consent of the King the Lords Spiritual and Temporal the Approbation of the Universities the determination of the Convocation Thus it was carried on in the reign of his successor Edward 6 th When it was re-established under Queen Elizabeth it was in a regular way by a legal abrogation of those Statutes made in Queen Maryes time and the Revival of the Lawes made by King Edward with Synodical consent All which things are fully and Satisfactorily handled by Sir Roger Twisden and Dr. Heylin after the Re. establishment of the Reformation by Queen Elizabeth there were few or no Recusants known in England for many years as is constantly avouched by our Writers who lived near those times few of the Romish perswasion if at any time they went to Mass refused to be present at our service * Lord Cokes â—barge as Norwich 1606. and when afterwards Pius Quintus by his Bull had forbid those whom he called Catholicks to resort to our Prayers there appeared only few who adhered to the Romish Religion the Popes laboured hard to keep up their party here by founding Seminaries for the instructing of the English youth abroad and by frequent Missions of Priests hither to propagate and Defend the Romish Doctrine yet during the reign of Queen Elizabeth King James and King Charles the first Popery decayed till the troubles of our late warrs gave the Romish emissaries opportunity to pervert many unstable persons who either discontented with their sufferings at home or pinched with necessity or offended with the many Sects which the licentiousnesse of Warr had begot or couzened with pretenses of the Antiquity unity glory and splendor of the Romish Church or perhaps allured with the pleasing Doctrine and Opinions whereby many Romish Casuists gratifie Sinners revolted from us and whether the restauration of Peace and Order may reclaim those whose Sufferings and troubles alienated from us God only knowes There is great talk still of the increase of Popery the Papists striving to credit their cause by these reports of numerous Proselites though I hope it is not so as I see no reasonable ground that it should be so yet the reports of Enemies should at least alarum us to be as Active in maintaining our ground as they are in striving to gain it and unless we are weary of our Religion to shew as much zeal in defending as they do earnestness in assaulting This hath Occasioned the ensuing Discourse in which my desâ—gn is from the doubtfulness and perp'exity of the Romish Doctrine the Superstitious vanity of many allowed prastises in their Church the absurdities in their publique Offices and the contradictions betwixt their Prayers and Doctrins to disswade the fond Admirers of the Romish Religion and to endeavour to reclaim them who are ready to embrace their Errors for Catholick truth â—â—SSIVS MOLNA S. IGNATIVS LOYOLA SOCIETATIS IESV FVNDATOR VASQUEZ ESCOBAR Optabilir est Fur qua'm Mendax assiduus vtrique veró Perditionis hareditatem consequentur Eccles. 20 vers 25. Paâ—â— CHAP. I. The first Consideration I propose shall be from the doubtfulnesse and Vncertainty of many Doctrines in the Church of Rome IT is not Reasonable to Adhere to that Church which Commands us to believe under pain of damnation Doctrines which are uncertiane and dubious But the Church of Rome doth Require such things pro. In the Creed of Pius 4th * Bulla Pij 4th Super form Juram Profess fid There are several things Required as Conditions of Communion with that Church and which their Clergy are bound to swear that they truly Believe and will constantly defend and that they will take Care that they be taught to and Believed by those who are under their Charge and this also they Acknowledge to be the Catholick faith without which there is no Salvation But now many of these things which they are bound to hold according to the Letter of the Decree are Uncertain and Doubtfull and from their own Principles and Confessions will apear so 1. I instance in the Articâ—e that they acknowledge the holy Catholick Apostolick Roman Church to be the Mother and Mistrisse of all Churches But there is no Certainty of the truth of this Article for it is either meant of the Churches united under the Obedience of the Roman Bishop or else of the Particular Diocess of Rome It cannot be meant of the Universal Church which obeyes the Universal Vicar of Christ as Suarez phraseth it for all Churches are supposed by them members of that Universal Church and the Universal Church to be the Collection of all Churches Now it is improper to call the Universal Church A Mother of all Churches for all Churches are the same with the Vniversal Church and nothing can be called a Mother to it selfe Again it cannot be a Mistrisse of all Churches for it is only a Society of all Churches United together and Suppose all those Churches throughout the world of which this Universal Church is made I aske what is the Mistrisse to all these Churches either t is the Roman particular Church which I shall shew to be otherwise or else they must say that all these Churches United are a Mistrisse to all Churches when yet they suppose no other can be a Church but what is United with these which is absurd If they mean the particular Roman Church then first that cannot be a Mother of all Churches which in order of time was founded after some Churches unlesse wee could say the Mother might be born after the Daughter but the Roman Church was founded after the Church of Jerusalem and therefore St. Hierome * Com. in Iss 2. sayes the Church founded in Jerusalem begat the Churches of the whole world Ecclesia in Hierusalem fundata totius orbis Ecclesias seminavit and the Synodical Letter * Theodoret Eccl Hist. l. 5. 6. 9. from the Council of Constantinople to Damasus and the Western Bishops calls Cyril the Bishop of Jerusalem the Mother of all Churches Again the Roman Church was founded after the Church of Antioch where the Disciples were first called Christians Acts II. 26. Quae prima omnium ausa est proferre Christianum nomen atque Nascentis Evangelij gloriam praedicare saith Polidor Virgil * De Invent rerum l. 4. c. 2. I may ad after the Church of Britaine for Suarez * Defens Fidei Cathol l. 1. c. 1. confesseth it was from the first Rising of the Gospel and Baronius from some manuscripts in the Vatican affixeth it to the 35th year of our Lord which was near nine years before the founding of the Roman Church If then the Roman Church was founded after some other Churches it is then uncertain and doubtful how we can acknowledg it to be the Mother of all Churches and prosesse this as an Article of Faith without which there is no Salvation Secondly If it be not de fide that the Roman particular Church shall never err in matters of Faith then it
* Plat. in vita John 18. When we thus see some owned for Popes who have never been duly elected and do know how much tirannical compulsion may force an outward compliance we cannot judge the submission and silence of the Church as Suarez holds Can be any certain ground that the election was lawful The sum of this argument is this if it be uncertain whether the essentialls of a just and true election be performed then it is vncertain whether this be a true Pope and ex consequenti it cannot be de fide that this Pope is the true sucessor of Saint Peter secondly we cannot be certain absolutely that the things essentially required in the consecration of the Pope are duly performed I do not mean of such things in the consecration which are only required by the cannon but I speak of those things which they account essential that there can be no consecration without them first I instance in the qualification of the person to be consecrated without baptisme there is no ordination and pro. who have not been baptized cannot be ordained nor consecrated and are jure divino uncapable of orders but we cannot be absolutly certain that this person hath been baptized pro. we cannot be absolutly certain that some thing essential to his consecration is not wanting Secondly In the intention of the consecrators for that is essentially necessary in conferring of orders by the Councells of Florence * Decret de Sacram. and the council of Trent * Sess de Sacram. Can. 2. requires an intention of doing that which the Church doth but it may fall out that the consecrators have no intention of doing any such things either through negligence or malice either they may intend to do nothing or not to do that which the church doth i. e. to consecrate or they may intend to do this outward act in sport or merriment or if then they cannot be certain that there is either an actuall or virtuall intention in the consecrators then they cannot be certain absolutly that the essentialls of consecration are duly performed Thirdly Without intention in the person to be consecrated there is no true consecration so Innocent the third determines * C. majore Extra de Baptisms and Suarez call's it the common opinion of Divines that to the value of a sacrament is required intentio suscipientis but no man can be absolutly certain that the Pope either in any moment foregoing or during the act of consecration did any way intend to receive it for ti 's not the bare outward performing or doing or receving which are required but the intending in the mind to do or receive and of that inward intention in the mind we cannot be certain Many more things might be added concerning the consecrators whether they were baptized whether they were Priests whether there is no defect in any thing essentially required to their baptisme or ordination whether the intention in the consecration was directed to that present person for that Filliucius * Cas Consc tract 1. c. 5. n. 79. requires now in these things since ti 's Possible some essential may be wanting it follows no man can be certain absolutly that this is the true Pope and if he cannot be so absolutly certain that this is the true Pope because ti 's possible some essential has been wanting then he cannot own it to be so de fide nor swear that the Church of Rome is the Mother and Mistress of all Churches because of its Union with him Secondly I instance in the Article of Trausubstantiation according to the Creed of Pius 4th they swear that in the most holy Sacrament of the Eucharist there is truly really and substantially the body and blood with the Soul and Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ and there is a conversion of the whole substance of bread into the body and of the whole substance of wine into the blood which Conversion the Catholick Church calls Transubstantiation and in the Council of Trent there is an Anathema pronounced against those who shall deny that wonderfull and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the body and of the whole substance of the wine into the blood the Species of bread and wine onely remaining which Conversion the Catholick Church most fitly calls Transubstantiation now though according to the Letter the Decree seems plain and they will all cry up this wonderfull miracle this August mistery yet in the explication of it and of the grounds whereupon they believe it they are perplexed For First although they pretend to derive this Doctrine from Scripture yet it is not certain that there is any place of Scripture which necessarily infers this doctrine so Scotus * In 4. lib. sent dist 11. q. 3. saies and how the body of Christ is there whether by Conversion of something into it or without Conversion the substance and accidents of bread remaining non invenitur in Canone Bibliae saies Gabriel Biel †In Canone miss lect 40. and notwithstanding that they usually insist on the 6th of St. John and the words of Institution this is my body yet others of great note among them conclude that it is not exprest in Scripture so Canus * Loc. Com. l. 3. c. 3. fund 2. holds and Cajetane maintains †the 6th of St. John no way pertains to a Sacramental * In 3. part q. 80. art vet eating the same is held by Jansenius Tapperus and others cited by Suarez and first some of them confess they should not have believed it unless the Church had declared it to be de fide for the Church by the spirit of truth did explain those things which were obscure in Scripture * Canus Loc. Com. l. 3. c. 3. fundam 2. but then it would be still in vain to endeavour to prove this conversion from Scripture because there is no argument from thence which can sufficiently convince and to argue with us from those Texts which they think are not sufficiently cogent without their Churches explanation is altogether impertinent for we are as uncertain of the infallibility of their Church in explaining those Texts as we are whether those Doctrines be contained there 't is first as to us uncertain whether this Doctrine be delivered in Scripture Secondly though they affirm that by the words of institution the bread is turned into the body and the wine into the blood yet they are perplexed about the meaning of them First As whether there be any figure in the words or no For if they be construed figuratively then they cannot certainly infer any transubstantiation and first sometimes they tell us there is no figure or trope yea there ought to be none in the words of Institution but then how can the Cup be the New Testament there the Cup must be put for Wine in the Cup. Again How can the Cup be the New Testament properly For a Testament is the Testators
commemoration of the dead which S. C. mentions for those who are gone before us with the signe of faith and repose in the sleep of peace and rest in Christ refreshment light and peace for the Romanists suppose the torments to be greater than the greatest torments of this life now how do they repose in the sleep of peace when they indure both a punishment of loss in the want of the sight of God and a punishment of sense how do they rest in Christ when they are perhaps in far greater torments than they in this life whereas Those who dye in the Lord rest from their labours * Rev. 14. 13. Thirdly Though the prayer runs that God would absolve him from his sins yet still there is no necessity that there should be a Purgatory for those prayers may suppose as you see many do the Soul yet to be in suspence and in its passage to Gods tribunal and that they use the commendatio animae at the buriall or Trentall which they did when the Soul just went out of the body so that these prayers rather signifie a prevention of punishment than any mitigation or ending of it or again these prayers may refer to the resurrection for it is not said absolve him from the bond of his sins that he may be presently released from Purgatory but that in the glory of the resurrection being raised among the Saints he may breath again and so we have such a prayer in the Pontifical which begins Deus cui omnia vivunt c. that God would command the Soul of his Servant to be received by the holy Angels and carried into the bosome of Abraham his friend and be raised at the last day and what ever faults by the deceit of the devil be incur'd thou of thy pitty and mercy wash away by forgiving them Here is a prayer for pardon but then 't is at the resurrection and thus though there are prayers for pardon yet still they are no way reconcileable with their Doctrine Thus I have finished the considerations which at present I intend and perhaps if occasion offer it self may add more my conclusion is a request to those who begin to entertain such fair opinions of the Romish Church that they would not exchange their Religion before they consider what they shall gain by the bargain I see many who did not much minde to understand the duties of their own religion much less to practice them are easily drawn over to the Romish party and when they live like Atheists at least to seem some body they pretend to be Papists I envy them not such Proselites who add nothing to the repute of any side but only number nor doâ—â—e loose any thing by such Renegado's whose practice disgraced their profession the Church is purer when the dregs are purged out Rome had at first wanted men to inhabite it if Romulus had not opened an Asylum and modern Rome would not be so much replenished if there were not a Sanctuary to shelter such converts 't is hardly any matter what religion men profess if their practice be not answerable and 〈◊〉 though they glory in their multitudes yet many who seem to be of their religion would prove if they were â—iâ—ted of none at all There are others well meaning persons who as in Charity I must judge are moved either through affection to peace or love to truth as they think to incline to the Romish Church these I do not condemn for their love to peace 'T is a noble design in imitation of the good Samaritan to poure Oyle and Wine into the Churches wounds and reconcile brethren who are at od's and God â—orbid but we should meet them for peaces sake so far as we can without prejudice to piety and truth but what benefit can we expect by our concessions when they pretend what ever we can judge from Scripture reason or Antiquity they cannot erre yea the least concession that they have erred or can erre oreturns their foundation destroies the Infallibility of their Church What hopes to reclaim them to moderation when those who mediate for peace are looked on as enemies Erasmus Modrevius and Cassander are in their account damnati authores and if they be not high flow'n Papists they account them though they die in the communion of their Church but only close Heriticks I do not condemn those who are inquisitive after truth and ready to imbrace that which is attended with sutable motives To these 〈◊〉 I offer these considerations whether 't is fit to adhere to that Church which requires all to believe those Doctrines as necessary to salvation which are uncertain and dubious to imbrace those for Apostolical Traditions which are not such to receive those Ecclesiastical rites for wholsome and good of which many are vain and foolish and cannot be excused from Superstition Let them consider whether it be fit to adhere to that Church whose sacred Offices contain many untruths and impieties and Lastly whose very prayers do in many things contradict their avowed Doctrine he that can swallow down such considerations and turn Romanist has as I may judg bidden adiew to his reason as well as Religion Soli Deo Gloria FINIS
are so many intricacies about the species themselves where they are subjected what Vnion betwixt the body of Christ and those accidents whether this body be an Organical body or no when it ceases to be under the species if there be no substance of bread what then is broken what chewed what digested what is it which nourishes what is it which breeds worms c there are so many intricacies that those who stifly maintain this Doctrine of Transubstantiation know not how to winde themselves out I instance in some few things First what is it that is broken either the body or the species it cannot be the body for the body cannot be divided into parts and first to say that the body is broken and chewed by the teeth unless they be understood in a sound sense in majorem incides haeresin quam ipse habuit Berengarius saies the Gloss * Gloss in Can. Bereng de Consecr dist 2. and yet in these words Berengarius was forced to recant panem vinum non solum esse Sacramentum sed verum corpus c. in veritate manibus Sacerdotum frangi fidelium dentibus atteri †Can. ego Berengâ— ibi that the body was in truth held in the Priest hands broken and chewed with the teeth which words saies Serenus Cressy are far from being justifiable unless they be understood Sacramentally i. e. for the outward species which yet he sees cannot be for it 's said not only is a Sacrament but the body c. and is in truth held in the Priests hand broken and chewed and if it be so then Pope Nicholas and the Council erred which prescribed this recantation and how will he swallow that it cannot be the species for no man can break or chew colour or savour or figure c. but only some substance Secondly what is it that nourishes it is either the body or the species First it cannot be the body for the body of Christ cannot be turned into our bodies otherwise Christs body could not be whole for thousands of men must have part of his body It is nourishment to us saies Cressy but not after a Carnall manner â—ut how can this be for if it be not nourishment after a Carnal manner then it must be after a Spiritual and how can our bodies be nourished Spiritually If there be nourishment there must be something digested but Christs body is not turned into our bodies by digestion saies he If there be nourishment then something must be added to our bodies but Christs body is not added to our bodies Let him first either shew how bodies can be nourished Spiritually or confess that he speaks what he doth not understand Some first among them say The body ceases to be under the species when it comes into the belly others say while it is in the mouth others that while the species remains the body remains and first while the species are in the belly the body of Christ is there * Lindwood in Conâ— prov de sum trin c. altiss p. glutiant but the Gloss on the Canon non iste de consecrat distinct 2. saies the body doth not come down into the belly quousque verò pergulam procedat nescio how far it goeth into the Throat I know not yet he concludeth 't is not digested as other meats are nor passes into the nourishment of the body for it is the food of the Soul and not of the body Well can it be the species Secondly that also is uncertain for nourishing is the reparation of a substance not of accidents and first must be by a substance and not barely by accidents in nourishing the food must be transmuted into the body and how can accidents be so to salve all this God must afford some matter either restore the former matter of bread or produce some new matter or which is most miraculous to me all this must be done without a miracle saies Bellarmine * L. 3. de Euchar. c. 24. resp ad arg 6. for the Naturall Order of things require it i. e. when the dispositions requisite for introducing the form are made after the previous alteration of the species then the order of things requiring it God must substitute matter but what assurance hath Bellarmine that all these things shall be as he fancies that the accidents shall be disposed without matter in which they should be subjected that when these material dispositions are perfected God will substitute matter many such things there are which will trouble him to resolve All this shews that this is a most perplexed Doctrine for if the substance of bread be gone what can nourish it must either be the body or the species and yet neither of these can they certainly fix on Thirdly what is it that is corrupted as when worms are generated of the Host it cannot be the body for God will not suffer his holy one to see Corruption If they say the species neither can that be for Corruption is properly of substance neither can the worms be generated of bare accidents as of colour figure or the like there must be then some new matter created into which the form of worms must be introduced and how strange must this be that men to free themselves from these perplexities are forced to shelter themselves under pretence of multitude of miracles of which not one can be perceived by our senses Durand mentions eleven miracles in Transubstantiation * Rationale div offic l. 4. c. 12. and yet there is not the least appearance to our senses that there is one yea to clear themselves from the perplexities which attend this Doctrine they are forced to fly to more Thomas Aquinas †Part. 3. q. 75. art 8. arg 3. saies there are plura difficiliora c. more difficulties than in the creation And Scotus * In 4. lib. sentent dist 11. q. 3. objects to himself that this one opinion is the occasion of turning all Philosophers and those that follow Natural reason from the faith for they would think that there are greater inconveniencies supposing there be no substance of bread remaining than in the article of the Incarnation propter haec fidem patere contemptui omnium sequentium rationem this exposes Religion to the contempt of all that follow reason for to believe that which seems so much both against sense and reason and so little appearance of revelation to defend it is strange to wise and rational men who know not how to digest such uncertain doubtful and absur'd opinions unless they can bring their faith to believe what they judge impossible The sum of this second argument to prove the perplexities of the Romish Church in the Doctrines she hath defined is taken from the uncertainties intricacies and perplexities in the Doctrine of Transubstantiation Thirdly I instance in the Doctrine of Invocation of Saints the Council of Trent * Sess 25. de Invocatione c.