trident. sub Paul 3. A. D. 1546. making them not to see what till now all their Seers told them and Tradition is not onely a suppletory to the deficiencies of Scripture but it is now the onely record of faith But because this is too bold and impossible an attempt and hath lately been sufficiently reprov'd by some learned persons of our Church I shall therefore not trouble my self with such a frontless errour and illusion but speak that truth which by justifying the Scripture's fulness and perfection will overthrow the doctrine of the Roman Church denying it and ex abundanti cast down this new mud-wall thrown into a dirty heap by M. W. and his under-dawber M. S. who with great pleasure behold and wonder at their own work and call it a Marble Building 1. That the Scripture is a full and sufficient rule to Christians in faith and manners a full and perfect Declaration of the will of God is therefore certain because we have no other For if we consider the grounds upon which all Christians believe the Scriptures to be the word of God the same grounds prove that nothing else is These indeed have a Testimony that is credible as any thing that makes faith to men The universal testimony of all Christians In respect of which S. Austin said Evangelio non crederem c. I should not believe the Gospel if the Authority of the Church that is of the universal Church did not move me The Apostles at first own'd these Writings the Churches receiv'd them they transmitted them to their posterity they grounded their faith upon them they proved their propositions by them by them
who having this warning from the very persons whence the mistake comes will yet swallow the hook deserve to live upon air and fancy and to chew deceit But this Topick of pretended Tradition is the most fallible thing in the world for it is discover'd of some things that are called Apostolical tradition that they had their original of being so esteemed upon the authority and reputation of one man Some I say have been so discover'd Papias was the Author of the Millenary opinion which prevailed for about three whole ages and that so Universally that Justin Martyr said it was believ'd by all that were perfectly Orthodox and yet it recurres to him onely as the fountain of the Tradition But of this I shall say no more because this instance hath been by others examin'd and clear'd The assumption of the Virgin Mary is esteem'd a Tradition Apostolical but it can derive no higher then S. Austin In serm de Assumptione whose doctrine alone brought into the Church the veneration of the Assumption which S. Hierom yet durst not be confident of But the Tradition of keeping Easter the fourteen day of the Moon deriv'd onely from S. John Salmeron tract 51. in Rom. 5. p. 468 in marg and the Asâ—atick Bishops but the other from S. Peter and S. Paul prevail'd though it had no greater authority But the Communicating of Infants prevail'd for many ages in the West S. Hierom. dial adv Lucifer and to this day in the East and went for an Apostolical Tradition but the fortune of it is chang'd and it now passes for an errour and S. Hierom said It was an Apostolical Tradition that a Priest should never baptize without Chrism but of this we have scarce any testimony but his own But besides this there was in the beginning of Christianity some Apocryphal books of these Origen gave great caution Tract 26. in Matth. and because the falsity of these every good man could not discover therefore he charges them that they should offer to prove no Opinion from any books but from the Canonical Scriptures as I have already quoted him but these were very busie in reporting traditions The book of Hermes seduc'd S. Clemens of Alexandria into a belief that the Apopostles preach'd to them that died Infidels and then rais'd them to life and the Apocryphal books under the title of Peter and Paul make him believe that the Greeks were sav'd by their Philosophy and the Gospel of Nicodemus so far as yet appears was author of the pretended tradition of the signing with the Sign of the Cross at every motion of the body and led Tertullian and S. Basil and in consequence the Churches of succeeding ages into the practise of it A little thing will draw on a willing mind and nothing is so credulous as piety and timerous Religion and nothing was more fearful to displease God and curious to please him than the Primitive Christians and every thing that would invite them to what they thought pious was sure to prevail and how many such pretences might enter in at this wide door every man can easily observe Add to this that the world is not agreed about the competency of the testimony or what is sufficient to prove tradition to be Apostolical Some require and allow only the testimony of the present Catholick Church to prove a Tradition which way if it were sufficient then it is certain that many things which the primitive Fathers and Churches esteem'd tradition would be found not to be such because as appears in divers instances above reckon'd they admitted many traditions which the present Church rejects 2. If this were the way then truth were as variable as time and there could be no degrees of credibility in testimony but still the present were to carry it that is every age were to believe themselves and no body else And the reason of these things is this because some things have in some ages been universally receiv'd in others universally rejected I instance in the state of Saints departed which once was the opinion of some whole ages and now we know in what ages it is esteemed an error 3. The Communicating Infants before instanc'd in was the practise of the Church for 600 years together Maldonat in 6. Joh. 53. videetiam Espéncaeuâ— de adorat Eucharist l. 2. c. 12. Now all that while there was no Apostolical tradition against this doctrine and practice or at least none known for if there had these Ages would not have admitted this doctrine But if there were no tradition against it at that time there is none now And indeed the Testimony of the present Church cannot be useful in the Question of Tradition if ever there was any age or number of orthodox and learned men that were against it only in a negative way it can be pretended that is if there was no doctrine or practice or report ever to the contrary then they that have a mind to it may suppose or hope it was Apostolical or at least they cannot be sure that it was not But this way can never be useful in the Questions of Christendom because in them there is Father against Son and Son against Father Greeks against Latin and their minds differ as far as East and West and therefore it cannot be in our late Questions that there was never any thing said to the contrary but if there was then the testimony of the present Church is not sufficient to prove the tradition to be Catholick and Apostolick 4. If the testimony of the present Church were a sure record of Tradition Apostolical then it is because the present Church is infallible but for that there is neither Scripture nor Tradition or if there were for its infallibility in matter of faith yet there is none for its infallibility in matter of fact and such is the Tradition concerning which the Question only is Whether such a thing was actually taught by an Apostle and transmitted down by the hand of uninterrupted succession of Sees and Churches Antiquissimum quodque verissimum We know the fountains were pure and the current by how much the nearer it is to the spring it is the less likely to be corrupted And therefore it is a beginning at the wrong end to say The present Church believes this therefore so did the primitive but let it be shewed that the primitive did believe this for else it is Out-facing of an Opponent as if he ought to be aasham'd to question whether you have done well or no. For if that question may be ask'd it must be submitted to trial and it must be answer'd and the holding the opinion will not justifie the holding it that must be done by something else therefore the sampler and the sampled must be compar'd together and it will be an ill excuse if a servant who delivers a spotted garment to his Lord and tells him Thus it was deliver'd to me for thus you see
wills some are scarce worth the remembring and are of an obsolete and worn-out authority Now if these men say true then they prove a tradition or else nothing will prove it but a consent absolutely Universal which is not to be had For on the other side They that speak against the immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin particularly Cardinal Cajetan bring as he says the irrefragable testimony of fifteen Fathers against it others bring no less then two hundred and Bandellus brings in almost three hundred and that will go a great way to prove a Tradition But that this also is not sufficient see what the other side say to this They say that Scotus and Holcot and Vbertinusde Casalis and the old Definition of the University of Paris and S. Ambrose and S. Augustine are brought in falsely or violently and if they were not yet they say it is an illiteral disputation and not far from Sophistry to proceed in this way of arguing For it happens sometimes that a multitude of Opiners proceeds onely from one famous Doctor and that when the Donatists did glory in the multitude of Authors S. Austin answer'd that it was a sign the cause wanted truth when it endeavour'd to relie alone upon the authority of many and that it was not fit to relate the sentiment of S. Bernard Bonaventure Thomas and other Devotes of the Blessed Virgin as if they were most likely to know her priviledges and therefore would not have denied this of Immaculate Conception if it had been her due For she hath many devout servants the world knows not of and Elisha though he had the spirit of Elias doubled upon him yet said Dominus celavit à me non indicavit mihi and when Elias complain'd he was left alone God said he had 7000 more And the Apostles did not know all things and S. Peter walk'd not according to the truth of the Gospel and S. Cyprian err'd in the point of rebaptizing hereticks For God hath not given all things unto all persons that every age may have proper truths of its own which the former age knew not Thus Salmeron discourses and this is the way of many others more eminent who make use of authority and antiquity when it serves their turn and when it does not it is of no use and of no value But if these things be thus then how shall Tradition be prov'd if the little remnant of the Dominican party which are against the Immaculate Conception should chance to be brought off from their opinion as if all the rest of the other Orders and many of this be already it is no hard thing to conjecture that the rest may and that the whole Church as they will then call it be of one mind shall it then be reasonable to conclude that then this doctrine was and is an Apostolical Tradition when as yet we know and dare say it is not That 's the case and that 's the new doctrine but how impossible it is to be true and how little reason there is in it is now too apparent I see that Vowing to Saints is now at Rome accounted an Apostolical doctrine but with what confidence can any Jesuite tell me that it is so when by the Confession of their chief parties it came in later than the fountains of Apostolical Doctrines De cultu S S. lib. 3. c. 9. Sect. Praetereà When the Scriptures were written the use of vowing to Saints was not begun saith Bellarmine and Cardinal * Contre le Roy Jaques Perron confesses that in the Authors more neer to the Apostolical age no footsteps of this custom can be found Where then is the Tradition Apostolical or can the affirmation of the present Church make it so To make a new thing is easie but no man can make an old thing The consequence of these things is this All the doctrines of faith and good life are contain'd and express'd in the plain places of Scripture and besides it there are and there can be no Articles of faith and therefore they who introduce other articles and upon other principles introduce a faith unknown to the Apostles and the Fathers of the Primitive Church And that the Church of Rome does this I shall manifest in the following discourses SECTION IV. There is nothing of necessity to be believ'd which the Apostolical Churches did not believe IN the first Part of the Dissuasive it was said that the two Testaments are the Fountains of Faith and whatsoever viz. as belonging to the faith came in after these foris est is to be cast out it belongs not to Christ and now I suppose what was then said is fully verified And the Church of Rome obtruding many propositions upon the belief of the Church which are not in Scripture and of which they can never shew any Universal or Apostolical Tradition urging those upon pain of Damnation imposing an absolute necessity of believing such points which were either denyed by the Primitive Church or were counted but indifferent and matters of opinion hath disordered the Christian Religion and made it to day a new thing and unlike the great and glorious Founder of it who is the same yesterday and to day and for ever The charge here then is double they have made new Necessities and they have made new Articles I chuse to speak first of their tyrannical Manner of imposing their Articles viz. every thing under pain of damnation The other of the new Matter is the subject of the following Sections First then I alledge that the primitive Church being taught by Scripture and the examples Apostolical affirm'd but few things to be necessary to salvation They believed the whole Scriptures every thing they had learn'd there they equally believ'd but because every thing was not of equal necessity to be believ'd they did not equally learn and teach all that was in Scripture But the Apostles say some othes say that immediately after them the Church did agree upon a Creed a Symbol of Articles which were in the whole the foundation of Faith the ground of the Christian hope and that upon which charity or good life was to be built There were in Scripture many Creeds the Gentiles Creed Matth. 16. 16. Martha's Creed the Eunuch's Creed S. Peter's Creed 1 Joh. 4. 2. 15. S. Paul's Creed To believe that God is and that he is the rewarder of them that seek him diligently To believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of the living God Joh. 20. 31. 11. 27. that Jesus is come in the flesh Hebr. 11. 6. 69. that he rose again from the dead these Confessions were the occasions of admirable effects by the first the Gentiles come to God by the following Matth. 16. 17. blessedness is declar'd salvation is promis'd to him that believes and to him that confesses this God will come and dwell in him and he shall dwell in God and this belief
the See of Rome It is commanded to be left out and in illius loco inseratur si placet sequens historia Index Beig p. 161. Impres A. D. 1611. Hanoviae and then there is made a formal story not consonant to the mind of the Historian And the same Lewis of Bavaria publish'd a smart answer to the Bull of P. John 22. an information of the nullity of the Popes proceedings against him Cantellarius Bavariae egregiè vindicavit principis sui memoriam à Bzâ—vianis impostu is but the records and monuments of these things they tear out by their Expurgatory Tables lest we of latter ages should understand how the Popes of Rome invaded the rights of Princes and by new doctrines and occasions chang'd the face the body the innocence and the soul of Christian Religion The whole Apology of the Emperour Henry the fourth and the Epistles of Prince Frederick the second they pull out of the fift Tome of the Writers of the Germane affairs In vitâ Julii Agric. Neque in ipsos modò Authores sed in libros quoque eorum saevitum that I may use the words of Tacitus complaining delegato Triumviris Ministerio ut Monumenta clarissimorum ingeniorum in comitio ac foro urerentur scilicet illo igne vocem populi Rom. libertatem Senatûs conscientiam generis humani aboleri arbitrabantur expulsis insuper sapientiae professoribus atque omni bonâ arte in exilium actâ ne quid usquam honestum occurreret For thus they not onely destroy the liberty of the Church and the names of the honourable and the Sentences of the wise but even hope to prevail upon the consciences of all mankind and the History of the World that nothing may be remembred by which themselves may be reprov'd But this is not agreeable to the simplicity and ingenuity of the Christian Religion Non tali auxilio nec defensoribus istis Christus eget But what Arnobius said to the heathen Lib. 3. adv gentes in their violent and crafty arts to suppress of growth of Christianity may be a good admonition to these Artists of the Inquisition Intercipere scripta publicatam velle submergere lectionem non est Deum defendere sed veritatis testificationem timere One thing more I am to adde here that they are so infinitely insecure in their errours and so unsatisfied with the learning of the world and they find it so impossible to resist the frequent and publick testimonies of truth or indeed rather they so grow in errour and so often change their propositions that they neither agree at one time nor does one time agree with another in their Purgations that a Saint to day may be a common person to morrow and that which is an allowed doctrine now next year may be heretical or temerarious or dangerous The Speculum Oculare of Johannes Capnio was approv'd by Pope Leo the tenth It was afterwards rejected by Pope Paul the fourth and him the Council of Trent following and rejecting the sentence of Pope Leo did also condemn it and the Inquisitors to whom the making of the Index was committed by Paul the fourth caus'd it to be burnt but afterwards the Censors of Doway permit the book and so it is good again What uncertainty can be greater to consciences than what the ignorance or faction of these men cause Here is Pope against Pope a Council against the Pope and the Monks Inquisitors of Doway against both Pope and Council and what can be the end of these things When the Quirogian Index came forth a man would think there had been an end of so much as was there purg'd and certain it is they were cautious enough and they purg'd all they thought deserv'd it Vide Praefaticnem ad Lectorem in Ind. Sandov but yet when they of Salamanca published the Bible of Robert Stephens and strictly had observ'd the Rules of Cardinal Quirago Ita ut in contextu pauca in Annotationibus plurima omiserint yet other Inquisitors being wiser by a new light did so blot and raze and scratch out many things more that the Bible which was a very fair one in A. D. 1584. came forth exceedingly defac'd and spoiled in the year 1586. I need not observe That in all the Expurgatory Indices you shall not find Gasper Schioppius or the Jesuites censur'd nor Baronius although he declared the Kingdom of Sicily to belong to the Pope and not to the King of Spain but if any thing escape which lessens the Popes Omnipotence it is their own word then it is sure to fall under the Sponges and the Rasor so that this mystery of iniquity is too evident to be cover'd by the most plausible pretences of any interested advocate But if this be the way to stop all mouths but those that speak the same thing it is no wonder if they boast of unity they might very well do so but that the providence of God which over-rules all events hath by his Almighty power divided them in despite of all their cunning arts to seem to be sons of one mother onely it will be now a much more hard province to tell when their errours first began since they have taken order to cut out the tongues of them that tell us And this they have done to their own Canon-law it self and to the old Glosses in which there were remaining some footsteps of the Ancient and Apostolical Doctrine upon which the craft of the enemy of Mankind Imprimebantur etiam Hanoviae procurantibus Junio Pappâ— 1611. and the arts of interested persons had not quite prevail'd as is largely to be seen in the very Censures themselves upon the Glosses published by the Command of Pope Pius quintus 1580. SECTION VII The Vncharitableness of the Church of Rome in her judging of others 4. THe next thing I charge upon them is That having done these things to propagate their new doctrines and to suppress those which are more Ancient and Catholick they are so implacably angry at all that dissent from them that they not onely kill them where they have power but damn them all as far as their Sentence can prevail If you be a Roman Catholick let your life be what it will their Sacrament of Penance is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it takes away all their sins in a quarter of an hour but if you differ from them even in the least point they have declar'd you are not to be endur'd in this world nor in the world to come Indeed this is one of the inseparable Characters of an Heretick he sets his whole Communion and all his charity upon his article For to be zealous in the Schism that is the Characteristick of a good man that 's his note of Christianity In all the rest he excuses you or tolerates you provided you be a true believer then you are one of the faithful a good man and a precious you are of the Congregation of
are apt to be earnest in their perswasion and over-act the proposition and from being true as he supposes he will think it profitable and if you warm him either with confidence or opposition he quickly tells you It is necessary and as he loves those that think as he does so he is ready to hate them that do not and then secretly from wishing evil to him he is apt to believe evil will come to him and that it is just it should and by this time the Opinion is troublesome and puts other men upon their guard against it and then while passion reigns and reason is modest and patient and talks not loud like a storm Victory is more regarded than Truth and men call God into the party and his judgments are us'd for arguments and the threatnings of the Scripture are snatched up in haste and men throw arrows fire-brands and death and by this time all the world is in an uproar All this and a thousand things more the English Protestants considering deny not their Communion to any Christian who desires it and believes the Apostles Creed and is of the Religion of the four first General Councils they hope well of all that live well they receive into their bosome all true believers of what Church soever and for them that erre they instruct them and then leave them to their liberty to stand or fall before their own Master It was a famous saying of Stephen the Great King of Poland that God had reserved to himself three things 1. To make something out of nothing 2. To know future things and all that shall be hereafter 3. To have the rule over Consciences It is this last we say the Church of Rome does arrogate and invade 1. By imposing Articles as necessary to salvation which God never made so Where hath God said That it is necessary to salvation that every humane Creature should be subject to the Roman Bishop Extrav de Majorit obedien Dicimus definimus pronunciamus absolutè necessarium ad salutem omni humanae Creaturae subesse Romano Pontifici But the Church of Rome says it and by that at one blow cuts off from Heaven all the other Churches of the world Greek Armenian Ethiopian Russian Protestants which is an Act so contrary to charity to the hope and piety of Christians so dishonourable to the Kingdom of Christ so disparaging to the justice to the wisdom and the goodness of God as any thing which can be said Where hath it been said That it shall be a part of Christian Faith To believe that though the Fathers of the Church did Communicate Infants yet they did it without any opinion of necesty And yet the Church of Rome hath determin'd it in one of her General Councils Sess. 1. cap. 4 as a thing Sine Controversiâ Credendum to be believ'd without doubt or dispute It was indeed the first time that this was made a part of the Christian Religion but then let all wise men take heed how they ask the Church of Rome Where was this part of her Religion before the Council of Trent for that 's a secret and that this is a part of their Religion I suppose will not be denied when a General Council hath determin'd it to be a truth without controversie and to be held accordingly Where hath God said that those Churches that differ from the Roman Church in some propositions cannot conferre true Orders nor appoint Ministers of the Gospel of Christ and yet Super totam materiam the Church of Rome is so implacably angry and imperious with the Churches of the Protestants that if any English Priest turn to them they re-ordain him which yet themselves call sacrilegious in case his former Ordination was valid as it is impossible to prove it was not there being neither in Scripture nor Catholick tradition any Laws Order or Rule touching our case in this particular Where hath God said that Penance is a Sacrament or that without confession to a Priest no man can be sav'd If Christ did not institute it how can it be necessary and if he did institute it yet the Church of Rome ought not to say it is therefore necessary for with them an Institution is not a Command though Christ be the Institutor and if Institution be equal to a Commandment how then comes the Sacrament not to be administred in both kinds when it is confessed that in both kinds it was instituted 2. The Church of Rome does so multiply Articles that few of the Laity know the half of them and yet imposes them all under the same necessity and if in any one of them a man make a doubt he hath lost all Faith and had as good be an Infidel for the Churche's Authority being the formal object of Faith that is the only reason why any Article is to be believ'd the reason is the same in all things else and therefore you may no more deny any thing she says than all she says and an Infidel is as sure of Heaven as any Christian is that calls in question any of the innumerable propositions which with her are esteem'd de fide Now if it be considered that some of the Roman doctrines are a state of temptation to all the reason of mankind as the doctrine of Transubstantiation that some are at least of a supicious improbity as worship of Images and of the consecrated Elements and many others some are of a nice and curious nature as the doctrine of Merit of Condignity and Congruity some are perfectly of humane inventions without ground of Scripture or Tradition as the formes of Ordination Absolution c. When men see that some things can never be believ'd heartily and many not understood fully and more not remembred or consider'd perfectly and yet all impos'd upon the same necessity and as good believe nothing as not every thing this way is apt to make men despise all Religion or despair of their own Salvation The Church of Rome hath a remedy for this and by a distinction undertakes to save you harmless you are not tied to believe all with an explicite Faith it suffices that your Faith be implicite or involved in the Faith of the Church that is if you believe that she says true in all things you need inquire no further So that by this means the authority of their Church is made authentick for that is the first and last of the design and you are taught to be sav'd by the Faith of others and a Faith is preached that you have no need ever to look after it a Faith of which you know nothing but it matters not as long as others do but then it is also a Faith which can never be the foundation of a good life for upon ignorance nothing that is good can be built no not so much as a blind obedience for even blindly to obey is built upon something that you are bidden explicitely to believe viz.
the case now for God hath forbidden any such way of passing honour to him by an image of him and he hath forbidden it in the second Commandement and this is confessed by Vasquez * Tom. 3. Comment in 3. part Qu. 25. art 3. disp 94. c. 3. So that upon this account for all the pretence of the same motion to the image and the sampler to pass such a worship to God is no better than the doing as the Heathen did when they worshipped Mercury by throwing stones at him An other authority brought by E. W. for veneration of images Pag. 50. is from Athanasius but himself damns it in the Margent with and without ingenuity for ingenuously saying that he does not affirm it to be the Great Athanasius yet most disingenuously he adds valeat quantum valere potest that is they that will be cosened let them And indeed these Questions and Answers to Antiochus are notoriously spurious for in them are quoted S. Epiphanius and Gregory Nyssen Chrysostom Scala Johannis Maximus and Nicephorus who were after Athanasius and the book is rejected by Delrio Martinus Delrio Vindiciae Areopag c. 14. by Sixtus Senensis and Possevine But with such stuff as this the Roman Doctors are forc'd to build their Babel and E. W. in page 56. quotes the same book against me for worshipping the Cross together with another spurious peice de Cruce passione Domini which Nannius a very learned man of their own and professor at Lovaine rejects as it is to be seen in his Nuncupatory Epistle Yea but S. Chrysostoms Liturgy is very clear for it is said that the Priest turns himself to our Saviours picture and bows his head before the picture and says this prayer These words indeed are very plain but it is not plain that these are S. Chrysostoms words for their are none such in S. Chrysostoms Liturgy in the Editions of it by Claudius de Saintes or Morellus and Claudius Espencaeus acknowledges with great truth and ingenuity that this Liturgy begun and compos'd by S. Chrysostom was enlarged by many things put into it according to the variety of times And it is evidently so because divers persons are there commemorated who liv'd after the death of Chrysostom as Cyrillus Euthymius Sabas and Iohannes Eleemosynarius whereof the last but one liv'd 126. years the last 213. years after S. Chrysostom Now how likely nay how certain it is that this very passage was not put in by S. Chrysostom but is of later interpolation let all the world judge by that known saying of S. Chrysostom Comment◠in Isai. c. 2. T 3. Quid enim est vilius atque humilius homine ante res inanimatas se incurvante saxa venerante What in the world is baser and more abject than to see a man worshipping stones and bowing himself before inanimate things These are his great authorities which are now come to nothing what he hath from them who came after these I shall leave to him to make his best of them for about the time of Gregory some began to worship images and some to break them the latter of which he reproves and the former he condemns what it was afterwards all the world knows But now having clear'd the Question from the trifling arguments of my adversaries I shall observe some things fit to be considered in this matter of images 1. It came at first from a very base and unworthy stock I have already pointed at this but now I shall explain it more fully it came from Simon Magus and his crew Theodoret says that the followers of Simon brought in the worship of images viz. of Simons in the shape of Jupiter De haeres ad qued vult Deum paulò ab initio haeres 1. E. W. pag. 51. and Helena in the figure of Minerva but S. Austin says that Simon Magus himself imagines suam cujusdam meretricis quam sibi sociam scelerum fecerat discipulis suis praebuisse adorandas E. W. upon what confidence I know not says that Theodoret hath nothing like it either under the title de Simone or Carpocrate And he says true but with a shameful purpose to calumniate me and deceive his Reader as if I had quoted a thing that Theodoret said not and therefore the Reader ought not to believe me But since in the Dissuasive Theodoret was only quoted lib. 5. haeret Cum ejus statuam in Jovis figuram construxissent Helenae autem in Minervae speciem eis thura adolebant libabant tanquam Deos adorabant Simonianos seipsos nominantes Theodoret. haeret fab lib. 1. tit Simonis haeresis in fin fabul and no title set down if he had pleased to look to the next title Simonis haeresis where in reason all Simons heresies were to be look'd for he should have found that which I referred to But why E. W. denies S. Austin to have reported that for which he is quoted viz. that Simon Magus brought in some images to be worshipped I cannot conjecture neither do I think himself can tell but the words are plain in the place quoted according to the intention of the Dissuasive But that he may yet seem to lay more load upon me he very learnedly says that Irenaeus in the place quoted by me says not a word of Simon Magus being Author of images and would have his Reader believe that I mistook Simon Magus for Simon Irenaeus Vide Irenae lib. 1. adv haeres c. 23. 24. But the good man I suppose wrote this after supper and could not then read or consider that the testimony of Irenaeus was brought in to no such purpose neither did it relate to any Simon at all but to the Gnostics or Carpocratians who also were very early and very deep in this impiety only they did not worship the pictures of Simon and Selene Vbi suprà haeres 7. but of Iesus and Paul and Homer and Pythagoras as S. Austin testifies of them But that which he remarks in them is this that Marcellina one of their sect worshipped the pictures of Iesus c. adorando incensumque ponendo they did adore them and put incense before them I wish the Church of Rome would leave to do so or acknowledge whose Disciples they are in this thing The same also is said by Epiphanius and that the Carpocratians placed the image of Iesus with the Philosophers of the world collocatasque adorant gentium mysteria perficiunt But I doubt that both Epiphanius and S. Austin who took this story from Irenaeus went farther in the Narrative than Irenaeus for he says only that they placed the images of Christ c. Et has coronant No more and yet even for this for crowning the image of Christ with flowers * Iren. reliquam observationem circa eas similitèr ut gentes faciunt i. e. sicut coeterorum illustrium virorum imaginibus consueverunt facere though they did not so much as is