often fallacious way of arguing however popular and that needs less Trouble in Examination from Persons to things whereas these will continue the same but they are changeable 1. But then it may be observed of the Roman Succession that the case seems so extremely chang'd since the first Times So great an Alteration there is in the Persons and in the Office to which the Succession is now come that it can hardly be look'd on as the continuation of the same The Episcopal Power is all that we can find for some hundred of years laid claim to and our Note is only concerned in it tho in some few single Acts it began by degrees to be stretch'd so as to put other Bishops upon their Guard and Protestations as in the case of Appeals by the Africans Yet were all Bishops owned to have an equal share in that all to be of like Power and Authority all alike Successors of the Apostles whether at Rome or in the meanest City as in the known Testimonies in St. Cyprian and St. Jerom c. But the Papal Power now challenged and exercised is so vastly and widely different from Episcopacy that scarce any Propriety of Speech can bring them under the same Name But to come to matter of Fact. Notwithstanding the high Elogiums given by the Antients on particular occasions to the Roman Church or Bishops and the very bold Efforts and very lofty Aspirings of some of these yet he must have other Eyes or other Spectacles than we can procure who can espy any thing like the Supremacy and Authority claim'd by the present Papacy in the Principles or Practice of the Church for more than five hundred Years which as hath been observed could not but have been as discernable in all the Histories of those Times as the Reference to the power of our Kings and manner of our Government must be in our own History 2. Farther indeed there seems no great Reason for them to be much concerned at the Succession of Bishops that are not very favourable to the very Order We know what great Opposition in their Council of Trent the Divine Right of Episcopacy met with from the chief Favourites of that See when the Determination was so strongly pressed by others De Pont. Rom. l. 1. c. 8 9. l. 4. c. 24. And the Author of these Notes is pleated to determine the Government of the Church not to be chiefly in the Bishops but properly and intirely Monarchical in the Pope only and that he derives his Power immediately from Christ But the Bishops have theirs from him as to Jurisdiction which is Government 3. Moreover they have the less reason to except against any Churches for the want of this Apostolical Order when their very Catechism that multiplies Orders with much less Distinction of Office makes this no distinct Order but only a different Degree of the same Priesthood the supreme Order in their Church ascending only gradually from that of a common Presbyter to that of Bishops Arch-Bishops Patriarchs and the Pope himself Some of the intermediate we know admit no distinct Ordination Nay the pretended plenary Power of the Pope hath sometimes by particular Delegation empowered mitred Abbots but meer Presbyters to supply the Place of two of the Bishops if but one be present even in Ordination it self and that of a Bishop as Bellarmine in this very Note yields Many other Instances might be given of their endeavours to advance the first as it were on purpose to fence off the danger of a Rival To what use else should serve so many Priviledges and Exemptions long complained of Their chief Rise hath been upon the Depression of Bishops and robbing them of their ordinary Power So quite opposite is the true case from the Jelousies of some about this Primitive Order 4. Also they will have little cause to glory much in this pretended uninterrupted Succession when they consider how many Nullities according to their own Principles may dissolve and separate the closest Connexion thereof For besides confused Tumultuary and Simoniacal Promotions from which their own Writers will scarce free some of them That one Principle of the Intention of the Priest being necessary to the Effect of any Sacrament had need make them fearful of relying too much upon it For in case this were once wanting in some of the principal Sources through so long a Tract of time variety of Circumstances and different Temper of Persons which many will think no hard matter to suppose however can never be certainly proved otherwise by this Rule they cannot be secure of any Order yea scarce of any true Christian among them So I proceed to the Third Inquiry How insufficient a Proof this will afford them of any Great Advantage Inquiry 3. Indeed Bellarmin himself seems so Just as in part to yield this in his Answer to the Fourth Objection about this Note He says an Argument may be brought that there the Church is not where there is not this Succession but it cannot thence necessarily be gathered that there the Church is wheresoever this Succession is So that it seems no positive Proof with him Wherefore he thinks fit to exclude the Eastern Churches or break their Succession upon pretences of Heresy 1. For First This Succession is no sufficient Evividence of the Truth of the Doctrine of any Church Indeed were Tradition so infallible a Conveyance of Truth as some Men that talk of nothing below Demonstration would vouch Were it impossible for any new Opinion to creep into the Church Were it necessary that Men must believe to Day as they did Yesterday and so in short as it were at one Leap up to the very Apostles and that the passage of sixteen hundred years were able to make as little Alterations in the Memorials or Evidences of what Doctrines or Rules of Practice were first delivered by word of Mouth as the last Nights sleep does of what pass'd the Day before Then every Church of Apostolical Foundation and such were all then Planted had been and would still continue as Infallible as the Church of Rome thinks her self and we should not have had any dispute about their Tenets nor any such Exceptions against their Succession What Security theirs hath from the Defections which others are charged with or have been found liable to what Evidence may be produc'd that any Church or Company of Men in the Church may not add in process of Time some Doctrines and Usages very prejudicial to the Common Faith once delivered to the Saints And that the Resolution of our Faith is only with safety to be made into the Perpetuity and Infallibility of the Roman Church alone by it self or its Dependants we are yet to seek And much wonder that the Ancients in all their Disputes with Hereticks and Schismaticks should take so great a compass to confute their Adversaries from Scripture Reason and other Authorities beside what the See of Rome afforded and not with our
172. The Eighth Note Sanctity of Doctrine THat this Note as well as the others is far from performing what is promised for it by the Cardinal is sufficiently made evident by four Particulars p. 173. I. What is here meant by Sanctity of Doctrine p. 174. Tho' that is the best and purest Church which hath the least of Error and Corruption in its Doctrine and Discipline yet that which is the best is not the only true Church p. 157. II. That Sanctity of Doctrine i.e. a pure profession of true Religion without any mixture of Error is no true Note or Character whereby a man may distinguish the true Church from all false Churches p. 176. That this can be no true Note of the true Church made evidently appear from the consideration of those necessary Properties of all true Notes by which Things are to be known and distinguished p. 177. These are Four. 1. Every true Note ought to be common to all of the same kind with the thing which it notifies p. 177 to 180. 2. Every true Note ought to be proper and peculiar to that kind of things of which it is a Note and not common to Things of another kind p. 181. 3. Every true Note ought to be more known than the Thing which it notifies p. 182 183. 4. Every true Note ought to be inseparable to the Thing which it notifies p. 184 to 188. III. In what sense this may be a Note of the true Church p. 189. That is a true Church which professes all the Essential Articles of Christian Faith and receives all the Essential parts of Christian Worship and Discipline p. 190. The Church of England willing to be tried by this p. 192. IV. According to the Principles of the Church of Rome the true Church is not to be found by this Note in which soever of the two Senses we understand it ibid. This clearly made out in Four Particulars 1. The Church of Rome decryes mens private judgment of Discretion as utterly insufficient to make any certain distinction of Truth from Falshood in matters of Religion p. 194. 2. Shee allows no sufficient Rule without the true Church to guide and direct our private Judgment of Discretion p. 195. Which is the true Church not to be resolved by Principles of Nature but those of Revelation p. 196. No other Rule while we are out of the Church to direct us in this Enquiry but only that of Scripture ibid. This the Church of Rome tells us is insufficient and that for two Reasons 1. Because the Scripture is not full enough as to all Doctrines of Faith and Manners And therefore there are certain unwritten Traditions in the Church of equal Authority with it by which its defects are supplied p. 197. 2. Because it is not clear enough the Sense of it being so obscurely expressed that we can never be certain what it is without the interpretation of the true Church p. 198. These considered and answered 3. The Church of Rome resolves all certainty as to matters of Faith into the Authority of the true Church which indeed is the Fundamental Principle of Popery p. 199. A short Dialogue upon this Argument between a Papist and Protestant p. 200 to 202. 4. The Church of Rome gives Authority to the true Church to impose upon us a necessity of believing such Things as before they were not obliged to believe p. 203. to the End. The Ninth Note Efficacy of Doctrine BY Efficacy of Doctrine Two Things understood Either 1. The power which the Word of God hath in the hearts of particular men to dispose them to believe aright and to live well Or 2 That Success which it hath in drawing Multitudes outwardly to profess and embrace it p. 209. The first too inward and the second which is that which the Cardinal understands by it too uncertain a thing to be a Note of a True Church ibid. Many other things besides Efficacy of Doctrine which have and may convert whole Nations to the Christian Religion such as hopes and fears outward force necessity p. 210. An Instance hereof in the Conversions wrought by Charles the Great p. 211. The difference between such Conversions and those which were made in the first Ages of the Church p. 212. In answer to the Cardinal upon this Note Three things laid down I. That the prevalency of any Doctrine can be no Note of a True Church p. 213. This appears 1. From what our Saviour hath said in this matter ibid. 214. 2. From the Consideration of the Temper and Constitution of Mankind p. 215. to 217. 3. From plain matter of Fact. p. 218 219. Error hath such an influence often up n mens minds that they have rejected Truth and preferred the most gross and impious Opinions before it ibid. This apparent from the Histories of all Ages ibid. More particularly in the Case of Arianism p. 219. And in that of Mahomitanism p. 220. The Conversions wrought by those if the Greek Church whom the Church of Rome accounts Hereti ks p. 221. The Efficacy of the Reformed Doctrine ibid. II. That the Prevalency of the Doctrine professed in the Church of Rome is no Note of its being a True Church p. 222. And that for these reasons 1. Because of that great mixture of Errors which there is with the Truth which it professes p. 223. 2. Because the Doctrine of the Church of Rome is so much altered from what it formerly was ibid. 3. Because it hinders those who embrace it from throughly examining it p. 224. 4. Because Art and Force have sometimes been made use of to make it prevail p. 225. III. The Arguments the Cardinal makes use of to prove this to be a Note of the True Church proved to be Insufficient p. 226. 1. His Arguments from the Scriptures considered ibid. 2. His Arguments from the prevalency of the Christian Doctrine in the beginning of the Church examined p. 227. 3. His Arguments from the particular Instances which he gives of Conversions wrought by those of the Church of Rome reflected on p. 227. I. The Conversion of the English by Austin the Monk considered p. 228. Four Things alledged in answer to it ibid. 2. The Conversion of the People of Franconia by Kilianus replied to p. 228 229. 3. The Conversion of a great part of Germany by Vinofrid otherwise called Boniface considered ibid. The Conversion of the Vandals of the Danes of the Bulgarians Slavonians c. Ascribed to other Causes than the naked Efficacy of the Christian Doctrine ibid. The Barbarous Cruelties that were used by the Spaniards in the Conversion of the Indians p. 230. The Instance of Heraclius the Emperors Letter to Dagobert King of France concerning the method he made use of for the Conversion of the Jews p. 231. The Conclusion The Tenth Note Holiness of LIFE IN this Argument it is shewn I. What the Notion of Holiness is p. 233. Holiness is of Two kinds 1. Holiness of Calling and Dedication What
Reform'd They call us the Reformed therefore we are Reformed is as good an Argument as we call them Catholicks therefore they are Catholicks In this Sense are those Words of St. Austin cited by Bellarmine Contr. Epist Fundam c. 4. to be understood That should a Stranger happen in any City to enquire even of an Heretick where he might go to a Catholick Church the Heretick would not dare to send him to his own House or Oratory Not that that Heretick did believe that those that there were call'd Catholicks did hold the true Catholick Doctrine for then he could not have believ'd his own but looking upon it as a bare name of Distinction he directed him to that Assembly of Christians that were so called St. Austin seems here to suppose a Case as if a Traveller entring into a City where both Popish and Reform'd Churches were allowed and should chance to meet a Protestant and of him enquire the way to a Catholick Church and he direct him to a Popish one or a Papist and of him enquire the way to a Reform'd Church and he direct him to a Protestant one It would not therefore follow that either the one or the other did believe either Church to answer and correspond with its Name that the Popish was Catholick or the Protestant Reformed but that they were Words of vulgar use whereby they might be known from one another but not the true Church from the false IIII. It does not follow that because the Name of Catholick in that time when it was for the most part in conjunction with the Catholick Faith was a sure Note of a true Church it must always be so even when the Name and Thing are parted It was not long before the Christian Church became miserably torn and rent asunder divided into many and some very great Bodies all pretending to Catholicism By what Mark now is the Catholick Church to be known Not by the Name surely when all Parties laid claim to it and the grossest Hereticks such as the Manichaeans themselves as St. Austin tells us who had the least to shew for it coveted and gloried in it Have never any Hereticks or Scismaticks been styled Catholicks Nor ever any Orthodox styl'd Hereticks The Greek Church is call'd Catholick and yet the Church of Rome will have her an Heretical one The Donatists appropriated to themselves that ample Title and yet St. Austin thought them no better than Shcismaticks The Arrians call'd themselves Catholicks and the Orthodox Homousians and Athanasians but neither the one was the more nor the other the less Catholick for what they were call'd Truth is always the same and the Nature of things remains unalterable let Men fix on them what Names they please By this Rule then is the true Church to be known not because it bears the Name of Catholick for that a Church may do and yet be guilty of Schism and Heresie but because it professes the true Faith and then tho it be in name Heretick it is in reality Catholick This is Lactantius's Rule to discern the true Church by the true Religion That Church alone Instir lib. 4. c. ult Sola Catholica est quae verum cultum retinet says he is Catholick that retains the true Worship of God. And St. Austin in his Disputes with the Donatists where the true Church was appeals to the Scripture as the only Infallible Judg Non audiamus haec dico haec dicis sed audiamus haec dicit Dominus c. Ibi quaeramus Ecclesiam Epist 166. de unit Eccl. c. 2. Amongst many others to this purpose he hath these Words I say this and thou sayest that but thus saith the Lord. 5. Again does it follow that because the being called after the Names of particular Men in that Age when all so call'd were for the most part corrupt in the Faith was a sure Brand of Schismaticks and Hereticks it must ever be so May not Names and Titles be unjustly and maliciously impos'd If the Churches of the Reformed must go for Hereticks and Scismaticks meerly because they are distinguish'd by the Names of those Men that were the first and most eminent Instruments in that blessed Work as of Lutherans Calvinists Zuinglians the like Is there not the same Reason that the several Orders in the Church of Rome that go under the Names of their particular Founders as the Benedictines Franciscans Dominicans Jansenists and Molinists and others be esteemed so too If there be any Difference the advantage of Reason is on our Side since the Reformed assume not those Names to themselves and tho they deservedly honour the Memories of those Men and with thankful Hearts embrace the Reformation God was pleas'd by their Ministry to make in the Church yet do they by no means affect to be call'd after their Names They own no Name but Christian or Catholick when it signifies Persons adhering to the true Catholick Faith The others are Nick-names fasten'd on them by their Adversaries out of Scorn or Malice to represent them to the World as far as they are able as so many Schismaticks from the Catholick Church and as having other Leaders than Christ and his Apostles But those in the Church of Rome that are denominated from their particular Founders give themselves those Appellations seem to prefer them before that truly Catholick one of Christian which while with some neglect they leave to the Common People they glory and pride themselves in the other so that if this Note of an Heretick is valid it turns with great Force against themselves who are really guilty of it and not against us whom they will make guilty of it but are not III. The Church of Rome having egregiously corrupted the Catholick Faith or Religion neither is nor deserves the Name of a Catholick Church Whether she is guilty of this or no will be best seen by comparing her Doctrine in several Points with that delivered by Christ and left upon Record by his holy Apostles for tho the Church of Rome will not allow the Scriptures to be the whole and a perfect Rule of Faith and Manners yet they acknowledg them to be the Word of God and granting that they must acknowledg that all those Doctrines and Practices that are forbidden by them are Corruptions and Depravations of it Let us then bring their Faith to the Touchstone How readest thou The Scripture says See Discourse of the Object of Religious Worship 1685. Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve Mat. 4.10 Which Words evidently appropriate all kinds and all degrees of Religious Worship unto God they being an answer to the Devil's Temptation who requir'd but the lowest Degree the Devil acknowledging that the right he had of disposing of the Kingdoms of the World to be only derivative not natural they were delivered to me At the same time confessed himself not to be the Supream God and consequently cannot be suppos'd
things considered nothing is more apparent than that the true Church is neither to be distinguished from other Bodies of Men or of Professors of Christianity by the largeness of its Extent or the Numerousness of its Members and therefore that a true Note thereof cannot result from these And besides a true Note of the Church must be Essential to it must belong thereto as the true Church and therefore is inseparable from it But how could Amplitude or Multitude be ascribed to the true Church in the Time of our Saviour when he called it a little Flock and said Strait is the Gate and narrow is the Way that leadeth unto Life and few there be that find it c. But Bellarmin pretends to fetch this Note of his out of the Bible and not only to be beholden to Vincensius Lyrinensis for it whom he first cites in favour of it tho little to his Purpose as will be seen anon The Texts he produceth are four two in the Old Testament and two in the New. Those in the Old Testament are Psal 2.8 Where God the Father promiseth his Son That He will give him the Heathen for his Inheritance and the uttermost parts of the Earth for his Possession And Psal 72.8 Where 't is prophesied That Christ shall have Dominion from Sea to Sea and from the River unto the Ends of the Earth Those in the New Testament are Luke 24.47 Where our Lord declareth That Repentance and Remission of Sins should be preached in his Name among all Nations beginning at Jerusalem And Acts 1.8 Where he tells his Apostles That they shall receive Power after that the Holy Ghost is come upon them and they shall be Witnesses unto him both in Jerusalem and in all Judea and in Samaria and unto the uttermost parts of the Earth And it cannot be doubted but that these Texts do prove that the Members of Christ's Church shall be a very vast Multitude and that its Amplitude should even extend over all the World. But nevertheless 1. It doth not from hence follow that the Conjunction of Amplitude and Multitude doth make a Note or distinguishing Character of Christ's true Church It is one thing to say it belongs thereto as an Attribute and another that 't is appropriated to it as a Note That may be even Essential to a Thing which yet is not a Note of Distinction or peculiar Property whereby it may be known from all other Things The power of Sensation is essential to a Man yet for all that he is not distinguishable thereby from a Beast But it is evident from what hath been discoursed that the true Church is not to be distinguish'd from the Kingdom of Satan nor of Antichrist nor from Erroneous Sects by Amplitude and Multitude And that these together or apart are not so much as Essential to the Church of Christ since there was a time when as hath been said it was without them both 2. This is so far from being a Note of the Church that 't is no more than a variable State and Condition thereof since it hath had from time to time its Ebbs and Flows and hath had sometimes larger and other times straiter and narrower Bounds This the Cardinal was aware of and therefore among other things he would have to be observed for the right understanding of this his Note he saith That Although the Church ought not necessarily to be in all places at the same time yet now it ought necessarily to be or to have been in the greater part of the World For 't is acknowledged by all even the Hereticks themselves meaning the Protestants that the Church is now in her old Age and therefore must be past growing By the way though all his Hereticks no doubt do believe that the Church hath daily grown elder and elder yet I know not how many he hath found asserting that she is now arrived at old Age. But it will by no means be granted him that the Church is yet grown so old as to be past growing or to have a period put to its time of Encreasing And therefore I add 3. That we have great Assurance that the Church hitherto hath not deserved to be compared with what it shall be before the end of the World both in respect of its Amplitude and the number of Believers For there are very many plain Prophecies from whence this may certainly be concluded which all that without prejudice consider them must needs be satisfied have not hitherto been accomplished Namely those which have reference to the Calling of the Jews and the bringing in of the fulness of the Gentiles and the most plentiful Effusion of the Spirit and perfect rest from Persecution and universal Peace with the most wonderful outward Prosperity of the Church There are I say abundance of the plainest Predictions and Promises of this Nature which the Church hath not as yet experimented the performance of and they are expressed in such Words as that it may reasonably be believed that those great things which God hath heretofore done for his Church either Jewish or Christian are no better than Types and Emblems of what he intends to do in His appointed time Among those Predictions and Promises the Reader may consult these following which are but a few in companion of the whole Number viz. in the Old Testament Psal 22.27 to 31. Isa 2.1 to 6. Chap. 11. throughout Jer. 32.37 to 43. Chap. 33.7 to the end Dan. 7.13 14. And in the New Testament Mat. 24.14 Rom. 11.12 and ver 25 to 33.2 Cor. 3.15 16. Apoc. 20.1 to 7. Though the fulfilling of these Scriptures hath been deferred for so many Ages yet He is Faithful that hath promised so glorious an encrease of His Church with the other unspeakable Blessings now mentioned and will fulfil them when the Time is come which His infinite Wisdom knows to be the fittest for that Purpose And thus much may suffice to be said in reference to the Cardinal 's proving this Note by Scripture As to those Words in the next place of Vincensius Lyrinensis in his Commonitorium which he produceth for the confirming thereof viz. Eos propriè esse Catholicos qui tenent id quod semper quod ubique quod ab omnibus creditum est Those are properly Catholicks who hold that which hath been always every where and by all believed I answer 1. That Vincensius doth not pretend to give us in these Words a Note of the Catholick Church but of such a Christian This is evident at first sight And so is this 2. Whereas he makes it the Character of a true Catholick to hold what hath been believed semper ubique omnibus it cannot be hence inferred that he believed Amplitude or a Multitude of Believers to be so much as an Attribute of the Catholick Church and therefore much less a Note 3. If these Words lay down a true Note of a Catholick Christian then no Body of Christians can be
more evidently proved to be no true Catholicks than those of the Roman Communion may in all those Articles of Faith which are peculiar to themselves For as to Points of mere Belief how much more than the Apostles Creed can they shew us to have been received always every where and by all Christians But as for that large Addition of Tridentine Articles annexed to that Creed by P. Pius the 4th no unbiassed Person can believe they have ever done any thing like proving that any of them have been received always and much less every where and by all those whom themselves own for Catholick Christians 4. By this Note of a Catholick no Society of Christians can bid so fair for Catholicism as the Reformed Churches but especially the Church of England whose avowed Principle it is to receive nothing as an Article of Faith but what is contained in the holy Scriptures Artic. 6. or may be proved thereby Nor doth she embrace any one Doctrine as an Article of Faith but what is clearly expressed in those Books of whose Canonicalness there never was the least Dispute in the Primitive Church Secondly I proceed to shew that if we should acknowledg this to be a true Note of the Catholick Church instead of enabling the Church of Rome to make good her Pretension of so being it will destroy it And instead of doing Disservice to the Reformed Churches it will do them excellent Service and be a certain Argument of their being true Parts of the Catholick Church And 1. I will shew that it will not at all Advantage the Church of Rome as to that her Pretension and therefore can do us no Prejudice The Cardinal proves 1. That his Church began to fructify throughout the World in the Days of the Apostles from these Words of St. Paul Col. 1.6 The Truth of the Gospel is come unto you as it is in all the World and bringeth forth Fruit as it doth also in you c. But what is this to his Church Is the Gospel's bringing forth Fruit in all the World the same thing with the Church of Rome's so doing 2. He adds the Authority of several Fathers for this Church's being spread in their Time all over the then known World but gives us none of their Sayings except St. Prosper's The first Father he cites is St. Irenaeus in the 3d Chapter of his Book Edit Paris p. 53. But the Father here only saith That this Faith which he sums up immediately before and is but the chief part of the Apostle's Creed the Church disseminated throughout the World diligently preserves as if it were confined but to one House But how doth this concern the Church of Rome Which is not once mentioned with others here particularly named except we could be made to believe that wheresoever the Word Church is found that Church is still to be understood Next he cites Tertullian adversùs Judaeos Edit Rig. p. 189. and having search'd that Book these or none are the Words he means viz. Those Words of David are to be understood of the Apostle's their Sound is gone forth in all the Earth and their Words unto the End of the World For in whom have all Nations believed but in Christ who is now come The Parthians Medes Elamites and those that inhabit Mesopotamia Armenia Phrygia Cappadocia Pontus Asia and Pamphilia Egypt Africa and beyond Cyrene the Romans and Jews now in Jerusalem and other Nations as now of the Getuli and Moors all Spain divers Countries of the Gauls and those of the Britains which the Romans could never conquer are subject to Christ c. But I again ask What is all this to the Church of Rome more than to any other particular Church belonging to any one of the many Nations of which that of the Romans is one and two whole Quarters of the World here mentioned His third Father is St. Cyprian Edit Oxon. p. 10◠in his Book de Vnitate Ecclesiae But here is nothing he could fancy to be for his purpose except these Words The Church is one which by its Fruitfulness is extended into a Multitude As there are many Rays of the Sun and but one Light c. So the Church of our Lord which being filled with Light sends forth her Beams through the whole World is but one Light which is diffused every-where But though this be said of the Catholick Church is here the least Intimation that the Church of Rome is this Catholick Church After St. Cyprian follow several of the later Fathers their Books being only directed to But the narrow room I am confined to will not permit me to examine them nor need we look any farther to be satisfied how this greatest Man of the Roman Church condescended to the most shameful impertinence in citing Scripture and Fathers for the doing her Service But we must not overlook St. Prosper's Verses in his Book de Ingratis viz. Sedes Roma Petri quae Pastoralis Honoris Facta Caput Mundo quicquid non possidet Armis Relligione tenet i. e. Rome the Seat of Peter being made the Head of Pastoral Honour in the World whatsoever Country she possesseth not by her Arms she holds by her Religion But considering how early this Father lived viz. about the beginning of the Fifth Century he could mean no more than this That the Church of Rome the most Honourable of all other by means of that Cities being the ancient Seat of the Emperors keeps still possession of those places by the Religion they received from Her over which she hath lost Her Old Dominion And what is this but another plain Instance of most idle quoting of Ancient Authors Not to reflect upon Fetching Arguments from Poetical Flourishes But not to stand to consider how Ample the Roman Church was in the times of those Fathers nothing is more evident than that that part of Christendom she took up was but a small Spot of Ground compared with the Space those Churches filled which tho they held Communion with Her were distinct Churches from Her and owned no Subjection to Her. And it was about or above an Hundred Years after the youngest of those Fathers that the Pope was inverted by that Execrable Wretch Phocas a Blessed Title in the mean time with the Primacy over all Churches And Gregory the Great who died in the Beginning of the Sixth Century not only sharply inveighed against John Patriarch of Constantinople and his Successor Cyriacus for assuming to themselves the Title of Vniversal Bishops though there was no appearance of their designing any thing more thereby than an Addition of Honour not of Power to that Patriarchate but also called those who should affect such a Haughty Title Greg. Epist 37. 70. lib. 11. Ep. 30. l. 4. the Forerunners of Antichrist And as these Bishops taking this Title was a Demonstration that they acknowledged not the least Subjection to the Bishops of Rome so Pope Gregory's calling
Doctrine Which I doubt not to make appear performs as little as either of the former In order to which I shall endeavour to shew I. What the Cardinal means by Sanctity of Doctrine II. That according to his Notion of it Sanctity of Doctrine is no certain Note of the true Church III. In what Sense it is a certain Note by which any honest Enquirer may distinguish a true Church from a false one IV. That neither in this nor the Cardinal's Notion of it the true Church can be found by any honest Enquirer according to the Principles of the Church of Rome I. What it is that the Cardinal here means by Sanctity of Doctrine To which in short I answer That which he means by it is the Profession of the true Religion both as to Doctrine of Faith and Doctrine of Manners without any mixture of Error For so he explains himself The true Church is not only Catholick and Apostolick and One but also Holy according to the Constantinopolitan Creed but its evident the Church is said to be Holy because its Profession is Holy containing nothing false as to Doctrine of Faith nothing unjust as to Doctrine of Manners And a little after By this Note saith he it 's evident that no Church but ours is a true Church because there is no Sect either of Pagans or Philosophers or Jews or Turks or Hereticks which doth not contain some Errors that have been exploded and are manifestly contrary to right Reason By which it 's evident that he excludes all sorts of Errors from that Profession of Religion which he here sets up as a Mark of the true Church And therefore after he had given a brief Enumeration of the Errors of all other Sects as well of Pagans and Jews and Mahometans as of Christians He thus concludes But as for our Catholick Church it teaches no Error no Turpitude nothing against Reason no not excepting Transubstantiation though many things above Reason therefore she alone is absolutely Holy and to her alone appertains what we say in our Creed I believe the Holy Church In which Words he expresly points and directs us to his Catholick Church by this Mark or Note That it teaches no Error c. By which it is evident that Sanctity of Doctrine in the Cardinal's Sense consists in an unerring profession of the true Religion without any so much as the least intermixture of Error Now tho it is certain that that is the best and purest Church which hath the least of Error and Corruption in its Doctrine and Discipline yet it is as certain that that which is the best Church is not the only true Church For the only true Church is the Catholick Church which consists of a great many particular Churches whereof some are more and some less pure from Error and Corruption and yet all of 'em true Churches For all particular Bodies and Societies of Christians that are true parts of the Catholick Church are true Churches as being Homogenious Parts of the Catholick Church and consequently partaking of the same common Nature with it But when we are discoursing of the Notes of the true Church that which we mean by 'em is such certain Marks and Characters by which an honest Enquirer may distinguish such Societies of Christians as are the true Churches of which the true Catholick Church consists from such as are not and therefore that can be no true Note of the true Church which doth not distinguish it from all false Churches and whose contrary is consistent with the being of a true Church I proceed therefore II. To shew that Sanctity of Doctrine according to Bellarmin's Sense of it that is a pure profession of true Religion without any intermixture of Error is no true Note or Mark or Character by which any honest Enquirer can certainly distinguish the true Church from all false Churches And this I doubt not will evidently appear if we consider what are the necessary Properties of all true Notes by which things are to be known and distinguished and they are these four 1. Every true Note ought to be common to all of the same kind with the thing which it notifies 2. It ought to be proper and peculiar to that kind of Thing of which it is a Note and not common to Things of another kind 3. It ought to be more known than the Thing which it notifies 4. It ought to be inseparable to it The three last of which Bellarmin himself owns to be necessary Properties of every true Note Cap. 2. though the first he did not think meet to take notice of for a Reason best known to himself if therefore this Note according to Bellarmine's sense of it hath neither of these Properties belonging to it it can be no true Note of the true Church and that none of 'em do belong to it I doubt not but I shall make it evidently appear 1. First Every true Note ought to be common to all of the same kind with the thing which it notifies Thus every true Note of a true Man for instance ought to be common to all human kind and so every true Note of every wise Man ought to be common to all wise Men and by the same Rule every true Note of the true Church ought to be common to all true Churches For seeing the true Church is nothing else but only a Collection of all true Churches whatsoever is a certain Note of the true Church must necessarily belong to all true Churches in the World. And indeed since the end of our enquiry after the true Church is that we may communicate with it and since we can no otherwise communicate with the true Church but by communicating with some particular Church that is a true part of it the proper use of the Notes of the true Church is to direct our Enquirers whether this or that Church be a true part of it or which is the same thing whether by communicating with this or that particular Church we do communicate with the true Catholick Church And therefore unless the Notes of the true Catholick Church are such as do appertain to all true Churches they can never give us any certain direction in what Church we may communicate with the true Catholick Church for seeing we can communicate with the true Catholick Church in none but a true Church no Note can give us any certain direction where to communicate with the Catholick Church but what directs us to a true Church and no Note can certainly direct us to a true Church but what belongs to all true Churches If therefore not to err in its Profession be a certain Note whereby to find the true Catholick Church it must necessarily belong to all true Churches and consequently that can be no true Church which in any instance whatsoever errs in its Profession and indeed seeing all the true Churches in the World are only so many simular parts of the true Catholick Church and the
how shall I be certain that it is the true Church Pap. Why this you must examine by certain Notes of the true Church whereof one and that a principal one is Sanctity of Doctrine or an unerring Profession of the true Religion Protest But Good Sir can I not be certain that it is the true Church till I am first certain that it doth not err in its Profession Pap. No. Protest Why then I must be certain of the Truth of all those matters of Faith whereof its Profession consists before I can be certain that it is the true Church Pap. You must so Protest But pray how shall I If that be true which you told me just now viz. That there is no true ground of Certainty but the Authority of the true Church For how is it possible I should ever be truly certain when as yet I know no true ground of Certainty Pap. Why have you not the Authority of the true Church Protest But as yet I am not certain that the Church upon whose Authority you would have me believe is the true Church and till I am certain of this with what Certainty can I depend upon her Authority Would you have me be certain that whatsoever she professes is true upon her own bare Word and Authority before I am certain that she is the true Church If so why may I not as well believe any other Church to be the true Church seeing there is no other Church but what will pass its Word for the Truth of its own Profession as well as yours If not you must allow me to have some other ground of Certainty as to Matters of Faith besides the Authority of the true Church For before I can securely rely upon the Authority of any Church as the true ground of Certainty I must be certain that it is the true Church and my Certainty that she is the true Church must depend upon my Certainty of the Truth of all those Matters of Faith comprised in her Profession So that before I am certain of the Truth of her Profession it is too soon for me to rely upon her Authority as the only ground of Certainty and when I am certain of it it is too late because I am certain already Fourthly And Lastly The Church of Rome gives Authority to the true Church to impose upon Mens Minds a necessity of believing such things as before they were not obliged to believe For she makes the Church's Authority not only a concurrent motive of Faith but the very formal reason of it so that we are not only obliged to believe what the Church declares but we are therefore obliged to believe it because she declares it 'T is true some of the Roman Doctors tell us that the Church hath no power to make new Articles of Faith but only that seeing there some old Truths in Scripture and the unwritten Tradition of the Church which the Church hath not yet declared and which therefore Men are not yet obliged to believe the Church hath Authority when ever she thinks meet to declare 'em and thereby to oblige Men under pain of Damnation to believe 'em but others of 'em and particularly Cardinal Bellarmin de Potest Sum. Pontif. tell us That the Church of later Time not only hath power to explain and declare but also to Constitute and Command those Things which belong to Faith. And indeed the difference between declaring and constituting or making an Article of Faith is only Verbal For an Article of Faith is a Truth that is necessary to be believed And therefore if the Church by declaring a Truth which was not necessary to be believed makes it necessary to be believed it thereby makes that Truth an Article of Faith which was not an Article of Faith. And so to declare and to make is the very same thing But in this they are all agreed that the true Church hath power to make those things necessary to be believed which were not so before And if this be true no Man can ever be certain by this Note of an unerring Profession that he hath found the true Church For before I can be certain of any Church as for instance the Roman that it is the true Church I must be certain that that Church's Profession is true but when I proceed to examine the particular Articles of it as I must do before I can be certain of the Truth of the whole I shall find there are several of them of the Truth of which in the opinion of several even of her own Doctors I have no sufficient ground to be certain either in Scripture or Tradition which while I am seeking the true Church are the only Rule I have whereby to examine them as particularly Transubstantiation Seven Sacraments Necessity of Auricular Confession Roman Purgatory and Indulgences Vid. Note the Sixth pag. 125. c. And if these Roman Doctors pretend to be certain of them upon no other Reason but because their Church which they are sure is the true Church hath declared them How shall I be certain of them who am but an Enquirer whether it be the true Church or no And therefore as yet cannot be supposed to be sure that it is for without her Declaration they themselves confess I have no sufficient ground to be certain of the Truth of them And till I am sure she is the true Church her Declarations are no ground of Certainty to me And as I cannot be certain that these Articles are true till I am sure that the Church which declare them is the true Church so supposing that the true Church hath power to impose upon me a necessity of believing such Things as before I was not obliged to believe I cannot be certain that they are false because no Authority can be supposed to have a right to impose upon Men such a necessity of believing but what is infallible and cannot impose what is false on them unless it be supposed that Men may be rightfully obliged to believe what is false If therefore the Roman Church be the true Church as for all I yet know it may then for all I yet know it hath Authority from God to impose upon me a necessity of believing whatever she declares and consequently for all I yet know she is Infallible But as for my self I know that I am a fallible Creature and therefore whatsoever Infallibility declares to me must certainly be true whatsoever Probabilities yea or seeming Demonstrations I may have against it how then can I be certain that any Article is false which is declared to me by a Church that for all I yet know is Infallible if it be Infallible I am sure that whatever it declares is true And if it be the true Church it must be Infallible Supposing that the true Church hath Authority to impose new Necessities of believing but whether it be the true Church or no is the Thing I am now enquiring by this Note of
an unerring Profession But till I am certain one way or t'other whether she be the true Church or no I can never be certain whether her Profession be true or false till I am certain that she is the true Church there are some Articles in her Profession of which as her own Doctors confess I cannot be certain that they are true and till I am certain that she is not the true Church I can never be certain that any one Article in her Profession is false and if I cannot be certain whether she errs in her Profession or no till I am certain whether she be the true Church or no to what purpose should I enquire whether or no she be the true Church by this Note of an unerring Profession If supposing her to be the true Church she hath Authority from God to oblige me upon pain of Damnation to believe to Day that which I was not obliged to believe Yesterday to what end do I enquire whether those things which she commands me to believe are true or false If she be the true Church as for all I yet know she may be I am sure what ever she commands me to believe must be true and therefore till I am certain that she is not the true Church I can never be certain that any thing she commands me to believe is false For how can I be certain that any one thing she imposes is false when for all I yet know she is the true Church which the God of Truth who can neither impose himself nor authorize any other to impose on me that which is false hath authorized to impose it and if till I am certain that she is not the true Church I can never be certain that any thing she imposes is false How can I ever be cartain by this Note of an unerring Profession whether she be the true Church or no For if any thing she professes or imposes be false by this Note she cannot be the true Church but whether any thing she professes be false or no I can never be certain till I am first certain whether she is or is not the true Church THE END ERRATA IN the Seventh Note Pag. 137. the first cum Capite in the Title is to be blotted out P. 147. line 17. for Arian r. Asian P. 148. l. 6. f. Complaint r. Complement LONDON Printed by J. D. for Richard Chiswel at the Rose and Crown in St. Paul's Church-Yard 1687. The Ninth Note of the CHURCH EXAMINED VIZ The Efficacy of the Doctrine Nona Nota est Efficacia Doctrinae Bellarm. L. iv c. 12. de Notis Ecclesiae IMPRIMATUR June 8. 1687. Jo. Battely BY Efficacy of Doctrine must be meant either that power which the Word of God has in the Minds of Particular Men to dispose them to believe aright and to live well or else that success which it has in drawing Multitudes outwardly to profess and embrace it The former of these is too inward a thing to be the Note of a true Church No Man being able to know what the Word of God has done in anothers Heart but instead of that apt rather to be deceived in what it has done in his own The Second which must be that the Cardinal means can as little be a Note by reason of its Uncertainty and if we cannot be sure of the Note we shall be less so of that which we are to find out by it If indeed there were nothing which could or did move Men to relinquish Heathenism Judaism or Turcism for our Religion but the pure Efficacy of the Christian Doctrine it would be a very good Note of the excellence of the Doctrine it self but according to the Cardinal 's own Principles it could be no Note that that were the true Church which preached it since he will not allow the sincere preaching of Truth to signify any thing Lib. iv 2. And we shall have much less reason to rely on this Note if we consider how many other things there are besides the Efficacy of the Christian Doctrine which have and may convert whole Nations to it Let us therefore at present grant in general the matter of Fact to be true that such Conversions as the Cardinal speaks of were made by the Church of Rome yet how shall we know that they were made purely by the Efficacy of its Doctrine and that no other means such as Force c. were used Is it enough that he tells us so The Bishop of Meaux tells us that in the late great Conversion in France not one of the Persons converted suffered Violence either in his Person or Goods That they were so far from suffering Torments Pastoral Letter p. 3 4. that they had not so much as heard them mentioned and that he heard other Bishops affirm the same Now if those Reverend Prelats were out as most people think they were in a matter of Fact of which they might be Eye-witnesses why may not the learned Cardinal be so too in his Relation of Conversions made so many hundred years since If he be out his Note falls to the ground and if it cannot be made plainly to appear to us that he was not out his Note as far as it is founded upon those Histories which he produces wants that certainty which should give us satisfaction Historians who wrote in those obscure times and were perhaps themselves Converters being most of them Monks might vain-gloriously ascribe much to the Efficacy of their own Doctrine and the Centuriators themselves whom he so often quotes might not be very curious to search or accurate to relate the chief motives of their Conversions because they wrote before the Cardinal had made Efficacy of Doctrine a Note of the true Church and little dream't what odd use some Men would make of their History But notwithstanding these Neglects and Disadvantages I do not doubt but that if we look'd back into the Writers of those Times nay even into the Centuriators themselves we should find some other things besides Efficacy of Doctrine concurring to the Conversions which were then wrought An instance whereof to pass by at present the particular examination of those mentioned by the Cardinal we have in those Converons wrought by Charles the Great to whose victorious Arms they were more to be ascribed than to any thing else besides For not to mention that the Clergy were not then in any great capacity of doing much by the Efficacy of their Doctrine the Bishops being so ignorant that they were to be commanded to understand the Lord's Prayer and could hardly be brought to make some few exhortations to the People but instead of that turned Souldiers to shew that they were willing to do somewhat towards the propagating their Religion such was the Zeal of that Prince rather to defend and increase the Kingdom of Jesus Christ Mezeray in the Life of Charles the Great than to inlarge his own Empire that Peace could never be
Constance and Trent that 't was the ancient Practice For the Doctrine of Transubstantiation See a Treatise of Transubstantiation by one in the Communion of the Church of Rome Printed 1687. one of the Communion of the Church of Rome hath given us an Account lately he proves from many Doctors of the Church of Rome that it is not ancient viz. from Peter Lombard from Suarez Scotus the Bishop of Cambray Cardinal Cusanus Erasmus Alphonsus à Castro Tonstall and Cassander And that 't is not taught in the holy Scriptures he proves from the Testimonies of Scotus Ockam Gabriel Biel and Cardinal Cajetan and after all that it was not the Doctrine of the Fathers of the Church It would have been very fit I should here have made an end having considered every thing which the Cardinal hath offered as to this Note of the Church But there is a late Writer I will not call him Author hath taken the Confidence to produce the Testimony of the Jewish Writers in behalf of the Church of Rome Mr. Sclater's Consenf Vet. and which is most surprising of all he quotes the Rabbins in Defence of the Doctrine of Transubstantiation which they are as far from asserting as he is from understanding them The Cardinal was too learned and modest to attempt any thing of this Nature but this Gentleman advanceth higher than he thought fit to do What he offers speaks nothing so lowdly as the Writers Effrontery and Ignorance not to say something worse Tho he thought fit to desert his Mother the Church of England yet it little became him to fly in her Face and suborn a Rout of Jews against her His Discourse is so weak that I shall bestow very little time and pains about it I shall however say something to it that he may not think any Part of his Pamphlet unanswered and do heartily wish him Repentance for his Folly and that he may learn Modesty for the future And for my better proceeding in this matter I shall do these things First I will briefly shew the true use and value of the Testimony of Jews as to the Christian Religion Secondly I shall shew the gross Ignorance not to say Dishonesty of this Writer in this Matter Thirdly I shall prove that the Jewish Writers are so far from serving the Church of Rome that they bear witness against it and that also in this very matter of Transubstantiation First I shall consider how far the Testimony of the Jews is useful to Christianity And several such there are that serve the common Christianity 1. The Jews as to matter of Fact confess that there was such a Man as Jesus that he wrought wonderful Works They do in their Talmud and elsewhere mention several of those Names which are mentioned in the New Testament and are there mentioned to have been at the same time in which they are placed there This is an useful Testimony and serves the common Christianity and saves us the labour in our Books against the Jews of proving these Matters of Fact. 2. They are also good Witnesses as to the Number of the Canonical Books of the Old Testament which were deposited in their Hands This is owned by Cardinal Cajetan who affirms that this is one Advantage we receive from the Obstinacy of the Jews Cajetan in Rom. xi v. 11. that tho they believe not in Christ themselves yet they approve the Books of the Old Testament and therefore those Books cannot be supposed to have been invented by the Christians to have served their turn This Testimony of theirs serves indeed the common Christianity but is so far from serving the Church of Rome that it is a good Evidence against the Council of Trent who have receiv'd those Books for Canonical which the Jews never received into the Canon of Scripture 3. They are good Witnesses of the Promise of a Messias which is reckoned among the Fundamental Articles of the Jewish Faith. And this is an other Advantage that Christians receive as Cajetan well observes in the Place mentioned before from the Obstinacy of the Jews Abravenel C. Fidei c. 1. They agree that such a Promise was made and that therefore it cannot be supposed either a Forgery of the Christians or a vain Belief peculiar only to them 4. They are good Witnesses where they interpret those Texts of the Old Testament of the Messias which belong to that matter and which are by the Writers of the New Testament applied to that purpose And the more ancient Jews do thus The Chaldee Paraphrasts and other of the more ancient Jewish Doctors do apply those Texts to him which the Christians also understand to be spoken of him Of which were it not too great a Digression it would be easy to produce very many Proofs This serves the common Christianity greatly and in our Disputes against the Jews affords us very great Advantages 5. Nor do I deny but that some of the Catholick Doctrines of the Christian Religion I mean such as have been always believed from the first Beginning of Christianity may receive some Confirmation from the Writings of the most antient Jewish Doctors But to produce them as Witnesses as this Writer does to a Doctrine never received by the antient Church is the most extravagant thing imaginable Secondly I shall shew the gross Ignorance not to say Dishonesty of this Writer in this matter His Author from whom he borrows all his Rabbinical Learning is Galatinus He tells if we will believe him that he was always accounted a very learned Man Preface to Consens Veterum It would have been more to his purpose to have vouched for his Honesty After this he falls into a Fit of Devotion he is of a sudden transported with Admiration that the Hebrew Writers long before Christ's time take Mr. Sclater's word for that should have such Notions But the Wind bloweth were it listeth c. He might have staid till he had been sure of the matter of Fact and then 't would have been time enough to admire at it But the Reader is to know that Mr. Sclater was mightily inclined to believe in this matter with the Church of Rome or else Galatinus could never by his Arguments have prevailed upon him This appears from his own Words after he had drawn up his Evidence from Galatinus P. 27. he tells his Reader that Galatinus thought and I 'le assure you 't is hard to say what a Jew that professeth himself a Convert to the Church of Rome does really think these Prophecies and Interpretations he might have called them Dreams and Figments argumentative not only against the Jews but a Confirmation also of the Christian Religion against all Hereticks c. But if you ask Mr. Sclater what confirms him in this Belief you 'le find him not hard to believe I am confirmed says he by the Title-page of his Book Of so great force is the Title-page of Galatinus his Book with Mr. Sclater of
consult St. Bernard himself he is comforting himself and others under the defect of Miracles in his Age. * Bernard Serm. 1. In di◠Ascensionis Non tam merita sunt quanindicia meritorum Quis daemonia ejicit linguis novis loquitur serpentes tollit c. Primum enim opus fidei per dilectionem operantis cordis compunctio est in quâ sine dubio ejiciuntur daemonia cum eradiantur e corde peccata c. Bern. ubi supr He tells us that Miracles are not so properly meritorious as the Indications of good Men. Who saith he now casteth out Devils speaketh with Tongues destroys Serpents c. Nay seems to account the great Work wrought upon the Hearts of Believers wherein he and others were made the blessed Instruments to be equivalent to Miracles The first Work saith he of that Faith which worketh by Love is the Compunction of the Heart by which without doubt Devils are cast out when Sin is rooted out of the Heart And then those that believe in Christ speak with Tongues too when the old things are vanish't from their Lips they do not speak for the future with the old Tongue of their first Parents who declin'd into Words of Wickedness So when by Compunction of Heart and Confession of the Mouth former Sins are blotted out they must necessarily destroy Serpents that is extinguish the venomous Suggestions c. And thus he goes on in that allusive way accommodating the whole Christian Life to something of those miraculous Acts in the Primitive Days But let the ingenuous Reader judg now Is it not probable that had St. Bernard been so very illustrious for Miracles beyond all the Saints whose Lives had been ever written instead of apologizing for the defect of Miracles or drawing the equivalent between the Conversion of a Sinner and casting out Devils or speaking with Tongues he would not have put in a word or two here of what great things God had enabled him to do Again it is observable of St. John Damascen concerning whom they tell us that his Hand having been cut off by the Saracens for the Profession of the Faith he praying before the Image of the Blessed Virgin and falling asleep upon his awaking found his Hand restor'd only a Seam of Blood visible where it was cut off and joyn'd again Now if we consult himself he tells us of the Doctors and Pastors of the Church that succeeded the Apostles in their Grace and Dignity that they having obtain'd the enlightning Grace of God's Spirit did both by the Power of Miracles and Eloquence of Speech enlighten blind Men and reduce the Wanderer into the way * Damascen Orthodox Fid. l. 1. c. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. But we saith he who have neither the Gift of Miracle nor of Speech c. Is this spoken like a Man of Miracle ‖ Cum modestiâ viro Christiano dignâ humilitate de seipso loquitur B. Pater Damascenus c. His Commentator indeed would bring him off as if it were his Modesty to speak thus of himself and gives the instance of S. Paul confessing himself least of all the Apostles But certainly were he never so modest he would not lie for the matter by any means especially when he made mention of the Miracles that former Ages had produc'd St. Paul as humbly as he thought and spoke of himself made no scruple upon occasion to mention the mighty Powers that God had endu'd him with and so did St. Peter too Nor was it other than their Duty sometimes to do it both to own the Gift with Thankfulness and to make use of it as an Argument to enforce their Doctrines upon those they had to deal with Thus much for the Persons 2. For the Doctrines It would be too tedious to run through the various Heads of Doctrine which they boast of as confirm'd by Miracles many of which are so monstrously ridiculous so highly improbable so confessedly fabulous so perfectly needless and to no purpose that they are not worth one minute's regard either to examin or expose them The Legends of the Saints and the School of the Eucharist lately published in English I may add Father Cressy's Church History will abundantly furnish the Reader that is at leisure to dip into that way of Learning However because our Cardinal hath thought fit to make this of Miracles his last Argument for the Proof of Christ's bodily Presence in the holy Sacranent and besides pointing at great numbers hath himself insisted upon six or seven which he thought of the greatest weight (e) V. Bellar. De sacr Euchar l. 3. c. 8. I shall examine one or two of them It is a very considerable Miracle the Cardinal mentions from Paulus Diaconus in the Life of Saint Gregory which I rather pick out because I find our Putney Convert very fond of it It is of a Woman that laugh'd while in the distribution of the Sacramental Bread Consensus Veterum p. 69. she heard it call'd the Body of our Lord when she knew she had made it with her own Hands Upon this St. Gregory prayed and the outward species of Bread was turned into visible Flesh by which the Woman was recovered to the true Faith and the whole Assembly mightily confirmed This were a good significant Proof of Transubstantiation indeed if it were but true Though here also a Man might as justly question his Senses at the sight of such a Change as he must always renounce them in the belief of the thing it self But there are considerable difficulties before the truth of the Story will go down with Vs Vnbelievers For 1. It is a very unlucky thing that never any such Miracle was yet wrought in view of any of those Churches that do professedly deny this Doctrine In the second Council of Nice Actio 7. Therasius the President puts this grave Question What is the cause that Miracles are not wrought by any of our Images and as gravely answers it himself Because Miracles are not given to them that believe but to them that believe not It is indeed what St. Paul intimates concerning the Gift of Tongues 1 Cor. xiv 22. which most Interpreters apply to all other Miracles We are the Persons to whom this Ocular Demonstration should be made and because it hath not yet upon any Occasion or Challenge whatever been made amongst us we may reasonably question the truth of this or any other Story of this kind which they tell amongst themselves Besides 2. this Story was writ by Paulus Diacocus about two hundred years after the Death of this Gregory and in an Age as Fabulous as any hath yet been I add lastly That the very Doctrine of Transubstantiation had hardly got the least footstep in the Church in the days of St. Gregory it cannot be pick'd out of any of his Writings no not in that passage which Mr. Sclater hath quoted from him * Consens veterum p.