never mentioned Manichaeus ergo the Church on whose word he received the Ghospel was that of his time not that of the Apostles When therefore E. S. pag. 220. says It is plain S. Austin meanes not the Iudgment of the present Church but of the Catholick Church as taking in all ages places he evidently contradicts the very text of S. Ausstin whence I conclude that ether he speakes against his conscience which I am unwilling to beleive or else which is more excusable that he had not reade the text which he understakes to explicate A third yet more improbable explication is delivered by W.L. pag. 82. He speakes it ether of Novices or doubters in the Faith or else of such as were in part Infidels Mr. Fisher the Iesuit at the conference would needs have it that S. Austinspake it even of the faithfull which I cannot yet thinke For he speakes to the Manichees they had a greate part of the Infidell in them And the words immediatly before these are If thou shouldst find one qui Evangelio non credit which did not beleive the Ghospel what wouldest thou doe to make him beleive Thus W. L. This is like wise plainly fals for S. Austin was nether a Novice nor a doubter in the faith nor in part an infidel when he writ that Booke for he writ it after he was made Bishop as you may see l. 2. retract c. 2. But he speakes of himselfe describes the ground of his owne faith ergo he doth not speake of Novices Doubters or halfe Infidels nor describes the ground of their fath but of those who are firme beleivers I prove that S. Austin speakes of his owne Faith shews the ground on which it relyed For first he says I would not beleive the Ghospel without the authority of Catholicks commending them Secondly he says If you weaken the authority of Catholicks I will reject the Ghospel This I beleive Mr. Stillingf saw therefore sayd pag. 220. If you extend this beyond Novices weaklings I shall not oppose you in it And I cannot think that W.L. had reade that place at least with attention when he writ he could not think S. Austin spake of the faithfull Stillingf pag. 220. Nether you nor any Catholick Author is able to prove that S. Austin by these words ever dreamt of any infallible authority in the present Church Answer seing S. Austin expressely says he would renounce the Ghospel if the authority of Catholicks were weakened in him by discovering they had delivered any one lye he must ether think them exempt from all possibility of lying or else he adhered very loosely to the Ghospel I hope E.S. will not assert the later part wherefore he must grant that S. Austin thought the Church free from all possibility of errour Let us returne to Mr. G. B. G. B. pag. 43. Christ's prophetick office is invaded by the pretence of the Churches Infallibility in expounding Scriptures And why Good Sir should the infallibility in expounding Scriptures be an invasion of the prophetick office of Christ seing infallibility in writing them was no such thing Certainly it is more to compose a writing them to understand it as many can understand Cicero's speech pro Milone who cannot compose such an one And your old women pretend to understand severall parts of Scripture which yet I think will scarce undertake to pen the like By this Say you the whole anthority is devolved on the Church No more then it was on S. John when he writ his Ghospel or S. Paul composing his Epistles Nor soe much nether seing these were so assisted as to compose Holy Scripture when the Church only pretends to expound the word of God How doth such an assistance of the divine Spirit derogate from the infallibility of God from which it is derived But her exposition must be admitted say you though contrary to the sense As if Infallibility did not exclude all possibility of such a wrested exposition The infallibility of the Church may slyght your attempts whilest you are armed only with such straws We have seene you arguments Let us see your Answers to ours G. B. pag. 44. The Gates of Hell not prevailing against the Church Mat. 16.18 Proves not the pretence of infallibility Why not learned Sir Not a word for that but as if you had forgotten what you were about your fall uppon the Inglish Translation of that text which you say deserres amendment And I will leave you to be taught better manners by your fellow Ministers or your mother the kirk of Scotland G. B. pag. 45 The spirit leading into all truth Joan. 16.13 advances not the cause a whit since that promise relates to all beleivers Here is another assertion without proofe as if we were bound to take your word Those words are part of the sermon after the last supper at which only the Apostles were present which was directed immediatly to them You should then give some reason why they relate to all beleivers althô spoken to only the Apostles G. B. The Church's being built on the Rocke Peter proves nothing for a series of Bishops of Rome seing the other Apostles were also foundations ANS If it proves all Bishops together Infallible firme in faith as a Rock it confounds your Reformation which is condemned by them all G. B. The keys of the Kingdome of Heaven Mat. 16.19 import no more then that Peter was to open the Ghospel When you shall give in a proofe we will consider it Till then I will beleive not you but Christ who 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 addes the office of the Keys to open shut not the Ghospel but Heaven by loosing binding sins G. B. pag. 46. It is certaine that vice as well as errpr os destrictove of Religion If then there be no authority for repressing of vice but that same of the discipline of the Church it is not incongruous there be no other authority for suppressing of error but that same of the discipline of the Church ANS It is certaine that both in the old new law severall persons have beene secured against Error who were subject to sin S. Peter was truly reprehensible (a) Gal. 2.11 for a thing he did not for any thing he writ or preacht The same of David of Salomon c. For this reason our Blessed Saviour commanded (b) Mat. 23.23 all to follow the Doctrine of the Scribes Pharisys because they sate on the chaire of Moyses but not their example Soe your question why God should provide more against error in faith then against vice in manners can find no place amongst Catholicks who are taught to adore God's holy will even when they understand it not to Bring (c) 2. Cor. 10.5 into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ To you who think it absurd to deny a man the use of his Reason in judging discerning all things submit even Divinely
his humble applications to God bowing to him lifting up his hands to the throne of Grace Heb. 4.16 ro receive thence Mercy then turne to the People to powre it uppon them Thus on Jacobs Ladder the Angells appeared going up downe up to God downe to Jacob a type of what Preists doe when they officiate But he gives them a short Barbariais Benedidiction That Benediction which you a very civilized person disdaine as Barbarous is taken out of Scripture the words of an Angel to Gedeon Judges 6.12 Our Lord be with you Dominus vobiscum Scripture it selfe cannot escape your censure if a Papist use it Your contempt of the language of Angels in this world will scarce make you worthy of their company in the next G. B. page 35. After Adoration the God is to be devoured by the Preist which made the Arabian say Christians were fooles who devoured what they adored ANS Aworthy authority for a King's chaplain in ordinary to build uppon Sir Christ sayd Take eate this is my body Because he says it is his body we adore it because he commands us to take eate it we obey do so But a Turk says it is foolish Let it be soe no Turk's opinion is the rule of my faith Is it of yours Is not this Prodigious that against the expresse words of Christ the practice of the whole Church the authority of a Turk should be brought nay preferred before it this by a minister G. B. pag. 38. Rome enioines severer censures on the violation of these ceremonyes then on the greatest transgressions against either the morall or positive Laws of God ANSWER I know no motive you can have for advancing such notorious untruths but that of Cicero Cum semel limites verecundiae transieris oportet gnaviter esse impudentem You have past those bounds there I leave you CHAPTER XIII Scripture the Church where Of the Resolution of Faith G.B. pag. 41. Papists call the Scriptures a nose of wax the sourse of all Heresyes c. ANS If any Roman Catholick compared Scripture to a nose of wax it is only because the letter may be wrested to different senses made to lookenot that way which the Holy Ghost designed but that which men's Passions leade them to The world affords not amore convincing instance of this flexibility of Scriptures then that of your owne Brethren in the late troubles who brought it to countenance Sedition Rebellion Heresy Murther the horriblest of all Murthers Parricide the killing of the father of the Country Did Scripture of it selfe Looke towards or abet all those crying sins nosure it condemnes them formally It can then be wrested from its owne naturall sense to another meaning contrary to it which is all that is meant by that phrase As for its being a sourse of Heresyes it is not tru that Scriptures doe found heresyes or that heresyesspring out of them but that men draw heresyes out of the words of Scriptures taken in a sense quite contrary to that of the holy Ghost G. B. pag. 41. Papists will have all the authority of the Scriptures to depend on the Church A greate difference is to be made betwixt the testimony of a witnesse the authority of a Iudge The former is not denyed to the Church ANS Here you grant to the Church as much as we desire provided you owne in this witnesse such a veracity as the nature of its Testimony requires to bring us to a certaine undoubted beleife of the Scriptures The Church never tooke uppon her the title of Iudge of Scripture In her Councils she places in the middle of the assembly a hygh Throne as for Christ in it sets the holy Ghospels as his word according to which she Judges of the Doctrine controverted Conc. Calced Act. 1. Soe she judges by Scriptures of the Doctrine of men but doth not Iudge of the Scriptures themselves At the first admission of a writing into the Canon of Scriptures the Church proceding is of another nature A writing is brought to her as writen by a man Divinely assisted of S. Paul for example to the Romans by Phebe or to Philemon by a fugitive servant Onesimus nether as a witnesse give any greate credit to the writing they brought The Pastors of the flocke of Christ consider the writings examin the messengers recurre to God by Prayer to demand the assistance of his Holy Spirit to know whither he were truly the Authour of the writing exhibited If after all these meanes used to discover the Truth they remaine convinced the thing was writen by inspiration of the Holy Ghost they obey it themselve command obedience to it as to the word of God use it as a Rule of Faith manners Soe when an unknowne person brings into a corporation a new Patent as of the King's Majesty presents it to the Major He before he allows the Patentee to act in vertu of it with his Brethen considers the writing the signet the seale the stile c. to know whither it be counterfitte or sincere with a Resolution to obey it himselfe make others doe the same in case it appeare to be truly the Kings The Major cannot be sayd to Judge of the Kings Patents to which as a subject he owes obedience but only to discerne whither an unknowne writing be the Kings Patent or no. You say this makes the authority of Scriptures depend on the Church Which is as rationall as if you should say the authority of the King's Patent depends on the Major of a petty corporation because the Patent is exhibited to him before it be executed If any man hath soe little common sense as not to discerne the difference betwixt these two Propositions to Iudge of the Kings Patent to Iudge whither an unknowne writing be the Kings Patent I am to seeke how to helpe him This authority of the Church to recommend the Scriptures as an undeniable witnesse occasioned that saying of S. Augustin 1. contu Epist Fundam c. 5. Ego Evangelio non crederem nisi me Ecclesiae Catholicae commoveret authoritas I would not beleive the Ghospel did not the authority of the Catholick Church move me to it Which words are cited by all Catholick controvertists as containing an implicit decision of all one controversys they shewing evidently S. Autstin's discourse against the Manichees to be just the same which we use against the moderne Protestants that as we are heyres of that Faith which S. Austin the Church of his time defended against its Opposers the Ancient Hereticks soe are we of the titles by which they enjoyed it the armes with which they defended it I will put downe the whole discourse of S. Austin atlarge that soe we may the better understand his meaning more convincingly shew how much the most understanding of our Adversarys are out of the way in explicating it The thing sought for in that
discourse was whither Manichoeus was an Apostle of Jesus-Christ or no The Manicheans sayd he was the Catholicks denyed it for whose cause S. Austin disputes thus in that place Quaero quis sit iste Manichoeus says he Respondebitis Apostolus Christi Non credo Evangelium fortè mihi lecturus es indè Manichoei personam tentabis asserere Si ergò invenires aliquem qui Evangelio nondum credit quid faceres dicenti tibi non credo Ego verò Evangelio non crederem nisi me Catholicoe Ecclesioe commoveret authoritas Quibus ergò obtemperavi dicentibus credite Evangelio cur eis non obtemperem dicentibus mihi Noli credere Manichoeo Elige quid velis Si dixeris crede Catholicis ipsi me monent ut nullam fidem accommodem vobis quapropter non possum illis credens nisi tibi non credere Si dixeris noli Catholicis credere non rectè facis per Evangelium me cogere ad Manichoei fideÌ„ quiaipsi Evangelio Catholicis proedicantibus credidi Siautem dixeris benè credidisti Catholicis laudantibus Evangelium sed non rectè credisti illisvituperantibus Manichoeum usque adeò me stultum put as ut nullâ redditâ ratione quod vis credam quod non vis non credam quippè multò justius cautius facio si Catholicis quoniam semel credidi ad te non transeo nisi me non credere jusseris sed manifestissimè apertissimè scire aliquid feceris Quocirca si mihirationem redditurus es dimitte Evangelium Si ad Evangelium te tenes ego ad eos me teneam quibus proecipientibus Evangelio credidi his jubentibus tibi omninò non credam Quod si fortè in Evangelio aliquid manifestissimum de Manichoei Apostolatu invenire potueris infirmabis mibi Catholicorum auctoritatem qui jubent ut tibi non credam Quâ infirmatâ nec Evangelio credere potero quia per eos illi credideram ita nihil apud me valebit quic quid inde protuleris Quapropter si nihil manifestum de Manichaei Apostolatu in Evangelio reperitur Catholicis potiùs credam quà m tibi Si aute inde aliquid manifestum pro Manichaeo legeris nee illis nec tibi illis quia de te mihi mentiti sunt tibi quia eam scripturaÌ„ mihi profers cui per illos credidaram qui mihi mentiti sunt Sed absit ut ego Evangelio non credam Illi autem credens non invenio quomodò possim etiam tibi credere Haec Aug. ibi I demand says this Saint who is this Manichaeus You answer he is the Apostle of Christ I will not take your word for it What will you say what meanes will you use to perswade me Perchance you will take the Ghospel thence endeavour to prove unto me the mission of Manichaeus But what if you meete with one who doth not beleive the Ghospel how would you deale with him For my part I would not beleive the Ghospel did not the Authority of the Cat. Church move me Whome therefore I obey in saying beleive the Ghospel should I not obey in saying beleive not Manichaeus Take your choice whither you will have me ely on the Catholicks or not If you say Belive the Catholicks they warne me not to beleive you wherefore beleiving them I must reject you If you say doe not beleive Catholicks you doe not well endeavouring to bring me to the Beleife in Manichaeus by the Ghospel which I received only uppon the word of Catholicks If you say you doe well to beleive the Catholicks when they commend the Ghospel but you doe not well in beleiving them when they blame Manichaeus doe you think me such a foole as without any reason I should beleive what pleases you not beleive what you dislike Certainly it is much more reasonable seing I must beleive the Catholicks that I abandon your communion unlesse you can give me an evident demonstration for the contrary Wherefore if you will alleadge Reason lay by the Ghospel If you retaine the Ghospel I will sticke to those uppon whose word I have admitted the Ghospel their authority forces me to renounce you Now if perchance you can shew out of the Ghospel any evident proofe of Manichaeus his Apostleship you will indeed weaken in me the Authority of Catholicks who forbid me to beleive you But that authority being weakened I shall no more be able to beleive the Ghospel which I received by it soe what soever you prove thence will fall to the ground Therefore if no cleere proofe of Manichaeus his mission is extant in the Ghospel I will rather beleive the Catholicks then you If a cleere proofe be found there I will nether beleive the Catholicks nor you not them because they were fals in the opinion they delivered of you nor you because you rely on that scripture which I received on the testimony of those who have deceived me Yet god forbid I should reject the Ghospel And beleiving it I see no possibility of beleiving you Thus the greate Saint Which I have cited at large because the whole discourse holds against all heresyes changing only the name of Manichaeus or Manichean into that which signifyes the Heresy as for example into that of Protestant or Luther Moreover it containes a cleere confutation of what hath hitherto by the learnedest of our adversarys beene sayd in answer to it The first interpretation of this place is delivered by W.L. in his relation of a conference pag. 81. some of your oâ—ne says he will not endure it should be understoode save of the Church in the time of the Apostles only And then cites Ockam Dial. p. 1. l 1. c. 4. Where he hath not one word of that But says Mr. Stillingf in his rationall account pag. 198. the words are in Durandus l. 3. insent d. 24. q. 1. q 9. where he says Intelligitur solùm de Ecclesiâ quae fuit tempore Apostolorum It is understood only of the Church which was in time of the Apostles The same Author borrows another explication of Biel lect 2. in Can. Missae that the words are to be understood of the Church in generall as it containes the first later ages A tempore Christi Apostolorum c. And to this he sticks for he addes And so doth S. August take Eccles contra Fund And D. Stillingf p. 198. 199. approves the same confirmes it out of Gerson Driedo Nether of these two explications can stand with the text as appeares out of those words Quibus obtemperavi dicentibus Credite Evangelio cur eis non obtemperem dicentibus mihi noli credere Manichaeo Whome I obeyed in saying Beleive the Ghospel should I not obey in saying doe not beleive Manichaeus Hence I frame this argument S. Austin professeth he received the Ghospel uppon the credit of that Church which condemned Manichaeus but that Church which condemned Manichaeus was that of his time not that of the Apostles who
Mankind 〈◊〉 the closest bonds of Peace freindship charity which it doth tempering our Passions forgiving injuries loving our enemyes teaching obediencâ— to those in authority over us by associating 〈◊〉 into one body called the Church ANSWER This is in deed a designe worthy of Christian Religion but imperfectly explicated by you seing you omite the love of God the God (a) â— Cor. 13.11 of Peace who alone can give us perfect Peace Humane wills are naturally oppoâ—â— to one another they cannot meete but iâ—â— their naturall center God And the love 〈◊〉 our neyghbour is never sincere lasting buâ— when it is grounded on the love of God Thâ— first effect of selfe love is to seperate us from God The second to divide us amongst oâ—â— selves Both are the effects of sin nothing can prevent them linck us together in the bonds of charity but he who can remit sins That Peace then which Christian Religion teaches which the Church recomend to her children which in her Prayers shee demands of God is not an effect of human industry but of Grace It proceedes from the mercy of God it is a sequel of Purity of conscience the Crowne of reall tru Iustice In fine it is the work of the unspotted Lambe (a) 1. Petr. 1.19 at whose birth Peace (b) Luk. 2.14 was announced in his name to the world by the Angells who left Peace (c) 10.14.27 as a legacy to his disciples before his Death who was sacrificed on the Altar of the Crosse to reconcile us to his Heavenly father restore Peace betwixt Heaven Earth which the sin Rebellion of Men had banisht You see sir how insufficient your explication of Peace is for the ends you propose You leave out the Cheife most necessary ingredient for purging our dissensions to use a Prophets comparison (d) Ezeh c. 13.10 you build with untempered Mortar You (e) Ierem. 6.14 heale the hurt of the people slyghtly saying Peace Peace when there is no Peace You hint indeed at a good humane meanes to Peace Obedience to those in Authority It was to prevent schisme (f) Inter Apostolos unus eligitur ut capite consâ—ituto schismatis toll retur occasio Hieron l. 1. adversus Vigilantium c. 54. that God establisht one Apostle over the rest But your endlesse Divisions subdivisions amongst your selves Shew how inefficacious this meanes is in your Reformation And how can it be otherwise when all your People have before their eyes the example of your first Patriarkes who began your Reformation by rejecting all Authority over them breaking the rules of divine worship setled al over the world till that time acknowledged by themselves Cur non licebit Valentiniano quod licuit Valentino de arbitrio suo fidem innovare Tert. l. de praescript Why may not a Lutheran doe what was lawfull to Luther your first Reformers rejected some articles of Faith then universally beleived because they seemed not to be contained in Scripture why may not the same motive authorize their followers to reject some others which you would retaine althô they are as little to be found in Scriptures Why may not a moderne Protestant retrench some unnecessary ceremony used by you at present seing you have cut off soe many others Let others live by that law which you publish think not soe hyghly of your onne authority as to make your dictamens not only the Rule of Actions but of the laws themselves It shall be lawfull to dissent from this article of Faith but not from that other to quit this ceremony not that when the same rule is applicable to both Is not this properly (a) 2. Cor. 1.24 to Lord it over the Faith of the People What wonder you find your layty refractory to your ordinances they are in this directed by your rule encouraged by your example Wherefore Looke no where abroade for the roote of these tares your Reformers planted them they layd the Egge out of which this cockatrice is hatched They eate the sower grapes which set all your Teeth an Edge Nether appeares there any possibility of a remedy while your reformation subsists this principle of Discorde Schisme being sayd in its very foundation consequently it cannot be removed with out the ruin of the whole structure nor retained without perpetuall danger of renting it in Pieces I wish these troublesome schismes endlesse discordes amongst your selves may make you seeke a proper Remedy by a Reunion to the center of union God his Church CHAPTER V. Of the Characters of Christian Doctrine G.B. p. 8. I shall add to this the main distinguishing Characters of our Religion which are four Pag. 8. First its verity Pag. 10. The second its genuine simplicity perspicuity The third its Reasonablenesse the fourth its easinesse Thus you ANSWER Are these the only or even the Cheife Characters of Divine Truths whither you take them as they are delivered in holy writ or as taught in the Church Can you find no other quality peculiar to them not common to others Then humane learning may equall if not surpasse Divine Take for example some principles naturally knowne as Two two make four or The whole body is greater then any part of it These are Tru it is impossible they should be false They are Perspicuous Easy no man can doubt of them who understands the termes They are Reasonable for what more reasonable then to assent to Evident Truth Nay of we compare then with supernaturall Truths as to their Perspicuity Verity in order to us the advantage seemes greater on the side of naturall Truths 1. o For no man ever doubted of the Truth of these having once understood their termes many have doe doubt of faith althô sufficiently proposed And 2. o no man ever dissented from those Principles when he had once admitted them many have Apostatized from their Faith Soe that all the Prayses you give to Faith belong more to naturall Sciences then to it Such a stranger are you to its tru Prerogatives The reason of this stupendious blindnesse in searching the scriptures is that you reade them as a master not as a disciple you intend not to learne from them what to beleive but to shape them to what you think you have the word but reject the sense which is to the word what the soul is to the body it gives it life motion The (a) 1. Cor. 2.14 naturall man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God for they are foolishnesse vnto him nether can be know them because they are spiritually discerned You see fir that some may reade or have the word of God yet not comprehend its meaning nay that it may seeme folly unto them The words may be words of (b) Iohn 6.61 lise everlasting yet they cry Durus est hic sermo this word is hard who
who dye without any sin but only without having satisfyed fully for the paines due to sins forgivē The same reasons are alleadged by D. Silvius (a) Sylvius in 3. p. Suppl q. 100. p. 350. where he treates the same question And before these Benedict us XII in his Decree Benedict us Deus hath these words Decernimus animas decedentes cum veniali aliquo peccato purgari post mortem post purgationem ante resumptionem suorum corporum judicium generale post Ascensionem Christi Domini fuisse esse futuras esse in caelo We doe declare that souls dying in veniall sin beind purged after their death before the generall Resurrection are translated to Heaven Which Decree you many find in magno Bullario in Alphons de Castro verbo Beatitudo You see fir that there is nothing in the Purgatory described by those Saints inconsistent with what we are tought to beleive of ours Soe W. L. or his squire E. S. must study for another evasion W. L. cites indeed the Councill of Florence to confirme his answer But that place helpes only to convince the world how perfunctoriously he read inconsiderately framed his Judgment uppon reading for in the place cited by him the Council speakes of souls dying in the state of Grace or Charity si in Charitate decesserint But of their not having any veniall sins not one word unlesse he thinks that all souls in Grace are free from veniall sins which will be another proofe of his abilityes in Divinity My next proofe is taken from S. Augustin in Enchir. cap. 110. Neque negandum est defunctorum animas pietate suorum viventium relevari cùm pro illis sacrificium mediatoris offertur vel Eleemosynae in Ecclesiâ fiunt sed iis haec prosunt qui cùm viverent ut haec sibi postea prodesse possent meruerunt Est enim quidam vivendi modus nec tam bonus ut non requirat ista post mortem nec tam malus ut ei non prosint ista post mortem Est verò talis in bono ut ista non requirat est rursus talis in malo ut nec his valeat cùm ex hac vitâ transierit adjuvari Similia habentur l. 21. de Civ Dei c. 24. It ought not to be denyed that souls departed are eased by the Piety of their surviving friends When the Sacrifice of our Mediator is offred for them or almes given in the Church But those are releived by these helpes wholived soe as to deserve the benefit of them after their death for there is a kind of life nether soe good as not to neede them nor soe bad as not to receive ease by them There is another soe good as not to want them a third soe bad as to be incapable of helpe even from them Thus S. Austin Where you see he distinguishes three places for the souls departed as cleerely as Bellarmin or the Councill of Trent One of those soe good as not to neede helpe by the suffrages of the Church such are the Blessed souls in Heaven Another soe bad as to be incapable or unworthy of releife by the suffrages such are the wretched souls in Hell A third needing them incapable of Ease from them such are souls in Purgatory You see secondly cleere mention of the Sacrifice of our Mediator offred by the Church in his days What is this but our masse which you may find againe l. 10. de Civ Dei c. 20. You see thirdly this sacrifice offred for the Deade And lastly you see Almes given in the Church for the releife ease of deceased friends How many points of our Reformers Catechisme doth this one place confute Truly one may think ether that they invented these doctrines to spite S. Austin or that this greate Saint writ that Chapter with a Prophetick spirit to convince the world that your sentiments are no lesse opposit to the ancient then to the moderne Church which both agree in holding out the same tenets in Faith E. Still pag. 642. S. Austin delivers his Iudgment with such feare hisitancy that any me may easily see that he was far from making it an article of Faith He may as well say that the Councill of Trent spoke with hesitancy He addes That in S. Austin's time many favoured Origenes his opinion of the finall saluation of all at least who dyed in the Communion of the Church But what is this to S. Austin who condemnes that hereticall opinion as he says may be seene l. 21. de Civ Dei c. 24. in the whole booke de fide operibus But says E. S. Augustin speakes doubtfully l. de fide operibus cap. 16. Enchir. cap. 69. But he should have taken notice that he speakes in those places not of Purgatory in it selfe but of a particular paine which we no lesse then he doubt of The matter he treates Enchir. c. 68. is the Greife which men feele fer the losse of such things which they Loved inordinately by that meanes offended God althô their love to creatures were not soe greate as to withdraw them from the foundation Christ Vrit eum rerum dolor quas dilexcrat amissarum sed non subvertit fundamenti stabilitate munitum Such a man is burnt and tormented with the losse of those things which he loved yet he is not quite consumed because the foundation stands fast viz his love to Christ whome he would sticke to althô with losse of other things Then follows c. 69. where he doubts whither such a purging fire or paine as this is shall accompagny them in the next world that is whither souls departed retaine any disorderly affection to their possessions in this world by reason of which the want of them may be a torment to them as it were burne them In alike manner l. de fide operibus cap. 16. Sivè ergò in hac vita tantum homines ista patiuntur says he sivè post hanc vitam talia quadam judicia subsequuntur Whither men suffer such things only in this life or the same rorments accompagny them into the next world Which is a thing moderne Catholicks as much doubt of as S. Austin yet he as well as we myght beleive most certainly what he soe positively affirmed in his Manuall chap. CX In vaine therefore doth E. Still alleadge p. 653. the blotting out of those words Constat animas post hanc vitam purgari It is evident that souls are purged after this life There is enough left in S. Austin's undoubted workes to confute his errour Soe the successe of that reformer was like that of Marcion with his sponge who blotted out some parts of Scripture yet what remained confuted his heresy As for holy Scripture I think the argument which S. Austin uses l. 21. de Civ Dei cap. 23. very convincing for Purgatory It is taken out of the words of our Saviour Mathaei 12.32 It shall be forgivē
are soe hard to please as to be satisfyed with none but those of your communion See W. L. pag. 305. where he ownes a commemorative sacrifice to be instituted by Christ Montagu in his Appeale 2. p. c. 29. acknowledges Representative Commemorative Spirituall Sacrifice And your Bishop of Ely Resp ad Apolog. Bellar. p. 184. admits likewise a Commemorative sacrifice G. B. d. 6. 65. To imagine that the Preists going through the Office of the Masse his receiving the consecrated elements can have a vertu to expiate the sins of others especialy of the dead is a thing so contrary to most common impressions that it will puzzle a mans beleif to think any can credit it ANSWER Your common impressions differ very much from those of other men soe you have much reason to suspect that they are only common in name but in reality they are only private conceipts of your owne head The Catholick Church beleives what you think none beleives S. Austin beleived it all Catholicks professe it our Councils define it our Catechismes teach it our pulpits preach it our Pastors proclaime it Yet you would faine perswade the world no body beleives it that the thing is incredibile As if you knew better whas passes in our harts then we our selves But if this be not an honest way it is at least cunning to take for granted what you cannot prove it is casyer to find a slyght to steale into your weake readers opinions then to gaine it by a substantiall reason G. B. Ibidem The Preists receiving the consecrated Elements cannot avayle another ANSWER We doe not beleive the Passion of Christ to be applyed by the Preists taking the Host but by the essentiall part of the sacrifice which consists in another action G. B. pag. 65. It is absurd to think one man's action can be derived to another ANS An article of our Faith must then be absurd viz the Communion of Saints which imports a mutuall communication of good workes amongst the members of the Church the the mysticall body of Christ See Pearson in exposit Symboli p. 714. where he proves it out of 1. Jo. l. 7. If we walk in the lyght we have fellowship with one another The Greeke says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Communication with one another And out of col 2.19 Holding the head from which all the body by joints bands having nourishment ministred knit together encreaseth with the encrease of God Soe that as in a naturall body all parts doe communicate to one another their nourishment in the Philosophy of the Apostle soe in his Divinity all parts of the mysticall body the Church communicate their good workes What say you sir how like you your censure which involves an article of the Apostles creede two Apostles Have I not reason to admonish you to regard where you shoote your bolts throw your stones for that they can scarce lyght on any place of our doctrine or on us without hitting the Apostles the Holy ghost many times those points of faith which you your self admit G. B. pag. 65. It clearly appeares from the Institution of the Lords supper that its end was the joint communicating of Beleivers ANS It clearly appeares that you little regard what you say The Primary end of its institution indeed that which only is specifyed by our Saviour is to be a commemoration of his Passion the Sacrifice of the Crosse Doe this in memory of me As for the joint communion it can only be a secondary intention of the institution the first cheife being our union with Christ out of which flows the second our union amongst our selves As lines in a circle meete in the center soe knit together CHAPTER XX. Regall Office of Christ Where Of Transubstantiation Dispensing in vows c. G. B. pag. 66. I advance to the opposition made to the Regall office of Christ first how far is it from his Glory in Heaven to beleive that five words muttred by a Preist should put him under the Elements This is a new kind of humiliation ANSWER You are very much mistaken if you think Humiliations in consistent with the the Regall office of Christ (a) Heb. 1.7 When God brought his first begotten into the world he sayd And let all the Angels of God worship him Yet he was then humbled to the condition of a man a private obscure man and even below it Ps 21.7 Opprobrium hominum abjectio plebis Certainly there is more shew of Majesty as he is placed on our Altars envitoned with lyghts adored by the People Prelates Princes the greatest Monarks laying their crownes the greatest Bishops their Croziers Miters at his feete then as he was in the little cottage of his reputed father a Carpenter picking Chips at his mothers command or following his fathers trade to get a subsistāce knowne to none regarded by none slyghted by all as is ordinary to men of that humble calling And what shall I say of the death of the crosse when his very disciples disowned him G. B. p 67. What low thoughts of his person must it breade in such minds as are capble of beleiving this contrivance ANS You speake like a Pagan to whome the Crosse of Christ is folly 1. Cor. 1.23 rather then like a Christian to whome Christ crucifyed that is under the greatest Humiliation is the vertu wisdome of God We who have learnt to looke or him as God Blessed for evermore even when on the Crosse dying we can take out of all his Humiliations occasion to admire his love adore his goodnesse to us but not to disesteeme his person or diminish our thoughts of his Majesty And let me tell you you are the first Christian I know of who ever made such unchristian reflections on the Humiliations of the son of God G. B. p. 67.68.69 70. In these you charge us with three crimes 1. With adding to the laws of Christ 2. Dispensing with the laws of God 3. Commanding things indifferent contrary to Christian liberty I Answer to the first third the Apostles did the same a forbidding strangled meate Blood which were things indifferent not forbidden by the law of Christ And as to your objection that this entrenches uppon Christian liberty I answer out a person very deare to you even your selfe in your vindication confer 2. p. 172. Christian liberty is stated in an exemption from the laws of Moyses Shew that we impose the law of Moyses you will say something to the purpose fo our entrenching uppon Christian liberty As for Dispensing in Divine laws when you prove what you object I will consider what to answer Your instances are not sufficient For first as for dispensing of vows there is an Epirkia in them as in laws which is an interpretation of some circumstances in which they doe not oblidge for example A man vows to fast next
1. Cor. 13. avayles nothing I could wish our Adversaryes would vouchsafe to reade with attention that Chapter last cited In it they would see the seate due to Charity the queene of vertues which seemes at present hidden from the eyes of those wise prudent men yet is revealed to little ones It is with greate difficulty that I undertake a comparison betwixt the practice of these vertues amongst Catholicks amongst Protestants because all comparisons seeme to be grounded at least on an apparance of equality in the objects which in this matter cannot be Yet something must be sayd to make these presumptuous men know their wants weake nesse that they may seeke to have them supplyed that I may proceede more cleerely I will begin with the definition of Faith Heresy SECTION I. Of Faith DIvine Faith is a firme assent given to an obscure Truth revealed by Almyghty God because it is revealed by him I say an obscure Truth because S. Paul (a) Heb. 11.1 says the same Argumentum non apparentium a declaration of things not seene or knowne by naturall reason This is the materiall object as Divines speake The only Formall object is the veracity of God quia Deus est verax that is can nether be deceaved or mistaken as being omniscient nor deceive us as being all Good To this the testimony of the Church concurres as a witnesse assuring that God delivered such a systeme of Truths Soe that is a condition necessary to apply the revelation to us who have not heard God speake or reveale S. Anthanasius in his Symbole delivers as a condition of Faith that it be retained entire undefiled integra inviolataque For seing all is delivered by the same authority those who beleive not all (b) S. Thom. 2.2 q. s. art 3. oppose that Authority delivering it by consequence even what they beleive they receive not purely uppon their submission to that authority speaking but for their owne Caprichio or Reason or Pleasure That is properly called Heresy which word is dedmed from the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tochoose And it signifyes a choice of any things what soever but by common use it is appropriated to that Choice (a) Tertul. l. de Praescript c. 6. Haereses dictae Graeca voce ex Electionis interpretatione quâ quis sivè ad instituendas sivè ad suscipiendas eas utitur Hieron in Tit. 3. Haeresis Graecè ab Electione dicitur quod scilicet unusquisque id sibi eligat quod ei melius esse videatur Vide c. Haeresis 24. q. 3. Vide etiam August epist 162. which is made af Points delivered as of Faith We Catholicks have Faith because we beleive firmely those Truths that God hath revealed because he revealed them to the Church which as a faithfull withnesse gives hitherto will give to the end of the world testimony to that Revelation And we cannot be Hereticks because (b) Tertul. supra Nobis nihil ex arbitrio nostro indutere licet sed nec eligere quod aliquis ex arbitrio suo induxerit we never take the liberty to choose ourselves or to admit what others choose But we take Bona fide what it delivered as revealed by the greatest authority imaginable on Earth which is that of the Catholick Church Let an Angel teach us any thing contrary to what is delivered we will pronounce Anathema to him in imitation of the Apostle (c) Gal. 1.18 Here is then the Tenure of our Faith The Father sent his only begotten son consubstantiall to himself into the world (d) Ioan. 15.15 And what he heard of his Father that he made knowne to us The Father son sent the Holy Ghost (a) Io. 16.13 he did not speake of himselfe but what he heard that he spoke The Holy Ghost sent the Apostles they (b) 1. Io. 1.3 declared unto us what they had seene heard The Apostles sent the Hyghest lower Prelates in the Church the rule by which they framed their decrees was Let nothing be altred in the depositum let no innovation be admitted in what is delivered quod (c) Stephanus PP apud Cyprianum epist 74. ad Pompeium traditum est non innovetur By this we are assured that our Faith is that which the Councils received from the Apostles the Apostles from the Holy Ghost soe by the Son to God the Father Where it rests Now to Protestants Their proceeding is far different They heare the whole Systeme of Faith commended by the Church as revealed by God take it into examination And some things displeasing them in it they fall to reforming it cut off at one blow all things not expressely contained in Scaipture Here is one Choice Then Scripture is called to their Barre neere a third part of it condemned lopt off which is a second Choice Thirdly there being still severall things in the remnanr which displease them as understood by the Church they reject that interpretation six on it such an one as pleases them most Soe that even what sense they retaine they doe it uppon this their haeresis or Choice What evidence can convince a man to be a Chooser in Faith that is A Heretick if these men be not sufficiently by this proceeding proved such For a further confirmation of this consider the severall ways of Catholicks Protestants in entertaining Propositions of Faith A Catholick hearing from the Church our Saviours words with the sense that is the compleate Scripture for the bare word without the sense is no more scripture then a body without a soul or life is a man presently beleives them what Reason soever may appeare to the contrary he silences it submits his understanding to Faith let the words seeme harsh the sense unconceivable yet the Truth of God triumphs overall those petty oppositions A Protestant heares the same presently consults his Reason till he hath its verdict suspends his Judgment If that say with the Pharisie (a) Io. 3.9 How can these things be or with the Capharnaits (b) Io. 6. This is a hard saying who can heare it The Protestant immediatly renounces it Soe we submit our Reason to faith you set yours above it we frame our Reason according to the dictamens of Revelation you shape Revelation by your reason In fine you set your Reason on a throne to Judge of that word by which one day you are to be Judged You may as easily prove the Pharisees Chapharnaits to be better Christians then the Apostles as that your proceedure in receiving faith is better then that of the Catholick Church SECTION II. Of Hope HOpe is an expectation of future Blisse promist by our B. Saviour to those who love him keepe his commandments It is built on a promise of God which cannot fayle And had that promise beene absolute we myght have beene more assuredly certaine of our
transubstantiation nothing occurres butfrom sense Then you pull downe Faith place sense in her place Tantae molis erat sanctum subvertere dogma The my steryes about God Christ say you are exalted above the reach of our facultyes But reason it selfe teacheth that it must be soe Here Faith is above reason But after wards pag. 134. Our faith rests on the evidences our senses give Here Faith doeshomage to sense Faith (a) Heb. 11.1 is an argument of things which appeare not Soe that it relyes not on senses for its object doth not appeare nor on Reason otherwise it would be science if the reason be evident or opinion if it were uncertaine Soe it relyes only on Gods veracity which consists of two qualityes one that he cannot be deceived being omniscient The other that he cannot deceive being good Nether is possible to God for to be deceived is an error in the understanding to deceive argues malice in the will Soe the assurance we have by Faith is greater then that of our senses which may be baffled greater then that of Reason which sometimes is mistaken in its principles ofter deceived in its deductious from them Thus (a) Rom. 3.4 God is tru every man alyer which later part imports a possibility oferror in our cleerest operations whither of sense or Reason To say that Faith rests on the evidence of senses as you doe p. 134. is soe contrary to the nature of faith that both Divines Phylosophers doubt whither the same object (b) S. Thom. 2.2 q. 1. ar 4. s. can beseene beleived generally speaking deny the possibility of it And to what our B. Savioursaid (c) 10.20.29 because thou hast seene me thou hast beleived They answer with S. Gregory Aliud vidit aliud credidit He saw man beleived him to be God To what purpose then are miracles if Faith doth not rely on them ANS To dispose our understanding to receive with attention submissiō the word of God by shewing it was God who spoke And when Christ appeales to his workes If (a) 10.10.38 I donot the workes of my father doe not beleive me but if I doe them if you will not beleive me beleive the workes he assignes only the out ward motive of Beleife by which his hearers were ether drawne to beleive or made inexcusable if they persistedin their incredulity Now it is the grossest errour imaginable to think that faith rests on all those things which dispose to it otherwise it would rest on the skill in tongues which is necessary to understand the originall Scriptures item on the masters who teach them on the stationer who prints them c. But what if the man who confirmes his mission by evident miracles teach things contrary to sense or Reason ANS Our duty is to silence both these harken to him (b) 2 Cor. 10. The Armes of our warfare are not carnall but myghty through God to the pulling downe of strong holds casting downe imaginations every hygh thing that exalts its selfe against the knowledge of God bringing into captivity every thought Who says every thought cōprehend's both those grounded on sense others more speculative But to say as you doe that Reason must be subject to Faith but not senses is very preposterously to put reason the mistresse under faith sense the servant above it You declame against Catholicks for acknowledging in the whole Church an authority in order to the word of God much lesse then that which you give to the senses of every particular man What an occasion doe you give us to returne uppon you all your declamations G.B. p. 134. We cannot really doubt but things are as they appeare to us for we cannot beleive it midnyght when we see cleerely the sun in our meridian ANS We should not doubt of what God says who we are sure cannot tell a lye We perceive dayly the Halluzinations of our understanding J am sure sometimes my senses are mistaken my reason corrects them All man is a Lyar every knowing faculty in him is subject to Deceite God cannot tell me it is midnyght when it is noone day because he cannot tell a lye But if God should tell me it is midnyght my eyes should represent to me a luminous body in the meridian perfectly like the sun I should suspect my eyes or guesse I saw a meteor or that I dreamed or raved or were yet in a worse condition The least last of my thoughts would be that God told a lye which is the first thought you suggest G.B. p. 135. Senses unvitiated fixing on aproper object through a due meane are infallible ANS Are they more infallible then God Are we infallibly certain all those conditions concurre may there not be more ways to delude oursenses then are discovered may there not be some latent defect in the Organ unperperceived by us or some want in the meane Answer to these questions withall tell me whiter you have as greate certainty of your answer to these queryes as you have of the veracity of God With more colour another may say that faith cannot be against Reason with Socinus refuse to beleive any thing contrary to discourse soe turne Antitrinitarian I think my self as assuredly certain of that metaphysicall Principle eadem uni tertio sunt idem inter se as of any thing I know by senses yet knowing what Christ hath taught concerning the Blessed Trinity I beleive that explicate that principle as I can why should we not proceede in like manner with oursenses when they seeme to contradict what Christ hath taught we are commanded to (a) Mat. 18.8.9 put out an eye cut off a hand or foote if it draws us to sin What shall we doe if they draw us to Infidelity or doe you think it unlawfull to keepe them yet lawfull to follow their suggestions deny our Faith in obedience to their depositions Heape up then your absurdityes your impossibilityes your incredibilityes your sophismes against Transubstantiation to as greate a bulke as your little studyes lesse diseretion will permit you will only multiply proofes of the insolency folly of the Reason of man which dares enter the lists against the Truth of God G.B. pag. 136. It is little lesse unconcevable to imagin that a man of no eximious sanctity nor extraordinary skill in Divinity should have the Holy Ghost at his command that his decrees must be the dictates of the spirit ANSWER I passe that disrespectfull expression having the Holy Ghost at his command No Catholick everspoke so Doe you think the assistance of the Holy Ghost whence flows all jurisdiction both spirituall temporall is restrained to only saints learned clerks doth Prelate Prince loose their jurisdictiō by every mortall sin Was Amos the sheepe heard a greate divine were Salomon Cayphas greatesaints were the Scribes Pharisyes such whose words all