may the King of France do the same in his as if the Pope should provoke him probably he might and so may all others if they please By which means at length the Bishop of Rome would be confined to his own Diocess and his Spiritual power be shut up in much the same limits with his Temporal But alas what an utter ruin would this be to the Papal dignity and honour How would their treasures be drain'd their glory sullied and their power abated yea even reduced to nothing No wonder therefore if Bellarmine in the Preface to his Books of the Romish Bishop stiles this Doctrine of his Supremacy the very summ or chief point of Christianity Had he said of Popery it had been true enough For 't is plain they look upon this as one of the most weighty articles of their faith Let this be denied our conformity to their Church in all other things will signifie little or nothing As it appears in Henry the Eighths case for though he still retain'd the main Body of Popery yet because he rejected this power of the Pope he was reckoned and treated as an Heretick and Apostate Whereas let this be but own'd and you shall be dispensed with in many other things As our Historians tell us it was offered to Queen Elizabeth that we should have our Service in English Communion in both kinds c. provided she would submit to the Popes authority and own his Supremacy L. This is I perceive so useful an opinion that they have great reason to be zealous in asserting it but it doth so apparently serve their own ends that were it for nothing else I should mightily suspect the truth of it but by the very slender proof they bring either from Scripture or Reason I am sufficiently assured that it is notoriously false T. Good ground you have so to be yet pray consider what mighty stress they lay upon this idle opinion whilst they confine the Catholick Church to those who embrace it and Excommunicate all others as Hereticks and Schismaticks Yea such homage they pay to this their great Master that even in things of an indifferent nature they will rather yield obedience to his commands than to those of their own Prince And that 's plain from this instance amongst others that for a considerable time in Queen Elizabeths days the Papists came to our Churches but after the Pope had sent order to the contrary they generally desisted And I have heard some eminent Papists alledging the Popes Prohibition as the chief reason of their not taking the Oath of Allegiance So certainly true it is that a Papist acting according to the rules of his own Church can be no further a good Subject than the Pope will give him leave Nor has any Doctrine been more destructive of the rights of Princes and the duty of subjects than this of the Popes Supremacy In pursuance of this or for the promoting it has the peace of the world in these latter ages been greatly disturbed Kings and Kingdoms Excommunicated and endeavoured to be destroy'd Yea for the disowning of this according to their mercyless tenents must we poor Protestants be made utterly miserable both in this life and that to come Here we must be condemned to fire and faggot and hereafter to everlasting burnings even because we will not believe the Bishop of Rome to be Christs Vicar on Earth L. For the sake of this I am more apt to suspect the rest of their Popish Doctrines But though the Pope be not Christs Vicar yet is it not too severe to stile him Antichrist for so it seems many of our Writers do at which my Author is very angry and says it is a calumny and a lye and most intollerable stupidity to assert it T. Certainly not greater than to assert his Supremacy But pray what reason does he give for this his anger and his confidence L. He says that Antichrist shall be a Jew a particular man at the end of the world whereas the Popes be successively many of divers Nations and many ages ago T. Whilst he gives you only his bare word for all this there would need no more confutation than a bare denial Nor shall I give you or my self the trouble to search into the Revelation or any other obscure places of Scripture thence to prove the Pope to be Antichrist Only you may call to mind the saying of Pope Gregory even now quoted That he who should take on him the title of Universal Bishop is the forerunner of Antichrist And so far as Pope Gregory's Infallibility may be allow'd they may serve to prove his Successors to be an Antichristian generation of men But without going about positively to define what is meant by Antichrist in the New Testament that which I would chiefly recommend to your serious consideration in this matter is this That though the Bishops of Rome were at first very pious and good men and so generally continued for some ages yet as they grew in wealth they did by degrees strangely degenerate from the virtue and piety of their Predecessors till at length they with the Grandees of the Clergy who are the Governing part of the Popish faction have most apparently set up and pursued a design exactly contrary to that of our blessed Saviour which design of theirs may therefore well enough be stiled Antichristian and so may the abettors of it who have by the most vile and unchristian methods carried on the same To make this manifest in a few words consider that our blessed Saviour hath expresly told us that his Kingdom is not of this world does not consist in riches honours and worldly dignity but his whole business was to promote the glory of God and the salvation of mens souls by bringing us to the love and practice of piety and humility righteousness and mercy purity and sobriety and all true virtue and goodness But now on the contrary he who stiles himself Christs Vicar plainly enough declares that his Kingdom is of this world For what is it they seek after and so earnestly contend for but worldly greatness and power pomp and glory to make all men pay homage and obedience to them And under this pretence of being Vicar of Christ and Successor of St. Peter have the Popes for many ages exalted themselves above all that is called God I mean above all Civil power above Kings and Emperours who are indeed Gods Vicegerents on earth They have set their feet on the necks of Princes and kickt off their Crowns at their pleasure deposed and destroy'd Kings absolved their Subjects from the Allegiance due to them and disposed of their Kingdoms to others so far as they had power For their own secular interests they have often stir'd up Wars amongst Christian Princes yea themselves have maintain'd and prosecuted the same They have excited the people to Civil Wars and Seditions and sometimes even drawn the Son to rebel against his own Father They have set
Apostles assertion Rom. 14. 17. These are such silly trifling injunctions as those of the Pharisees about washing their hands before Dinner and the like and may as justly be rejected without any thing of a wicked will or any contempt of that Authority which God hath set over us L. But does not our own Church lay the same commands upon its members viz. that they abstain from all sorts of Flesh in Lent and at some other times T. No where that I can tell of Our Church indeed appoints times of fasting and abstinence for such good ends as I have before mention'd and these times are to be observed in such manner with respect to our diet as that these ends may best be obtained but neither in any Rubrick Canon or Homily that ever I met with does our Church place any Religion in the bare distinction of Meats as to the kind of them I mean in abstaining from Flesh of Beasts or Birds rather than from the Flesh of Fishes from Butter rather than Oil from Milk and Eggs rather than Wine and Oysters about these things our Church gives no rule that I know of If at such times we use a very strict temperance somewhat more than ordinary and do thereby become more Humble and Charitable more Devout and Religious the Church is satisfied and her design answered and whether we eat a little Flesh or a little Fish she is not at all concerned As to the Laws of the Land about eating Fish rather than Flesh at certain times they were Enacted upon a Civil account not a Religious viz. for the encouragement of Fishing-trade and Navigation for the benefit of Sea-Towns and the like as is exprest in some of the Statutes themselves and most plainly taught in the Homily concerning Fasting But let us hear what yet remains CHAP. XV. Of withholding the Scriptures from the Common-People L. THere is only one thing more which he endeavours to vindicate from the exceptions made against it viz. the forbidding to have the Scriptures in the vulgar language so that the people cannot be admitted to read the same who would be glad as he expresses it to read and understand the last Will and Testament of their Father T. And what can he alledge for this their cruelty to the people so contrary both to Reason and to the very design of Writing the Holy Scriptures as well as to many express commands delivered in those Sacred Writings L. He first says it is not forbidden so the Bible be not corrupted by Sectaries and if the people ask leave of their Superiours to whom it belongs to judge whether they are capable of it T. If by the peoples asking leave he mean their obtaining it he may say very truly though very simply that then they are not forbidden viz. when they have got leave But in the mean time it 's very rare that the people do or dare ask this leave since it 's lookt upon as an ill sign of one inclining to heresie as they call it and to very few by their good will do they grant this liberty not commonly to any but such of whom they have all possible assurance that they are most firmly addicted to their party As to his talk of the Bibles being corrupted by Sectaries so far as it concerns our English Bibles as for others they are able to speak for themselves it is a most false and malicious reproach nor are they able to prove it as hath been sufficiently shewn by the Learned Writers of our Church who have vindicated this our Translation from the frivolous objections which some Romanists have made against it But besides that this is a vile slander it is also a meer pretence as they make use of it to defend their forbidding the people to read our English Bibles For why else do they not more generally permit them to read the Bible of their own Translation their Doway-Bible and Rhemish-Testament They dare not well trust their people even with these notwithstanding all their corrupt glosses in the Margent to make the Text speak in favour of their own opinions at least they give little or no encouragement to the reading of them For you shall seldom find them in the hands or houses of Papists amongst us And though they are forced to give somewhat more liberty to such as live in Protestant-Countries or where there are great numbers of Protestants as in France yet if you go but over into Spain or Italy where the Pope and his Clergy bear more sway there you shall hardly find in a whole Country one Bible in their own language in the hands of any of the people Yea if it should be found it might bring them into danger of the Inquisition and perhaps might cost them their lives Thus severe they were also in England at the beginning of the Reformation and most vehemently opposed the Translation of the Scriptures into English and did all they could to suppress them even sometimes burning the Bibles together with the Martyrs in Queen Maries days being wont to say this was the Book that made all the Hereticks And it was indeed the Book from whence they learned those Truths which Papists as falsely call heresie as the Pharisees did that Christian Doctrine which St. Paul preached L. There is little doubt but that common people of the Romish Church are generally kept from reading the Scripture since I find not that my Author himself does directly deny it nay he rather owns it whilst he goes on to plead that all good things are not good for all some abuse wine though it be good and among Sectaries who will read the Bible some understand it one way some another whence arise daily new heresies For there are many hard passages he adds which are ill understood by people that have little or no learning So St. Peter testifies 2 Pet. 3. and therefore as when there is dispute about any clause in a Will the Will is put into the hands of Proctors Lawyers and Iudges skill'd in the Law so in order to our being sufficiently informed of the Will of our Saviour Christ we must go to Sermons and Catechisms there to be instructed in publick or private as much as we will T. This is their common objection against the peoples reading the Scriptures that they are in danger of mistaking the sense of them and so may fall into errour or heresie But pray consider if this be a sufficient reason for their not reading them might it not have served as well to prevent the first writing of them especially in a language which the common people understood yet thus it was at the first for the Law was given to the Iews in their own language and in the same was the rest of the Old Testament written Thus also the New Testament was written in Greek a language then most generally understood in the world And the Apostles wrote their Epistles to the Churches in this same language which the
in all ages hath acknowledged and walked in But the Church of Rome which may well enough be stiled the Popes little flock hath peculiar Doctrines of its own which she hath added to the common truths of Christianity many of which Doctrines do apparently lead men to the broad way even to loosness of life and manners as hath been already shewn T. There needs nothing more be added to what you say and therefore I shall proceed to his sixth and last question viz. Can you shew me any miracles that ever were wrought in testionony of the truth of your Religion Or that all the miracles which Catholicks shew to have been done in confirmation of their Religion have been false or were wrought be Beelzebub any more than those which Christ did work in his life time L. I do well remember the answer that long since you gave to this the summ of which was that since our Religion is that same holy Christian Religion which was taught by our Blessed Saviour and his Apostles all those miracles which they anciently wrought in confirmation of their Doctrine do at this day confirm ours also which being the same with theirs needs no new miracles for that purpose For by those miracles of theirs besides other weighty arguments we are fully assured that Iesus Christ is the Son of God that he died for our sins and rose again from the dead with the rest of the Creed wherein is briefly comprized the summ of our Belief the chief articles of our Religion And when our first Reformers rejected those Popish errors which had been added to these ancient Christian Doctrines as they needed no extraordinary commission for this their reformation no more did they need any miracles to confirm their commission It was enough that they had authority from God from the Church and from their Prince to preach the truths of the Gospel and to reject all errors contrary thereto and to remove those abuses which in later times had crept into the Church But whilst they only preach'd that same Gospel which had been abundantly confirmed already by mighty signs and wonders they no more needed any new miracles than if such errors and abuses had never been brought in And as to those false Doctrines wherein Popery consists such as the Popes Supremacy Transubstantiation c. we do utterly deny that ever any true miracles were wrought in confirmation of them whatever fine tales their Monks may tell us in their Legends And for any to compare these their lying Legends so full of most ridiculous and prodigious stories with the account that is given of the miracles done by our Saviour and his followers in the New Testament is to be guilty of notorious impudence and blasphemy and plainly tends to promote infidelity and Atheism T. Your censure is very just and your answer solid and satisfactory as are the rest you have given By all which it appears that your Author had little cause to say that they who ask the resolution of these doubts from their Ministers if they have any light of reason will find how much they are deluded For blessed be God I hope many of our people are so well instructed that they will not be imposed upon nor much puzled with such captious Questions as these Especially whilst they seek to their Ministers for a resolution of their doubts by the grace of God they shall be secured from the delusions of Popish Emissaries who go about seeking whom they may deceive CHAP. III. An answer to some Propositions said to be unanswerable by Protestants T. IN the next place I find your Author at his Scholars request furnishing him with some unanswerable Propositions as he vainly stiles them against Protestants Of these he names eight taken as he says from Costerus the Jesuit who therewith if we may believe him put all the ablest Ministers of Germany and the Low-countries to their wits ends Which if it were so one would wonder that there were any Protestant Ministers or people left in those Countries and that they were not all long since driven out of their wits and their Religion into Popery But had they never used those terrible arguments of fire and sword Prisons and Inquisition no body would much fear their pregnant arguments difficult questions or unanswerable Propositions The two former we have already dispatched let us now survey the last in which I am apt to think we shall still find a tedious repetition of many the same things that we have already often heard which if it be so we shall more briefly pass over them L. Probably you will find it so However I think we shall sooner have finished if you please to give the answer your self to these his Propositions which I shall exactly recite to you T. That shall be as you will But I hope you are not moved with his formidable title of Unanswerable Propositions L. I have no reason I am sure if they be like his unanswerable Questions in which there proved little or no difficulty T. Their common way is to make up the want of good Reason with great words and loud noise producing only thin fallacies and empty sophistry whilst they talk big of Infallible Evidence and clear Demonstration But let us hear these dreadful Propositions I beseech you L. His first is this Never since the Apostles times till Luther began his new Doctrine in the year 1517 was any man found in the whole World who did in all things consent with either Lutherans Calvinists Anabaptists or other Sectaries opinions Nor shall ever any of the Sectaries prove the Apostles or Evangelists to have been of the Lutheran Calvinistical or any other new Sect. Whence follows that Luther and the rest have no Faith at all but only a new fancied invention which they adorn with the name of Faith and that they are the men of whom the Scripture in several places affirms that there will come in the latter times false Prophets T. As to Lutherans or Calvinists we own neither one name or other as has been often said nor are we concerned to vindicate any particular opinion of this Man or that though I reckon the Doctrine of both as to the substance of it to be sound and good at least so far as it agrees with that of our Church which only we are obliged to answer for and easily we may though he revile us also as Sectaries since it is no other than the same Christian Doctrine which is contain'd in the Gospel and summ'd up in the Creed and this let him confute if he can or attempt it if he dare And in this Doctrine we are sure both the Apostles of old with the Catholick Church in their Age and in all Ages since do fully consent with us Nor was it any new Doctrine that our Reformers brought in No but whilst they rejected Popish Novelties they retain'd those truths of Christianity which were as old as the first institution of Religion What
means he then by saying that none of the Ancients consent with us in all things In every little oppinion it 's scarce likely there were or ever will be two men in the World that do exactly agree No such agreement I am sure is to be found amongst the Divines of the Roman Church But as sure it is that we agree with the Apostles and Ancient Churches in all things material and substantial in all points of Faith necessary to Salvation For we embrace the same Holy Scriptures and the same Creeds which they did What means he again by saying that the Apostles were not of the Lutheran or Calvinistical Sect What that they were not followers of Luther or Calvin They were not like indeed but it 's enough I hope if Luther and Calvin were followers of the Apostles Thus what if he should say that the Apostles were not of the Church of England Is it not sufficient that our Church embraces the same Faith which the Apostles planted in all places where they came Wherefore we may with great reason conclude contrary to his extravagant and most uncharitable inferences that we have the true Christian Faith in our Church and not any new-fangled invention c. If the Apostles Creed be a Summary of the true Faith I am sure we have it since we do most heartily embrace this Creed and those Holy Scriptures whence it 's taken and therefore we are none of those false Prophets foretold in Scripture For whilst we keep close to God's Word as the rule of our Faith we are safe enough from deserving any such charge But how will they of the Romish Church acquit themselves from it whilst they have brought in many devices of their own to which the Apostles and Primitive Christians were meer strangers and therefore cannot be said to consent with Papists therein Such are their Doctrines of Purgatory Transubstantiation c. Such are their customs of praying in an unknown Tongue having private Masses where the Priest only receives in their publick Assemblies their half-Communions giving only the Bread to the people when they do Communicate c. None of these things were anciently taught or used in the Church and some of them but lately established amongst themselves These therefore we may justly say are new-fangled inventions devised of their own Brain contrary to Holy Scriptures And they who broach and maintain them are in this respect false Teachers and probably some of those who are foretold in Scripture at least they and their false Doctrines are condemned by it and that 's enough for our purpose L. It is so indeed and enough have you said to weaken and refute this his first Proposition If the rest have no more strength they are far from deserving that great title he gives them I shall rehearse the next if you please T. Presently you shall only take notice from what hath been said how plain the Answer is to that captious Question of theirs Where was your Religion before Luther Where was it Even there whereever the Gospel was received whereever the Christian Doctrine was own'd for that is our Religion and nothing but that It was therefore in the Primitive Church that was planted by the Apostles and in the whole Catholick Church in all succeeding Ages Our Religion was both in the East and the West even in the Roman Church it self For we grant they still retain'd the Christian Faith they kept and do still keep the Apostles Creed though they have added several new Articles to it and that especially in their Council of Trent which appear'd not in the World quite so soon as Luther Now the truly Catholick Ancient Christian Faith we receive but their new-coin'd Articles we reject So that before the Reformation our Religion was in their Church as Gold in a heap of Dirt or as one long since exprest it as the pure Flower amongst the Bran or as Corn among Tares And by the Reformation we only wash'd away this Dirt sifted out the Bran and plucked up the Tares But the old Religion the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles remains pure and entire L. But say they where did the Apostles teach that there is no Purgatory no Transubstantiation c Yet thus the Protestants teach and therefore they consent not with the Apostles T. Yes certainly but they do for as I have formerly told you we therefore say there is no Purgatory c. because the Apostles say no such things which be sure they would have done had they been true since they are such weighty and material points as the Church of Rome now accounts them What the Apostles taught that we receive what they taught not we refuse as knowing they were faithful in delivering all that they received of the Lord. Judge then which of us consents most with the Apostles we who receive all their Doctrines but reject what they never taught of they who teach these new Doctrines which neither the Apostles nor any of their first followers ever delivered nor were they for some Hundred years after generally profest so much as in their own Church Yea these Novelties were never directly and formally established as Articles of Faith and made necessary for all men of their Communion to believe till in these latter Ages some of them as I take it not till the very Council of Trent not yet an Hundred and fifty years since which they call a General Council though packt up of Bishops of their own Sect and the major part the Popes own creatures who used all the foul arts imaginable to carry things according to his humour as is plainly to be seen in the History of that Council written by some of their own Church Now in respect of these Articles in which Popery chiefly consists we may with great reason retort the question and demand Where was your Religion before the Council of Trent And were the Apostles of the same opinion with these Trent Fathers Compare their Creeds together and it will easily appear Yea compare that of Trent with any other of the old Creeds such as the Nicene or Constantinopolitan and it will easily appear what additions they have made to the ancient Faith whereas our Church receives those very same Creeds without addition or diminution To conclude this though we readily grant their Popish Errors to have been before our Reformation from them for they could not be cast out before they were brought in yet the great truths of our Religion were taught and received in the Church some Ages before those Errors were ever heard of Our Religion then did not first appear in Luther's days when the Reformation was wrought but is as old as since the time of Christ and his Apostles being nothing else but pure Christianity resormed from the errors and abuses of Popery These things I have already oft mentioned but could not well avoid the repetition of them on occasion of this his first Proposition which by this time you see
read them so do we as plainly see that after Consecration the Bread and Wine still remain in their natural substances and therefore are made the Body and Blood of Christ in a spiritual and mystical sense according to the most common acceptance of such Phrases that relate to Sacraments as was before shewn L. You need add nothing more to clear this matter nor can I imagine what reply they can make except they shall say that we must not in this case trust our senses but exercise of our Faith T. This indeed they do say but with no manner of reason For though God requires the Exercise of our Faith in Believing what he hath revealed though our senses cannot reach to or discern it yet we never read in the whole Book of Scripture that ever he requires men to believe any thing directly contrary to the evidence of their Senses to believe it was dark as midnight when they saw the Sun shining at Noon-day to believe the same Man to lye dead in his Grave whom they saw alive walking before them For at this rate all our Saviours Miracles had been wrought in vain if men must not believe their own eyes as we use to say For we must consider that Almighty God hath so framed our Nature that we are to be directed and guided by our Senses in those matters that properly belong to them Nor can we I think in this present state have more clear and full assurance of any thing than what our Senses when sound and perfect convey to us And therefore I have said our Saviour took this way to give assurance of the truth of his Gospel and of his Resurrection by that satisfaction he gave to the very Senses of Men. Thus St. Iohn when he would give the clearest and fullest evidence of the truth of Christian Doctrine he tells us That which we have heard which we have seen with our eyes which our hands have handled declare we unto you 1 Joh. 1. 1 2 3. Now all this may assure us that those words This is my body are not to be taken in such a sense as would engage us to the belief of Transubstantiation Nay the Word of God it self assures us that they are not since in this Word as I have shewn from many places the Holy Bread in the Sacrament is called Bread after Consecration and therefore are we so to believe it and are to look upon it as his Body Spiritually and Sacramentally and so neither one Text contradicts another nor will our Faith contradict our Senses L. This is easie and intelligible and neither offers violence to the Word of God nor to the Reason of our own Minds T. Yet further let me add if the Senses of all Men throughout the whole world are thus deceived as they must be if Transubstantiation be true then is all certainty of any thing whatever in a manner utterly destroyed How can I tell that I tread upon the Earth that I see the Heavens over my head or the Sun shining in the Firmament In these and all other things which I think that I see or hear my Senses may be imposed upon as well as in the present Case And how then can I be sure that any Revelation was ever made from God to Man Or how could any Man be sure of it though a Voice came to him from Heaven or a Vision appeared to him All this may be but idle fancy and delusion his Hearing and his Sight are not to be trusted Yea let this opinion be admitted and how can we be certain of the truth of that which God hath in his Word revealed For if he deceive me one way why not another The same Holy and True God who hath revealed his Will in Holy Scriptures hath also made another sort of Revelation in the works of Nature He hath given me Senses of Seeing Hearing c. and hath proposed Objects agreeable thereto Now if I believe him to be so Holy and Good that he will not deceive me in his Word why may I not from the same Goodness argue that he will not deceive me in his Works But if he should do it in the latter why may he not in the former also L. They may say this is a particular Case and therefore though our Senses may herein be mistaken yet we have no reason to suspect them at other times T. A particular Case it is indeed and such as nothing like it can be instanced in nor yet any good reason assigned why our Senses may not at any other time be deceived as well as in this matter But strangest of all it is that we have no warning given us in Scripture not to trust our Senses in this particular Case though in all others we may Nor do we find any thing said to take off the prejudice that might arise in mens minds against so strange a Doctrine We hear of no Objections made of old against it by the Enemies of Christianity nor of any Answers given to silence or prevent such Objections Nay on the contrary as I have said when the Capernaites mistook our Saviour's meaning he let them know that his Discourse was to be understood in a spiritual sense Ioh. 6. 63. Thus certainly the Apostles understood it as also those Words This is my body else surely we should have heard of their doubts and objections at least they would have made some further enquiry about the sense and meaning of them Else how comes it to pass that we never find the least mention of this same Doctrine in any of the Apostles Sermons or in the Epistles written to any of the Churches Nay though there was so fair an occasion offered to St. Paul when he discourses about the Lords-Supper 1 Cor. 11. where he tells them that what he had received of the Lord he delivered to them but he is there so far from explaining or asserting the Doctrine of Transubstantiation that he teaches the direct contrary in calling it Bread over and over after Consecration L. Yet I have heard some arguing for it from those words of his that he who eats and drinks unworthily is guilty of the Body and Blood of Christ Vers. 27. Now say they how could this be so hainous a sin if the natural Body and Blood of Christ were not present in the Sacrament T. For that let the Apostles own words decide it for he there tells us that he who eats this Bread and drinks this Cup unworthily is thus guilty So that it is Bread which is eaten and consequently Wine which is drunk by the Receiver But to do this unworthily and irreverently rushing upon it as a common meal not duly considering the great importance and design of this Holy Sacrament as it is a commemoration of Christ's death and a Spiritual Feast upon his Body and Blood this must needs be an hainous Sin being an affront to Christ himself and a profanation of his Sacred Ordinance This is meant by
upon it and by leaving most if not all of it out of many of their Books of devotion written in any vulgar Tongue I suppose lest the Consciences of the people should take check when they see practices so directly contrary to the Divine Precept For the great business of these their Guides seems to be not so much to lead them into Truth as to make them follow with ease where-ever they lead them L. 'T is a wonder why they should thus hazard themselves and the people whilst there appears no plausible pretence for it either from Reason or Scripture nor can I see any advantage they can hope for equal to the hazard they run T. Some pretences they have though very slender ones viz. That their Images make for the honour of Christ and the Saints for the instruction of common people and the raising of their affections Pictures being stiled Lay-mens Books But on the contrary the great God is hereby dishonoured and his Commands disobey'd and consequently our Blessed Saviour is displeased and the Saints themselves disgraced and affronted by such perverse ways of doing them honour And whilst the people have their senses perhaps gratified and their fancies pleased with the beholding and worshipping of rich and beautiful Images their minds this while are corrupted and debased true spiritual devotion is in a manner extinguished their Consciences are defiled and their Souls endangered by such Idolatrous practices L. How great is their crime then who draw them into these snares T. Great it is indeed beyond expression God grant they themselves may in time consider of it how they shall ever be able to answer it when the Blood of Souls shall be required at their hands by him who died to save them And besides the mischief done to those within the Church how many thousands by this practice of theirs are kept out of it For both Turks and Iews look upon those Christians as Idolaters who are guilty of this Image-worship and on that account are prejudiced against Christianity it self Thus do they harden these men in their infidelity whilst they defile themselves and those in their Communion with Idolatry L. Yet after all the Papists take it very hainously to be accused of Idolatry and some amongst our selves think this to be too heavy a charge T. Let them take it as they will and let others mince the matter as they please most certainly they are guilty of violating the Second Commandment and this violation of it by worshipping of Images hath as I have said been heretofore accounted and called Idolatry both by the Ancient Iews and by the Primitive Christians who utterly detested the same And if now a softer name must be devised for it let any man call it as he pleases still it must be looked upon as a gross impiety and a notorious breach of God's Holy Law which is enough to work an abhorrence of it in the minds of all good Christians But I 'le enlarge no further on this subject rather I shall refer you to the elaborate Discourses of that incomparable person Dr. Stillingfleet Dean of St. Pauls where you will find it handled to your full satisfaction Or in the mean time I would recommend to you the Homilies of our Church concerning the peril of Idolatry where you will find this Churches opinion of Image-worship viz. that it is downright Idolatry and there you may learn how far the Ancient Christians in the first and purest Ages of the Church were from this corrupt practice how it was ordained by an ancient Council that nothing painted on the Walls should be worshipped and how one of the Fathers in great displeasure tore a Veil in a Church in which he found a Picture fearing it might be an occasion of worshipping it and wrote earnestly to the Bishop of the place about it There also you have a large account of the rise of this practice in the more corrupt and declining times about Six or Seven hundred years after our Saviour and what opposition was then made to it by the better sort of Christians by what weak Arguments it was defended by what ill arts in some places established what bad effects it produced and how by degrees the people were sunk into all that gross Superstition and Idolatry which had overspread the Roman Church and particularly this Kingdom at the time of the Reformation This with much more to the same purpose you will there find discovered and will see what great reason there was for reforming the Church from this as well as many other corruptions and abuses wherewith we were over-run L. I shall gladly peruse these Homilies when I have opportunity being already very sensible that the worship of Images is a most dangerous and unlawful Custom a meer innovation in the Church and a plain breach of the Second Commandment and therefore well deserves to be branded with the infamous name of Idolatry from which God preserve me T. So it has been reckoned and commonly stiled by our Church and by those of our Divines who were most instrumental in the Reforming it and have been most eminent for the defence of it Good Reason you have therefore stedfastly to resolve against it But let us now proceed to what remains CHAP. XIII Of Praying by Beads L. THE next thing my Author attempts to vindicate is their praying by Beads which serve to number their Pater Nosters and Ave-Maries of which as I perceive by him Sixty three Ave-Maries and Seven Pater-nosters and one Creed make a Bead-roll T. Very like and this number as I take it they call our Ladies Crown and an Hundred and Fifty Ave Maries and Fifteen Pater-nosters makes a Rosary of which there is a kind of Order in their Church called the Confraternity of the Rosary Into this Society all manner of people may be admitted and these as I find in one of their Authors who gives an account of it are obliged to say over the whole Rosary once in a week at least And these Prayers are to be offered up in a certain manner to Almighty God in honour of the Blessed Virgin Now lest this should be two burdensome there is provision made that if they have any lawful impediment they may get another to say their Prayers for them and it shall be accepted They who enter into this Society must solemnly devote themselves to the Honour Love and Service of the Blessed Virgin Even as solemnly as a Man can consecrate himself to the Service of Almighty God our Heavenly Father do they give up themselves to her as the Mother of all Christians For so they say she is to be esteemed because our Saviour said of her to St. Iohn Behold thy Mother To each of these Votaries is given by the Father who admits him a set of Beads which are Blest and Crost and Sprinkled with Holy-Water And most wonderful Priviledges are bestowed by sundry Popes upon those who devoutly recite this Rosary They may gain a
Plenary Indulgence for themselves and may every day release a Soul out of Purgatory which surely they are very uncharitable if they will not do Nay which seems strangest of all even those in Purgatory may be admitted into this fraternity if any particular Friend of theirs on Earth shall desire it and will perform on their behalf what is required and so may they share in the merits of the whole Society Though by the way I wonder that any body should leave a particular Friend in Purgatory when he may so easily deliver him thence as you heard before But I 'le entertain you no longer with this fulsom ridiculous stuff Let us return to your Author and see what he says for this manner of Praying which a Parrot may go near to learn and use it with as much devotion as multitudes of them L. He says that the Ave-Mary is used Sixty three times because the Blessed Virgin Mary lived just so many years T. A wise Reason truly But I wonder where he had so good intelligence Some of her Worshippers it 's like have heard it from her own mouth For heretofore nothing more common than for her to appear to them and talk familiarly with them if we may believe their own Legends which I confess is somewhat hard to do Yet I grant there is as much certainty in the story of her Age as strength in the Argument taken from it that is just none at all Why do they not by this Reason say the Lords-Prayer Thirty three times because our Saviour lived so many years And it might also be asked why but one Lords-Prayer for nine Ave-Maries But waving these things let us hear his pretence for this odd way of Praying by running over the same words so many times together as if they would make up with the number what they want in weight and devotion and then telling them by their Beads as if they were afraid of being someway cheated if they did not keep so exact a reckoning Certainly we have neither precept nor example in Scripture to recommend such a way of worship L. All that he says is that David said his Prayers Seven times a day and our Saviour in the Garden repeated three times the same Prayer He demands therefore whether it be ill to say ones Prayers by number when he has reason so to do T. No surely But when a Man has no reason so to do it 's very vain and absurd And by all that he alledges it seems they have no reason else sure he would have given some For I beseech you where 's the consequence that because David prayed Seven times in a day that is very often therefore it 's a good thing to repeat one and the same Prayer Seventy times seven in a day or at least as often as we well can Or when our Saviour in his Agony doth with great servour and affection offer up his Petition to his Father thrice in the same words which were suitable to his present state is this any thing like the Papists way of running over an Ave-Mary Ten Twenty Thirty times together with a Pater-noster now and then intermixed for variety sake and this very oft in the midst of company without the least shew of devotion and as I take it in the Latine Tongue which few of them understand And which is prettiest of all when they are busie themselves though it be but at sports and pastimes they may then get some idle body patter over these their Prayers for them And I have heard it often reported by those who have conversed much with them that sometimes two of these devout people will play a game at Cards which shall say Prayers for the other at such a time So that it seems they take them for a kind of penance being glad when they are over as a School-boy when he has done his Task And is this like the Devotion of the Holy Psalmist who prayed to God and praised him with all his Heart and Soul and sang praises with understanding and with great affection and delight Or much less is this like to that of our Blessed Saviour who in the days of his flesh offered up Prayers and Supplications with strong cries and tears as we have it Heb. 5. 7. He continued indeed sometimes whole nights in Prayer and his holy Apostles were very constant and frequent in this duty and have enjoyned us to pray continually and in every thing to give thanks But do you find them any where directing us to say over the same words so often in an hour or a day and to make use of a sett of Beads to keep true reckoning Is this a Worshipping of God in Spirit and in Truth Is this like the fervent Prayer of the Righteous which St. Iames tells us is so effectual Is this like the Intercession of Abraham or Moses the Wrestlings of Iacob the earnest Prayer of Elias and other holy men recorded in Scripture Nay so far is it from being agreeable to such examples that it seems plainly contrary to our Saviours command Not to use vain repetitions in praying as if we thought to be heard for our much speaking Matt. 6. 7. L. So it seems truly and nothing can be more weak and impertinent than what my Author talks of saying Five Pater-nosters in honour of our Saviours Five wounds he means I suppose those in his hands and feet and that on his side But what he means by our saying the Lords-Prayer in honour to those wounds I cannot well tell T. Nor can I resolve you He might as well talk of saying it Twelve times in honour of the Twelve Apostles and then Seventy times for the Seventy Disciples and after that as oft as you please in honour of what you have a mind to For they forsooth have a certain peculiar manner of offering up their Prayers to God in honour to other persons and things which I confess I am utterly ignorant of nor do I think they themselves can give a rational account of it Of such blind devotions as these well may Ignorance be accounted the Mother L. But my Author is by no means pleased that this way of praying by Beads should be thought fit only for ideots that cannot read For he says that Kings and their Courts the Pope and his Cardinals make use of Beads who can read better than Sectaries T. There may be some question of that for all his confidence since it 's commonly said that the present Pope though much commended for some other good qualities can scarce read their Latine Service But let them be able to read never so well that will hardly prove all good which they do And if we speak of examples I must confess I had much rather follow our Saviour and his Apostles than the Pope and his Cardinals L. And so had I too But he says they have Books of Devotion as well as Beads that both are good and variety delighteth T. They had
the Iewish Church by the solemn rite of Circumcision and since our Saviour hath no where given the least intimation that this priviledg should be taken from them I can see no reason why the children of Christian Parents may not be solemnly consecrated to God by Baptism and so admitted members of the Christian Church And to omit many other Texts which speak in favour of infants this without any wresting of the words may be fairly drawn from that commission given to the Apostles and their Successors Mat. 28. 19. Go ye therefore and teach or disciple all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost They were to make Disciples of whole Nations which surely comprehends both Parents and Children First the Parents were to be instructed in the Christian Faith and upon their profession of it to be baptized And then they themselves being devoted to God and entred into Covenant with him since Parents have power over their children to dispose of them for their good and to lay engagements on them for that end surely it was lawful for them to devote their children also to God and to enter them into Covenant with him by Baptism thereby laying a strict obligation upon them when they come to years of discretion to perform their part of this holy Covenant if ever they hope for any benefit by it the Parents also being bound to acquaint their children with their duty so soon as they are capable of learning it Thus when any one from among the heathens became a proselyte to the Iews when he himself was circumcised so were his children also Yea learned men tell us that it was also the custom to wash these proselytes in pure water and that very probably our Saviour was pleased to accommodate himself to this same usage of theirs in his instituting of Baptism for the more solemn admission of members into his Church Now as an excellent Writer argues suppose that our Blessed Saviour instead of the word Baptizing should have used that of circumcising and have said Go teach all Nations circumcising them in the name c. would not all men have been apt to think that the same priviledg which the Iews had of admitting their children into Covenant by Circumcision that Christian Parents also should have the like why then may not the same be reasonably argued from the words though Baptism be here named and not Circumcision Very probable it is that the Apostles thus understood it and that they practised accordingly when we read of their Baptizing such and such persons and their housholds as Act. 16. 15 33. amongst whom there might be some children for any thing that can be shewn to the contrary And certain we are that very early in the Christian Church insants were admitted to Baptism and thence hath it continued to this day to be the general custom of all Churches throughout the world And pray take good notice that though our Church allows nothing to be imposed upon our belief or practice as necessary to salvation but what is contain'd in Gods holy Word yet she hath great regard to antiquity to the customs of the truly Catholick Church and the current Doctrine of the Fathers and requires Ministers to have due respect thereto in their Exposition of Scripture And therefore without any contradiction to her self may very well admit the observation of such customs that having so much ground from Scripture are recommended also by the early and general practice of the Christian Church This I say she may very well do but is by no means thereby obliged to receive all the traditions and customs of the Roman Church for many of which nothing can be truly pleaded either from Scripture or antiquity but very much against them from both L. This is very plain and satisfactory Pray let us have his next question T. It is this Can you make it appear to me how your Sectaries can with reason and sufficient ground condemn all the Catholicks that were so many ages before Luther and Calvin for being no better than heathens and convince me that by adhering to you I shall be more secure of my salvation than if I joyn my self to them that have been held time out of mind in most parts of the world for the men that have the true and only saving Religion What answer give you to this L. First I know no body that does thus condemn all Catholicks before Luther and Calvin For as to those Christians in the first ages of the Church who truly deserve the name of Catholicks whether of the Roman Church or any other we are so far from condemning that we admire and applaud them we approve of their Doctrine contain'd in the ancient Creeds and do imbrace and profess it we honour their memory and endeavour to imitate their example But as those of the Roman Church in latter ages whom he means I suppose by his Catholicks though we do not say they are as bad as heathens yet we do truly say that they have very much corrupted Christian Religion by false Doctrines and Superstitious usages and therefore we think it a much safer way to salvation to adhere to the ancient certain truths of Christianity every where received and to worship God in that pure and holy manner which our Blessed Saviour and his Apostles both taught and used than to embrace those additions made by the Roman Church which are no parts of true and saving Religion nor have ever been so accounted by the generality of Christians And though our ancestors might have some excuse from the state of this Church in their days yet we their posterity should be utterly inexcusable if now that our Church has so justly reformed her self from Popish corruptions we should break off from her communion and go over to the Church of Rome that hates to be reformed This were to add the guilt of Schism to that of Superstition T. Your answer is very clear and full and may well enough serve for the solution of his fifth Query which is to the same purpose with the former viz. Can you make evident at least that in your little flock or in Luther and Calvin their guides more holiness and virtue was to be found than in the Catholicks And that it is this little flock of yours not the Catholicks that go the narrow way that leads to life L. To this may easily be answered as you have formerly instructed me that though Luther and Calvin were learned and good men who in their own times and places did much service for the Reformation of Religion yet they never had authority in our Church nor do we own them as our guides The blessed Iesus is the Author of our Religion and after him the holy Apostles were the teachers of it being no other than Christianity it self and consequently the true way to eternal happiness even that narrow way of truth and holiness which the whole flock of Christ
therefore whilst the people take the Flesh under the species of Bread this may very well serve without taking the Wine too But if this be a good reason Why then need the consecrating Priest take the Wine Or why need our Saviour have appointed both Bread and Wine to be made use of in this his Holy Supper Here then you have a plain instance of their practising contrary to the Scripture in so weighty a matter as the Administring the Holy Communion To this may be joyn'd their custom of private Masses or Communions if that be not a contradiction the Priest himself many times receiving alone and none of the people who are present partaking with him contrary to the first institution of this Holy Sacrament and to the very nature and design of it as it is a Communion and contrary also to the practice of the Primitive Church To these may a great many more easily be added of which we have formerly taken notice Such as having their Prayers in an unknown Tongue contrary to the Apostles direction 1 Cor. 14. Their Worshipping of Saints and Angels which is forbidden in all those places that command us to Worship God alone in the name of Jesus Christ our only Mediator and most expresly Col. 2. 18. Rev. 22. 9. Also their Worship of Images and of the Host contrary to the second Commandment And for an instance of their false Doctrines many of which we have often mentioned we need go no further than that palpable one of Transubstantiation which he mentions as agreeable to Scripture that says This is my body But how little these words make for his purpose we have before shewn and that their plain meaning is This is the Sacrament of my Body or the representation and commemoration of it and the way of conveying the benefits that come by it according to the constant use of the like expressions in the matter of Sacraments even as the Paschal Lamb is called the Passover of which it was only a solemn Memorial But that the natural substance of Bread and consequently of Wine remains after Consecration we have proved from the Apostle who again and again calls it so 1 Cor. 11. How then can he say that without ground we separate from the Romish Church Since if there were nothing else to be blamed this alone were sufficient reason to keep out of their Communion since in order to it they require our belief of a Doctrine most apparently false namely that of Transubstantiation and enjoyn a practice founded upon this Doctrine which is notoriously sinful viz. the Worship of the Consecrated Elements as if they were now turned into the substance of Christ's Body and Blood yea into whole Christ both as to his Divine and Humane Nature Now they themselves as you have heard do grant that if there was no such change made by Consecration this Worship would be idolatrous and therefore we being upon good grounds assured that no such change there is do utterly abhor the very thoughts of such Idolatrous worship and do believe our selves bound in Conscience to Almighty God to undergo a Thousand deaths rather than be guilty of it yea though we lived in Popish Countries But besides this we here in England owe no manner of obedience to the Bishop of Rome nor are under any obligation to forsake the Communion of our own Church for that of the Romish but should be guilty of that hainous sin of Schism by so doing as the Papists amongst us are at this day of which more in another place As to what he talks that they who go from their Church can give no reason why they should rather turn to Luther than to the Calvinists c. it concerns not us in the least who neither turn to the one or the other but continue in Communion with our own Church in which we were Baptized and live in obedience to our own Rulers in Church and State whom God hath set over us Nor do I discern by what reason he makes this silly inference nor yet for what purpose But let me hear his next Argument L. It cannot be proved that ever at any time were admitted any Priests that were not first duly consecrated by Bishops Wherefore we rightly infer that all Lutheran Ministers Calvinists or any other Sects not Consecrated according to the old custom of the Holy Church are for both from the name and reality of the Divine Priesthood and so that in their Cene or Supper as they call it they give but a meer piece of Bread as also that they have no power to Absolve from Sins but send away people as entangled and defiled with Sin as they were when they came to them T. As to this Argument we of the Church of England are nothing concerned in it since our Priests receive Ordination from Bishops and therefore have as full authority for the exercise of their Ministerial function as those of any Christian Church in the World Some other Reformed Churches also do embrace Episcopal Government As for such who want it we shall not enter into a dispute concerning the validity of their Orders But this I think we may safely assert that if the people be duly qualified for the Lord's Supper as St. Paul himself calls it 1 Cor. 11. 20. by a firm belief of the Gospel and sincere love and obedience to our Blessed Saviour they shall not want the benefits that are promised to worthy Communicants through any defect or irregularity in the Ordination of their Ministers And if they do truly repent of their sins and forsake them they shall for Christ's sake obtain forgiveness from God though never any Priest should give them Absolution But on the other hand our Writers have shewn that according to the common principle received in the Romish Church That the truth of Sacraments depends upon the intention of the Priest the people cannot be certain at any time that they have true Sacraments no nor whether he be a true Priest that Administers them But I shall trouble you with nothing more on this Argument L. There is no need since it reaches not our Church in the least I shall therefore proceed to the fifth which is this It cannot be found in the whole Holy Scripture that nothing is to be believed but what clearly and expresly is contained written in the same whence follows the ruine and overthrow of the ground-work on which Lutherans Calvinists and other Sectaries rely when they affirm that nothing is to be believed but what is expresly set down in Holy Writ T. I wonder who says so Every thing is to be believed that has sufficient evidence of its truth whether it be in Scripture or not But this we say and this I suppose he means to argue against that nothing is of necessity to be believed in order to Salvation but what is contain'd in Holy Scripture Which in effect is the same as to say that the Holy Scripture contains all necessary
their condition shall be let us leave to the just Judge of all men remembring the Apostles saying Not he who commendeth himself is approved but he whom the Lord commendeth How far the ill education and ignorance of any of them may serve to excuse or lessen their faults it becomes not us to determine But as to our selves we may safely assert that for us to go against the light of Gods Word and our own Consciences in professing their Errors and joyning in their corrupt Worship would be a piece of inexcusable and damnable wickedness Whereas on the other hand we may rest fully satisfied and assured that if we sincerely believe the Holy Gospel which is at this day purely and plainly taught in our Church and live in strict and stedfast obedience to the precepts of it which are dayly inculcated upon us we shall most certainly obtain that Eternal Salvation which in this Gospel is promised to all such obedient Believers Of this we are as sure as that God is true for Heaven and Earth shall sooner fail than one tittle of his Holy Word on which we depend L. Whilst we depend on this Word certainly we shall never be deceived or disappointed But methinks it 's very bold Language and little better than Blasphemy with which my Author concludes his Book when he says that his Roman Catholicks may at the hour of death with confidence use those words of an Ancient Writer O Lord if it be Error which we have believed we are deceived by thee for thou hast confirmed these things to us by such signs and prodigies as could not be done but by thee with more to that purpose T. This can only with truth be spoken concerning the Christian Religion to which God bare witness by mighty Signs and Wonders But to apply it to the false Doctrines of Popery is indeed no better than Blasphemy For neither our Saviour or his Apostles ever taught these Doctrines nor did God ever work a Miracle for the confirming of them L. Surely it would argue more modesty to suspect the weakness of their own judgment and better to examine their Cause rather than to charge God himself with deceiving them if they are deceived T. Very true but you know the Proverb None so bold as those that are blind otherwise certainly they have reason enough to suspect that Cause to be very weak which is supported by no better Arguments than these which your Author hath produced who yet no doubt hath given us the best he could devise of his own head or meet with in their Writers CHAP. V. Of the number of Sacraments with some other things briefly discust and the conclusion of the whole L. SIR I am now come to the end of my little Book and ought therefore to put an end to the trouble I have given you yet before we part will you please to satisfy me in one thing of which I find no mention in my Author T. I shall willingly when I hear what it is L. 'T is concerning the number of Sacraments for Papists charge it as a great defect upon our Church that we have but two whilst they say they have seven T. How little reason there is for this Charge will soon appear if you consider that as to four of these five which the Papists pretend to have more than we though we give them not the name of Sacraments yet we have the things themselves And as to the fifth there is not the least reason that we should receive or they retain it For your fuller satisfaction I shall name them to you and in a few words make good what I have said L. Pray will you please to do it and I shall trouble you with no more questions hereafter T. To the Sacraments of Baptism and the Lords Supper which both we and they receive they do further add Confirmation Holy Orders Marriage Penance and extreme Unction Now as to the name of Sacrament it 's a vain thing to dispute about words till we are agreed of the sense and meaning of them For if by Sacrament they mean any sacred rite or usage that may signify some grace or some good duty or by way of allusion may serve to some good purpose in Religion then instead of Seven they may perhaps reckon Seventeen Sacraments or many more And in this large and looser sense the Ancients commonly made use of the word giving the name of Sacrament to many things relating to Religion which are any way mystical or significant yea frequently they call our Religion it self a Sacrament or Mystery And if they of the Church of Rome will use the word in this large sense and so stile the several things now mentioned Sacraments let them enjoy their liberty I think it 's not worth contending about Only let them not say that we despise the things themselves because we think it not so fit to give them this name For by a Sacrament we understand as it 's exprest in our Church-Catechism an outward sign of an inward spiritual grace given unto us ordained by Christ as a means whereby we receive the same Grace and a pledge to assure us thereof Now in this sense we say that only Baptism and the Lords-Supper are properly to be called Sacraments being ordained by Christ's express command as a way and means for the bestowing of his Grace upon all that duly partake of them These are as it were the Seals of the Covenant of Grace as Divines use to stile them which all Christians if they have opportunity are obliged to make use of For hereby we do in a solemn manner profess our selves to be Christ's Disciples and engage our selves to walk in all holy obedience to his Laws and so make a Covenant with him and upon our sincerity herein we receive Grace from God to enable us for our duty and have an assurance of his favour and of all the blessings that flow from it in and through Jesus Christ. Thus hath our Lord plainly ordain'd that all who believe in him should be Baptized with Water in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost for the profession of our faith in him and for the receiving the remission of our Sins with spiritual Regeneration Thus did he institute the holy Communion commanding all Christians to celebrate the same in remembrance of him for a commemoration of his death till his second coming and hereby we partake of the Body and Blood of Christ for the refreshing and strengthning of our Souls Plainly then you see how these two Sacraments were ordained by Christ himself for the use of all Christians to be as it were the badges of their profession that hereby they might solemnly testify their consent to the Covenant of Grace and at the same time may receive the blessings of this Covenant But now this cannot be said of those other things which the Papists call Sacraments how useful soever any of them may be in other respects For though