accident but only Death become two again so as to be in the same capacity as they were before they were married And for this reason the Iews though permitted to marry afterward yet sinned in so doing against the primary Precept of God Those whom God hath joyned let no man separate 6. Much lesse does the second species of Separation or the proper Christian Divorce dissolve this tye The only lawful cause of which Separation is by our Savior allow'd and by the Catholic Church acknowledged to be Fornication that is indeed Adultery under which are likewise comprehended as our most learned Doctors say other more grievous sins of unnâ—tural Lusts. And the reason why only such sins may not must cause such a perpetual separation is because they alone are directly contrary to Conjugal Faith By this separation whensoever it is caused by the crime of the one party neither of them not the innocent party are permitted to betake themselves to a second Marriage for then they could no be reconciled but by a new Marriage And here the Preacher may do well to consider what 〈◊〉 Patron he has betaken himself to which 〈◊〉 Chemnitius who against our Saviours Law as all Antiquity and the practice of the Englisâ— Reform'd Church interpret it contends for the lawful Marriage of the innocent party so teaching formal Adultery This separation for such a legal cause is perpetual that is the innocent persons may deprive the others of the right they have over their bodies and are in a free condition even after the faulty persons repentance whether or no to receive them again into their former condition Neither can it be imputed to the innocent person if the criminal should by such a separation fall into the sin of adultery 7. The other two Separations not Divorces one whereof is only a toro from the Bed the other from Cohabitation also may be made for other causes besides fornication As for sâ—m very infectious diseases for almost irreconcileable quarrels for attempts of killing or wounding one another c. Such Separations are not so perpetual as Divorces each of the parties being bound assoon as these impediments of conjugal conversation are removed to return as before to a Matrimonial Amity and Correspondence And till then I would ask the Doctor whether he have the courage to admit into his Bed or even his house a Serpent not only full of venom but ready and attempting to kill him with it Or if he have not this courage whether he will acknowledg such a separation so necessary even to the preservation of life to be a Divorce damnable because not for fornication What he will answer I know not But what he must if he go about to maintain his Assertion I am certain will be very irrational 8. Let him reflect on the practise of his own Church where he cannot but have heard of the common distinction of Divorces A Vinculo Matrimonii à mensa toro these two are both allow'd in England now I ask the Doctor of which does our Saviour speak If he say of the first then clearly the Husband of an Adultresse may marry again which is contrary to the Law if he say of the second still â—e contradicts his own Law which every day allows a separation for other Causes besides that of Fornication Can we believe the Doctor never read the ordinary Cases wherein Diâ—orses are granted as Pre-contract Fear Frigidity Consanguinity c. all which dissolve the very Marriage it self and yet in all these the Marriage was valid till actual divorce and the children shall bear the Fathers name and inherit his lands if there never happen an actual divorce this the wise men of our Nation do and never think they open a way to rebel against Christ. Something like this for the second branch of the distinction St. Paul himself does and sure he cannot be opposite to the will of our Saviour If says he the Vnbeliever depart let him depart a Brother or Sister is not subject in such cases that is the Innocent may remain separate and why may not the laws of a Nation regulate that liberty which the Apostle allows to every private Person or why may not a General Council determin such points as well as the laws of a particular Nation Thus I conceive it clear'd that You and We are in this particular either Both innocent or Both guilty CHAP. XIX Of SCHISM The unpardonableness of that Crime acknowledged by Antiquity c. No cause or pretence can excuse it 1. HAving followed the Doctor through all his vainly pretended Novelties of Doctrine We are at last arrived to the most concerning Point of all Schism Most concerning certainly for there is not any one of the fore-mentioned Doctrines which in themselves considered would absolutely destroy Souls though they erred about them But Schism alone whatsoever Error of Doctrine yea though no Error of Doctrine were either indeed or pretended to be a cause of it will be inevitably damning to every Soul guilty of it which damnation neither rectitude of Faith nor any good Works nor even Martyrdom it self will be able to prevent For this cause sayes St. Augustine our Christian Creed concludes with the Articles touching the Church because if any one be found separated from her he shall be excluded out of the number of God's Children neither shall he have God for his Father who will not have the Church for his Mother It will nothing profit such an one that he hath been Orthodox in belief done so many good works c. 2. This is a Truth generally testified by the ancient Doctors of God's Church and not at all questioned by the more sober Writers of the English Church who have written of Schism c. They all are ready in words at least to say with St. Denys of Alexandria That we ought rather to endure any torments then consent to the division of God's Church since the Martyrdom to which we expose our selves by hindring a division of the Church is no less glorious then that which is suffer'd for refusing to sacrificâ— to Idols And with St. Pacian Though the Schismatick Novatian hath been put to death for the Faith yet he hath not been crown'd Why not crown'd Because he dy'd out of the peace concord and Communioâ— of the Church separated from that commâ—â— Mother of whom who ever will be a Marlyâ— must be a Member And with St. Irenâ—us There cannâ—t possibly be made any Reformation of such importance as the mischief 〈◊〉 Schism is pernicious c. 3. But I do not find that Protestant Doctors have endeavour'd to penetrate into the true grounds why above almost all other sins a Christian is capable of committing Schism that is the setting up an Altar against an Altar or the relinquishing the external Communion of the Church the making Collects or Assemblies without yea against the consent of Bishops or Church Governours c. should
and examining Antiquity and were as willing to make it speak on their sides as the Preacher was But as ill Consciences as they had they were convinced and forced publickly to confess that the Fathers were against them and focus And in particular Opposition to his Claim of Antiquity like Bishop Iewels for the first six Centuries Doctor Fulk is so far from concurring with him or Bishop Iewel that he is so choleric at the suspition of such a charge that he addresses himself to his Adversary in this civil language I Answer saies he if he charge me with confessing the continuing of the Church in incorruption for six hundred years next after Christ he lyeth in his heart 3. One passage there is of that famous Andreas Duditius which truly I cannot read without extream compassion and astonishment at the dreadful judgment of God and it may do Doctor Pierce much good if he sadly reflect on it Many years he had lived in great esteem for learning and prudence a Catholick Bishop of Petscben in Hungary called Quinque Ecclesiae present he was at the frameing the Decrees of the Council of Trent But at last falling in love with a Maid of honour in the Queen of Hungaries Court to marry her he quitted both his Bishoprick and Religion This poor man in his declining Age could not abstain from confessing in a Letter to Beza his unsatisfaction in his new Religion vainly hoping some either Cordial or Opiate for his distressed Conscience from one as deeply plunged and by the very same motives engaged in the same change I pray observe his words Si veritas est saies he quam veteres Patres c. If that be truth which the antient Fathers by mutual consent have professed it will entirely stand on the Papists side For if heretofore any Controversies out of a beat of Disputation arosâ— between the learned among them an end was presently imposed thereto by Decrees of Councils or even of the Pope alone But what strange people have we among us They are alwaies wandring toss'd with every wind of Doctrine and being hurried into the main Deep they are carried sometimes this way sometimes another If you would inform your self what their Iudgment to day is touching Religion you may perhaps come to know it But what it will be to morrow on the same Argument neither themselves nor you can certainly affirm Thus Duditius And what Cordial against this scrupulous Melancholly does Beza his good friend afford him Take it from himself Scio speciosum esse venerandae velustatis nomen c. I know the name of venerable Antiquity is very specious But whence shall we fetch the beginning of that Title but from the Prophets and Apostles For as for Writers that come after them if we will take their own advice we will believe them on no other terms but as far as they shall evidently make good what they deliver out of the Holy Scriptures That is in effect have but the Christian modesty and humility to prefer your own sense of Scriptures before all the Fathers and Councils of Gods Church and then nothing they say need to trouble you Antiquity venerable Antiquity will be on your side You may confidently say of all your Adversaries Doctrins From the Beginning it was not so 4. Many other Confessions of the like nature might be added but for brevity-sake I will content my self with onely one more and that is as it seems to me a secret acknowledgement of the Church of England in her publick Liturgy directly contrary to the Preachers pretension and applications of his Text by which she after a sort imputes Novelty to her self and confesses the Roman to be that Church which was from the beginning In the Order for Morning-prayer there are these Versicles and Responds V. O. Lord save the King R. And mercifully hear us when we call upon thee V. Endue thy Ministers with righteousness R. And make thy chosen people joyfull V. O Lord save thy People R. And bless thine Inheritance Then follows a Versicle for Peace Now these as almost all the other Prayers are mafestly translated out of the Roman Office But that which ought to be observed is That in the Roman Office there is a Versicle and Respond immediately following these and going before the Versicle for Peace which the English Church has studiously left out and that is this V. Be mindfull of thy Congregation O Lord. R. Which thou didst possess from the beginning Now the ground why this special Versicle or Prayer for the Church was left out is not so mysterious but it may be very probably guess'd at The first Reformers did not love to put God in mind of that Church which was from the beginning Or rather they were desirous the People should forget the Church which was from the beginning They had rather no Prayers at all should be made for the Church than for one that was from the beginning because apparently that could not be the Reformed Church of England whose beginning themselves saw 5. Notwithstanding such plain Confessions of these Pillars of Reformation yet the Doctor confidently stands with a little contraction and abatement to Bishop Iewel 's Challenge He indeed mentions 27. Points of which 22. are about circumstantial matters touching the Eucharist and two more of them viz. 1. That Ignorance is the Mother and Cause of true Devotion and Obedience 2. And that the Lay-people if he speaks of them in general are forbidden to read the Word of God in their own tongue are Calumnies The other are three indeed of the Preacher's points viz. 1. Supremacy of the Pope 2. Worship of Images 3. Common-prayers in a strange tongue though the only fault he can find in this last is That the later Church hath adhered too close to Antiquity that the hath not varied in the language of her Devotions from her Predecessors and after A. D. 600. continued to say her Prayers in the same Language she did before But then this Bishop as being somewhat better experienc'd in Antiquity than Doctor Pierce had not the confidence in this his Catalogue to reckon as Novelties either the Infallability of the Church Invocation of Saints Purgatory or Prayer for the Dead Celibacy of the Clergy or Sacrifice of the Mass. So much more courage had the Preacher than even Bishop Iewel himself Well between both all antiquity is for them and nothing but novelty on our side No doubt but his admiring and believing Hearers assured themselves that some never-before-examined Witnesses some hitherto unknown or un-observed Records had been found out by their learned and confident Preacher to justifie their deserted claim of Antiquity I mean by way of aggression and not simple defence But when the Sermon is publish'd nothing appears in the Text or Margins but Assertions and Quotations an hundred times before produced and as often silenced many of which too as he explains them have no regard
their Testimony of Tradition must more then put to silence all contradiction of particular Persons or Churches it must also subdue their minds to an assent and this under the Penalty of an Anathema or cutting off from the Body of Christ which answers to a Civil death in the Law 9. If then an Obedience so indispensable was required to Legal Iudges who might possibly give a wrong sentence How securâ—ly may we submit our judgements to the Supream Tribunal of the Church And how justly will an Anathema be inflicted on all gainsayers of an Authority that we are assured shall never mislead us And the grounds of this assurance which the Preacher is not yet perswaded of are now to be discoverd 10. The true grounds of the Churcheâ— Infallibility are the words of Truth the Infallibility of the promises of Christ the Eternal wisdom of the Father These Promises are the true Palladium not of the Conclave but of the Vniversal Church Nor do we think Doctor Pierce such an Vlisses as to apprehend he can steal it away 11. We do not deny however that Infallibility and Omniscience are as he saies incommunicable Attributes of God It is God alone to whose Nature either lying or being deceived are essentially contrary because he is essentially immutable as in his Being so in his Vnderstanding and Will Yet the immutable God can preserve mutable Creatures from actual mutation God who is absolutely Omniscient can teach a rational Creature 〈◊〉 Truths necessary or expedient to be known So that though a man have much ignorance yet he may be in a sort omniscient within a determinate Sphere he may be exempted from ignorance or error in teaching such special verities as God will have him know and has promised he shall faithfully teach others Our Saviour as man was certainly infallible and as far as was requisite omniscient too So were the Apostles likewise whose writings Protestants acknowledge both to be infallible and to contain all Truth necessary to Salvation Good Doctor do you think it a contradiction that God should bestow an infallibility as to some things on a Creature What did our Saviour give St. Peter when he said I have prayed for thee that thy Faith fail not Thus the Doctor may see what a trifling Discourse he has made against Gods Church 12. Now the infallible promises of our Lord to his Church by vertue of which she has alwaies been believed to be in our sense infallible follow At least as many of them as may suffice for the present purpose 1. Our Saviour has promised his Apostles That he would be present with them alwaies to the end of the World Therefore since not any of them out-liv'd that age this infallible promise must be made good to their Successors 2. He has promised that When two or three of them meet together in his Name he will be in the midst of them Surely to direct them Therefore much more when the whole Church is representatively assembled about his businesse onely 3. He has promised that he will lead his Church into all Truth at least all that is necessary or but expedient for them to know 4. He has promised that Against his Church built upon St. Peter the Gates of Hell that is Heresie say the Fathers shall not prevail Therefore it shall be infallibly free from Heresie 5. He has commanded that Whoever shall not obey his Church shall be cut off from his Body as a Heathen and a Publican Therefore Anathema's pronounced by his Church are valid Our Lord indeed speaks of Decisions made by a particular Church in quarrels among Brethren Therefore if Disobedience to such Decisions be so grievously punished what punishment may we suppose attends such as are disobedient to Decisions of the Universal Church call'd by the Apostle The Pillar and ground of Truth made for the composing of publick Debates about the common Faith 6. To conclude the belief of the Churches Vnity is an unchangable Article of our â—reed Therefore certainly the onely effectual mean to preserve Unity which is an un-appealable and infallible Authority shall never be wanting in the Church 13. All these Texts and Prmises we by the example of the Holy Fathers and Authority of Tradition produce as firm Grounds of an Infallibility in the Universal Church representative which has an influence over the Souls of menâ— requiring much more than an external submission which yet is all that Protestants will allow to the most authentic general Councils We hope now Doctor Pierce will not fly to Mr. Chillingworths miserable shift and say that all these Promises are only conditional and depending on the piety of Church-governors For this is contrary to the assertion of all Antiquity which from these Promises argues invincibly against all Heretics and Schismatics who might otherwise on Mr. Chillingworths ground alledge as the Donatists did that the Church by the sins of some had lost all her Authority and that Gods spirit was transplanted from her into themselves Nor yet that he will use the plea of several other Protestant Writers somwhat more discreet who are willing to allovv those Promises absolute and to belong also to the Guides of the Church som or other that they shall in all ages continue orthodox but not alvvayes to the more superior or to the greater bodies of these assembled in Councils because thus they see their cause will suffer by it But this plea also is utterly unsatisfying For whenever the superior and subordinate Church-Officers or Ecclesiastical Courts shall contradict or oppose one another here the superior questionlesse is to be our Guide otherwise we have no certain rule to know who is so and therefore to these not the other in such cases must belâ—ng these promises where they cannot possibly agree to both 14. These promises now being Yea and Amen the Doctor must not seem to make our Lord passe for a Deceiver but apply them to his English Protestant Church since he will not allow them to the Catholic for to some Church they must be applyed But let him consider withal he must condemn St. Gregory who professed that he venerated the four first General Councils of the Catholic Church as the four Gospels He must condemn Constantine who in the first Council of Nice professed that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c whatever is decreed in the holy Councils of Bishops that ought to be attributed to thâ— Divine will In a word he must by condemning all the General Councils of Gods Church condemn likewise which is more dangerous the Act of Parliament 1 Eliz. For manifest it is that all the Fathers in those Councils did pronounce many Anathema's against all those that would not submit to a belief of such and such Decisions of theirs in some of which were new expressions not extant in Scripture but devised by the Fathers then present as the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Now I ask Doctor Pierce were
would make petitions to these Saints to exercise their Rhetorick and yet without any cautioning their hearers that they did it in such a manner which if done seriously would have been an injury to God to Christ our Redeemer yeâ— Idolatry c. And lastly since the Doctor may find Vossius and Forbes for some of them at least condemning this evasion 11. To these Testimonies I may adjoyn the expresse confessions of Protestants That Invocation of Saints was commonly in use in the Greek Church long before the 3 d. and 4 th General Councils For which besides the confession of Chemnitius Vossius also is clear whose words are About the year of Christ 370. those to whom the care of instructing the people was committed did by their practise lead them to invocate the Saints departed And indeed in the Greek Church the first or at least very near the first of those which gave such Examples were Basil Nyssen Nazianzen And in the West at the same time Ambrose of Millain a diligent Reader and Imitater of the Greeks followed the same custom Now since Dr. Pierce professes so ready a submission to the Judgment of the four first General Councils and must grant that several of these Fathers whom Vossius acknowledges to have been Patrons of Invocation and to have used it even in the publick Assemblies for which they were never censured did precede many years two of these General Councils I would gladly know if such a Question had been made before the third or fourth Council concerning Invocation of Saints as was before that of Trent Whether he can perswade himself that those Fathers would not have justified such Invocation for lawful in those Councils which they practised as lawful out of and before them and would not have produced at least as high a stating of that Point as the Council of Trent did And indeed a particular knowledg and agency of Saints deceased in in human affairs seems to be acknowledged in the fourth General Council and Invocation in the third Person Whose words are Let Flavian be had in everlasting memory Behold Vengeance i. e. on his murderers Behold the Truth Flavian lives after death Let Flavian the Martyr pray for us 12. It remains in the last place that an Answer be given to the only Aâ—gument out of Antiquitie produced by the Doctor against this Doctrine and to prove it's Noveltie For saies he St. Augustin denies invocation of Saints to have been in his daies And his only proof that he does so is from those words of his The men of God that is Sainâ—s departed are named indeed in their due place and order but they are not invoked by the Priest who Sacrifices 12. To this passage our Answer it 1. That sure the Preacher had forgot he was to reckon presently after the Sacrifice of the Masse among Novelties introduced after the fourth General Council when he produced this Testimony that expresly proves the contrary Here is a Sacerdos brought in and here he is brought in both praying and Sacrificing and yet saies the Doctor no such thing as any Christian Sacrifice Or if a Sacrifice only a Sacrifice perhaps of praise and thanksgiving But St. Augustin will contradict him who as hath been said calls this indeed a Sacrifice of Thanksgiving in regard of glorified Saints commemorated in it but a Sacrifice propitiatory in regard of the faithful departed with some stains of sins remaining 2. The same thing St. Augustin means here i. e. That Saints are not soveraignly invocated by way of Sacrifice as the Supream Donors and Fountain of all good that descends to mankind is taught by the Catholic Church even where she professes Invocation of Saints in the same sense as St. Augustin allows it that is as of our fellow-members and citizens making efficacious intercessions for us to this Supream Deity to whom we Sacrifice For thus saies the Council of Trent Although the Church be accustomed to celebrate Masses somtimes in the honour and memory of Saints yet she does not teach that the Sacrifice should be offered to them but to God alone who has crown'd them And hence it is that the Priest is never wont to say O Peter O Paul I offer this Sacrifice to thee but to God to whom he gives thanks for their Victories and implores their patronage that they may vouchsafe to intercede for us in Heaven whole memory we celebrate on earth A part of which Decree is taken out of S. Augustin himself in the same Treatise quoted by the Preacher 3. Dr. Pierce could not possibly have made a worse choice of a place from whence to select a Testimony as he would have us believe denying all Invocation of Saints whenas in the two Chapters of the same Book immediately preceding this many stories are largely recounted to certifie the great good that Christians had found by the intercession of Saints and all this whilst in their Oratories they begg'd their intercession 4 Perhaps he will not yet be content but with Bishop Andrews will urge it is not here said by St. Austin That the Saints are not Sacrificed to but that they are not so much as invocated at the Altar And if it be unlawful to invocate them there it will be as well unlawful any where else Hereto it is answered That all this taken in a right sense is granted For first To this day in the Masse there is no kind of Invocation of Saints yea more according to the Council of Carthage till the Consecration be perfected there are no Prayers directed to the Son of God nor to the Holy Ghost but only to God the Father 2. But this argues not that if the Church had so order'd it it might not have been lawful even at the Altar to have Invocated the Saints by such an inferiour Invocation or Compellation as the Church has determined which is only according to Card. Perron prier pour prier to desire them to pray for us As even in the Masse it self the Priest requests the Assistants saying Orate fraires ut meum ac vestrum Sacrificium acceptabile fiat apud Deum c. To whom the people Answers Suscipiat Dominus Sacrificium de manibus tuis c. 3. But as for the Supream sort of Invocation which St. Austiâ— only intended in this passage and which he calls Culium latriae this is only due to God and without impiety cannot be made to Saints And thus St. Austin writing against Faustus the Manichean fully justifies what he saith in this passage 5. But after all this that St. Austin allows Invocation of Saints in an inferior way do but examin only these places in him c. 4. De curâ pro mortuis a Book which he wrote in Answer to a Quere of Paulinus Whether it doth benefit any one after his death to have his body buried in the Memorial of some Saint When as saith he such consolations of the living are
how to express the Catholick Doctrine in such words as might best instruct the people and prevent Hereticks from abusing them Hence it was St. Athanasius said We meet here not because we wanted a Faith i. e. were incertain what to hold but to confound those who go about to contradict the Truth Which Rule if Councils observe I think the Doctor would scarce refuse to obey them and our only difference in this point I hope is he thinks they do not observe this Rule and I think they do CHAP. XXVI The Preacher's boasting Catholicks cannot justly be obliged to shew from Antiquity Evidences of their Doctrines Conditions necessary to be Observed by the Doctor in case he Reply Of the Name Protestant 1. THus I have gone through and examin'd except to those who love to be contentious sufficiently all the pretended Novelties imputed by Dr. Pierce to the Roman Catholick Church I have likewise brought to the Test all the Allegations made by him either to excuse the English Churches Separation from the Roman Catholick or at least to perswade us not to call it Schism And it seems to me I have demonstrated him unsuccessful in both Nay more which is a great misery if he would consider it with that seriousness which Eternity deserves I think I have prov'd that the fearful crime of Schism will lye heavie upon his Church though he had shew'd all the Points by him mention'd to be Novelties And having done this I must say with St. Augustin Vtinam verba ista infuderim non effuderim But considering the present temper of this Age I doubt I shall have reason to fear according to the same holy Father's expression lest when I beg them to afford their ears they should make ready their teeth 2. However I hope the Doctor will no more be believed with any reason to complain as he doth in his Sermon of one remarkable infirmity in the Popish Writers They ever complain we have left their Church but never shew that Iota as to which we have left the Word of God or the Apostles or the yet uncorrupted and Primitive Church or the Four first General Councils Truly this Speech of his seems to me so vain and rash and shameless a boast that I cannot but blush for him when I read it and tremble for him when I see Truth so little consider'd by a Preacher sustaining God's Person as he pretended 3. But perhaps I understand not his phrase of shâ—wing that Iota as to which they have left c. If he mean we have not demonstrated their deserting Antiquity or that we believe not even since we have seen their Answers that our demonstrations are unanswerable there are extant whole Libraries of our Controvertists sufficient to overwhelm him Particularly before he say so again let him enquire out and consider a Book written by Simon Vogorius Counseller to the French King entituled An Assertion of the Catholick Faith out of the Four first Oecumenical Councils and other received Synods within that time Or even let him review what is quoted against him here concerning one of his own Points Celibacy of the Clergy out of the Four first General and several other as ancient Provincial Councils Before all which Councils there is found an Injunction of it as high as Calixtus his dayes about A. D. 220. which also Doctor Peirce mentions Doth not this prohibition of the Priests from Marriage amount to the magnitude of an Iota with him How comes it then to be one of his Grievances in this Sermon and that under no milder a phrase than the Doctrine of Devils Or will not such Antiquity pass for Primitive and Antiquity Antique enough to use his words Unless he will shrink up Primitive Antiquity from the 6th Age to the 4th from the 4th to the 3d. where few Writings being extant less of the Churches Doctrines and Customs can be shewn in them Or from the 3d to the 1st Age and the Apostles times as the Presbyterians in the Plea of Antiquity treat the Prelatists For on this manner even the most learned of the Protestant Writers when they are straitned with proofs are wont to retire So Bishop Iewel long ago made a bold challenge to be tryed by Antiquity for the first 600 years But after many hot Encounters between the Controvertists and after Antiquity better discover'd to the later Pens on the Protestant Party than to the first A. Bp. Lawd more cautious contracts the Protestants Challenge somewhat narrower to the Fathers of the first 400 years or thereabouts The Protestants saith he offer to be tryed by all the ancient Councils and Fathers of the Church within the first 400 years and somewhat further And since the A. Bp. Doctor Hammond makes his Plea of Antiquity yet shorter viz. for the Fathers of the first 300 years For the particular Doctrines saith he wherein we are affirmed by the Romanists to depart from the Vnity of the Faith we make no doubt to approve our selves to any that will judge of the Apostolical Doctrines and Traditions by the Scriptures and consent of the first 300 years or the Four General Councils And again We profess saith he to believe so much and not to be convinced by all the Reasons and Authorities and Proofs from Scriptures or the first Christian Writers those of the first 300 years or the Four General Councils Where by submission to the Four first General Councils he means only to the bare decisions of these Councils in matters of Faith concerning our Saviour and the Holy Ghost not obliging himself also to the Authority of those Fathers who flourished in the time of these Four Councils and sate in them For though the last of these Councils was held in the middle of the 5th Age yet he claims a tryal by the Fathers only to the end of the 3d Age. Again by this submission to the Writers of the Three first Ages only he bars most of the chief Fathers and all those that are more large and Voluminous from bearing any witness against Protestants and leaves scarse half a score Authors of Note now extant and several writing only some short Treatises or Epistles whereby they are content to try all the Doctrine and Discipline of Antiquity 4. But these were timorous Souls that would fain be thought to deal civilly with antiquity let us hear two or three bolder spirits that speak plain and freely What sayes Doctor Willet Let not your Majesty be deceived by the Popish Arguments of supposed antiquity as Joshua was with the old and mouldy bread of the Gibeonites and the reason is given for Anti-christ began to raign in the Apostles dayes in St. Pauls dayes What says Acontius Some of us are come to that that they will fill up their Writings with the Authority of the Fathers which I would to God they had performed with prosperous success as they hopefully attempted it c. I onely think this
custome is most dangerous and altogether to be eschewed What sayes the witty Whitacre The Popish Religion is a patcht coverlet of the Fathers Errors sewn together And again to believe by the Testimony of the Church not excepting any Age is the plain Heresie of the Papists To conclude for I might quote all day long upon this Subject what sayes the Patriark of Protestancy Luther There never was any one pure Council but either added something to the faith or substracted And now what shall we say our selves in this confused variety Against some of our Adversaries we must cite antiquity or else we do nothing against others if we cite all the antiquity that ever was baptized we do nothing God deliver them from their cross and incertain wandrings and me from the weariness of following them in their wild chase 5. But if the Doctor means by shewing that Iota as to which c. that we have not so shewed it as to stop their mouths or to force them to confess and repent of their fault then there can be no shewing any thing by any one party to another as long as the dissention lasts between them In this sence they have never shewed one Iota to the Presbyterians Anabaptists Quakers c who after all their Books Canons Acts of Vniformity c. which those Sects call Antichristian tyrannical Popery as the Protestants did ours still persist in separation from them Then neither the Apostles antient Fathers or Councils ever shewed one Iota to antient Pagans or Heretics because for all their shewing others remained Pagans and Heretics afterward And yet even in this particular though a very unreasonable one we Cathâ—lics can confidently affirm that we have defeated this bravado of the Preacher For evident Truth on our side has extorted from the mouths and pens of a world of the most learned among the Reformed Writers a Confession both in general and in every particular Controversie that Antiquity declares it self for the Roman Church against them Thousands of such proofs may be read in the Protestants Apology the Triple Cord c. Books writen on purpose to reckon up such Confessions This is truly if well considered an advantage strange and extraordinary for I believe never did any of the Antieâ—t Hâ—retiâ—s so far justifie the Catholic Church No such confessions of theirs are recorded by the Antieâ—t Fathers which shews that above all former examples the Heretics and Schismatics of this last Age are most properly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 condemned by their own Consciences 6. But withall the Doctor must take notice of this one thing That it does not belong to us Catholics to be obliged to shew that Iota in which they who have set up a new and separated Church from us but the other day have left the word of God or Primitive antiquity or the four first General Councils aâ— it belongs to them who have thus divided themselves not only to shew but to demonstrate first most clearly that there is such a discession from those Scriptures Fathers and Councils by that former Church which they deserted not in an Iota but in some grand principle of our Faith which admitted no longer safety to them in her Communion because the Roman Catholic Church is in possession and by our Adversaries own Confession has been unquestionably so for above a Thousand years of all or most of her present Doctrins for which they have relinquished her Particularly the Pope has enjoy'd an Authority and Supremacy of Jurisdiction a longer time than any succession of Princes in the world can pretend to A Jurisdiction acknowledged as of Divine Right and as such submitted to by all our Ancestors not only as Englishmen but as Members of the whole Western Patriarchaâ— yea of the Vniversal Church and this as far as any Records can be produced He is now after so many Ages question'd and violently deposed from this Authority by one National Church nay by one single Woman and her Counsel the universality of her Clergy protesting against her proceedings and much more against her destroying a Religion from the Beginning establish'd among us and which had never been question'd here in former times but by a Wiclef or a Sir Iohn Oldcastle c. manifest Heretics and Traytors Now it is against all Rules of Law Iustice and Reason that such as are Possessores bonae fidei should be obliged to produce their evidences This belongs only to the Plaintiffs and no Evidences produced by them against such a Possession can be of any force except such as are manifest demonstrations of an Vsurpation yea such an Vsurpation as cannot either be exercised or submitted to without sin 7. The Doctor is likewise to consider thaâ— if ex super abundanti we should yield so far as out of Antient Records of Councils or Fathers to alledge any Proofs to enervate their claim to them and justifie our Possession Such Proofs of ours though considered in themselves were only probable yet in effect would have the force of demonstrations against English Protestants But on th' other side unlesse they can produce from Scripture or Antiquity evident demonstrations against us they are not so much as probabilities all this by their own confession For as has been shew'd they lay it for a ground and acknowledge the Catholic Church of which according to their own Doctrin the Roman is at least a Member to be in all fundamental Points infallible and that in all other Points now in debate which are not fundamental it would be unlawful for particular Churches to professe any dissent from her without an evident demonstration that she has actually and certainly erred in them yea moreover that she will admit none of the Dissenters into her Communion except such as though against their Consciences and Knowledge will subscribe to her Errors Errors so heynous as to deserve and justifie a separation 8. These things premis'd my last care must be to provide that in case a Reply be intended to this Treatise it may not be such an one as may abuse the world The Preacher must consider it is not such another blundering Sermon that will now serve his turn to give satisfaction so much as to any Protestant who has a Conscience guided by the light of Reason or thinks Schism not to be a sleight Pâ—ecadillo Therefore that he may know what Conditions are necessary to render an Answer not altogether impertinent and insupportable I here declare that in case he shall undertake a confutation of what is here alledged by me to disprove the charge of Noveltiâ—â— by him laid on the Roman Catholic Church and the excusing of Schism in his own he will be a betrayer of his own Soul and the Souls of 〈◊〉 those that rely on him unless he observe the Conditions following 9. The first is since if Protestants have in truth an evident demonstration that the Roman Doctrins for which they separate are indeed such pernicious errors and