undermine partly by raising real Scandals and Offences and partly by strongly representing Imaginary ones But against all this Humility and Charity will fortifie us and the Grace special Guidance and Mercy of God will preserve us if we be careful to continue in those Graces It was Pride and Arrogance and Discontent in Aerius which gave the * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Epiphan p. 905. a. Devil Advantage to instigate him to the first Opposition of such a Catholick Practice It was Pride Vanity and Ostentation of Parts by which he set Gobarus to work to shew his Learning and Acuteness in finding out Differences of Opinions among them who perhaps in many of those things differed no more than the Writers of the Sacred Scriptures seem to do For I do not find that he made any special Opposition against this Practice But I doubt it was not imaginary but real Scandal and gross Abuses of a good Practice by which Waldo and his Followers and the Albigenses were moved to oppose all without Distinction tho' there seems to have been in him with a Zeal for God but without Knowledge a Mixture of Pride and Conceitedness And it was real and not imaginary Scandal by which Luther was at first moved to oppose Indulgencies and his Followers at first to oppose even this innocent and commendable Practice But in such Men as Vsher and Bucer it was the Reputation of the Cause they had espoused in gross and Compliances with the Times and their particular Interests by which they were moved But let us but carefully follow our Saviour's Admonitions and Directions wisely distinguish the Ingredients of the Composition of Truth and Falsehood and honestly imbrace hold fast and own the Truth when we have the Opportunity and we shall not want sufficient Light and Evidence to find it The specious Appearances set up against this Catholick Practice of the Church of Christ are these 1. That there is no Scripture Authority for it 2. That the Ancient Practice was to Pray for all such as were at Rest 3. That the Ancients were not agreed in their Opinions concerning the State of Separate Souls or the general Intention of the Church in those Prayers To detect the Fallacy Falsity and Impertinence of these Allegations as briefly as may be To the first I say it is a meer Fallacy and grounded upon a false Supposition that nothing is to be admitted in Doctrine or Worship but what there is Scripture Authority for if it be understood of a special Authority and their usual Pretences of not Adding or Diminishing are to be understood of those particular Parts or Books of the Scripture as is plain by the Additional Writings and Practices of Holy Men afterwards 2. It is inconsistent with the Tradition of the Doctrine and Institutions of the Gospel and of the Ordinances of the Apostles which were all by Word and Deed without Writing as the Common Laws of this Nation were at first settled and much of what was written was written upon special Occasions and much with that Brevity and Conciseness by the special Providence of God as was sufficient for them for whom it was intended and yet so as should need an Authentick Explication to preserve the Authority of the Catholick Church 3. It is contrary to the express Directions of the Scripture to contend for the Doctrine once delivered to the Saints in general and to hold the Traditions they had received whether by Word or Epistle c. And if it be understood of a general Authority the Allegation it self is false For it is contrary to all those Scriptures which declare the Authority of the Church and require Obedience to Superiors And either way it is contrary to the Sentiments Testimony and Practice of the Ancient Christians who in Questions of Difficulty and Contests with Hereticks always inquired not only what was written by the Apostles but also or principally what was delivered by them to the Churches which they founded in all Parts of the World of which the Catholick Church doth consist which the Scripture it self stiles the Pillar and Basis of Truth 1 Tim. 3.15 v. Grot. not only for the Sense and Meaning of the Scripture as Lawyers with good reason do when in doubts about the Construction of Writings they inquire how the Usage hath gone for in that case the Writing is the Principal Evidence but in this case what was delivered to the Churches which were compleatly and plainly instructed and ordered by the Apostles was the principal Inquiry and the Scriptures but an accessory Evidence as our Year-Books are of the Common Law in Questions concerning the Common Law But I doubt not but there was a special Providence in it that so much was written and no more and that it was written in such a manner Lastly This hath been the Practice and Pretence of Hereticks and Schismaticks in all Ages to the intent with the better colour to set aside the Authority of the Catholick Church that they might so make way to set up their own private Opinions and Conceits in the Place thereof but never more grossly nauciously and scandalously than by some of the Principal of the late Reformers Calvin especially on the one side inculcating and crying up The Pure Word of God The Pure Word of God and on the other abusing it by straining wresting it to serve their own turns and eluding and evading what is plainly contrary to them which is now past all doubt not only by the Confessions of Mr. Baxter and Le Blank but the many of all Parties who have deserted divers of those Assertions which were so hotly contended for under that specious Pretence a plain Evidence and Demonstration that they were no better than their Predecessors in that Pretence But besides all this what I am now doing if I be not much mistaken will be a particular demonstration of the Truth of what I say To the other two Allegations I say they are both impertinent to the Question under consideration here which is only concerning the Matter of Fact and Practice I do not say that they are impertinent to the Subject in general to be considered upon other Occasions but to this special Question and therefore to insist upon them in this Case instead of directly answering to the Question is fallacious captious and an abuse to the Reader to impose upon him distract him and withdraw him from the proper Question There might be Difference in Forms and various Intendments and all consistent Certainly there was no such Difference or Variety either of Forms or Intendment as there is this day amongst Protestants of both in their greatest Solemnity of the Sacrament But if the matter of Fact be certain it may be in the Power of the Church to order the Form and at Liberty for every one to construe the Intention or make his Inferences or Observations for his own Use as well as of the Scripture And the Matter of Fact is
which have sprung out of what is called the Reformation For I do not find that Wickelif and his Followers here the Lollards or John Huss or Hierom of Prague who carried his Books and Doctrines into their own Country and were all three Men of Parts and Learning ever opposed Prayers for the Dead tho' among the Opinions attributed to Huss one is that there is no Purgatory Fire which is denied by others who yet are for Prayers for the Dead But by all the several Sects of the later Reformers since Luther began they have been questioned opposed and left out of their Publick Prayers Only here in England in the first Liturgy composed by English Clergy in the Reign of King Edward 6. which I therefore call The True English Liturgy the ancient Prayers for the Dead were retained both in the most Solemn Office of the Daily Sacrifice and at Funerals But these and other principal Parts of the Liturgy were soon after new-modelled in a clandestine manner by Cranmer Bucer and other Foreigners and Calvinian Sectaries and craftily imposed upon the Church and Nation And the Abuse is continued to this day This is the true Original and Succession of all the Opposition which hath ever been made to this Practice of all Mankind in general and of the whole Catholick Church of Christ by Hereticks Sectaries and Schismaticks and the meanest of all those not a Man amongst them of any Eminence for Piety or any Virtue or so much as Parts or Learning much less any Man of Note in the Church much less any Church Party or Part of the Catholick Church who were or who continued in Communion with The Catholick Church or any Particular Catholick Church as they anciently distinguish'd them from the Assemblies and Associations of Hereticks and Schismaticks in the same City It is very observable wonderful and a great Evidence of unquestionable or undeniable Truth that in so many Ages when there had been so many so considerable Parties of Hereticks and Schismaticks and so malicious spiteful and inraged as many of them were against the Church that none of the most considerable of them should ever seek to advantage their Cause by such a Question which doubtless they would not have failed to have done had they apprehended any color of Truth or Advantage in it that none in all the Parts of the World should ever oppose it but such an obscure inconsiderate and inconsiderable Generation of People till the late Reformers sprung up who thought they could never reform enough or pick quarrels too much till they had brought that which might have been a considerable Cause if well laid and managed to an indefensible brable Amongst them indeed there have been many Men of sufficient Learning but but few of that Ingenuity Impartiality freedom from Prejudice temporal Interest or Fear of Displeasing and of that Generosity as to assert the Truth plainly without respect of Persons or Parties and those few have been very much born down among us especially by the Violence and Headiness of Parties and Factions Yet such is the Power and Evidence of Truth in this Case that it hath found Advocates amongst the most learned of all Parties Of this I think it not improper to produce an instance or two in this Place The first shall be an eminent Person both for Learning and Virtue Bishop Forbes the first Bishop of Edenburg promoted by King Charles 1. who is reported to have said of him That he had found out a Bishop who deserved that a See should be made for him In his Considerationes Modestae Controversiâ de Purgatorio cap. 3. § 17. coming to speak of Prayers and Oblations for the Dead Sed hic primum c. But here first saith he is to be reproved the Opinion of some rigid Protestants who do altogether censure and condemn Prayers for the Dead because they find no Precept or Example of such Prayers in the Old or New Testament Certainly even those who are most against it dare not deny that it is a most ancient Custom and most universally received in the whole Church of Christ that in the Publick Prayers of the Church Commemoration should be made for the Dead and Rest be prayed for to God for those who died piously and in the Peace of the Church And having cited divers of the Ancients for it he adds This most ancient Custom was full of Piety and most truly did Cassander say This was always fixt in * Note Then this was agreed among All. All Christian Minds That the Spirits of those who being initiated in the Sacrament of Christ departed this Life in the Confession of his Name with signification of Repentance should be commended to the Mercy of God that Remission of Sin Eternal Rest and a Part with the Elect might be intreated for them †This second part is so cited in Vsher p. 246. as is apt to lead the Reader into mistake as if they were not agreed in more than the Author did intend And altho' concerning that State of Souls for which those things were profitable it was neither sufficiently manifest nor agreed among all yet all judged this Office as a Testimony of Charity toward the Deceased and a Profession of Faith concerning the Immortality of Souls and Resurrection to come to be grateful to God and profitable to the Church Then he saith This most Ancient and Vniversal Custom of the Church very many and most learned Protestants do not disallow and cites the Apology of the Augsburg Confess Chemnicius Mentserus Luther Gerard Vrbanus Regius Vorstius Vossius Dr. Field Bishop Andrews and passing over in silence very many others as he saith he recites the Words of the Liturgy of Edward 6. both in the Office for the Communion and that for Burials laments that such most ancient and pious Prayers should by the Persuasion of Bucer and others be expunged and wisheth that the Church of England which hath shewed great Moderation in many other things of less moment had rather conformed her self in this business as also in some others to the most ancient Custom of the Universal Church than for some Errors and Abuses which had by degrees crept in plainly rejected it and wholly taken it away to the great Scandal of almost all other Christians I need add no more after this Learned and Apostolick Bishop only in short take notice of what Vrbanus Regius saith that None reject it but Epicureans and Sadduces and Vorstius that No Good Man can dislike it and Bishop Andrews that There is little that can be said against it and conclude this matter with the Words of the learned and famous Hugo Grotius The use of Praying for the Dead received through all Churches of the East no less than of the West ought not to be condemned And after some reasons for it and something concerning the Jews he adds The Ancient Liturgies are not to be condemned since Christ himself did never reprehend the Prayers
granted by the very Allegation Nor indeed is it much denied by any Men of Learning Scio esse pervetustam hanc precandi pro piè defunctis consuetudinem saith Bucer in his Censure and after he had a little indeavoured to put off Tertullian S. Cyprian and Dionysius he adds Sed sit hic quantumvis vetustus Dionysius Et sit hujus atque aliorum S. Patrum authoritas quantumlibet magna attamen nostrum est tanto anteferre omni humanae authoritati divinam quanto Deus omni homine major est sapientia nostri charitate docendique nos omnia propensione Jam or are pro Defunctis nullae docent Scripturae sive verbo sive exemplo Et vetitum est quicquid his adjicere vel detrahere Deut. 4. 12. Solet nobis objici says Peter Martyr Ecclesiam semper pro Defunctis orasse quod quidem non inficior sed assero illius facti neque Verbi Dei neque Exempli quod desumitur ex Sacris literis auctoritatem habere in 1 Cor. 3. fol. 45. Ed. Tig. 1579. Verum est quod Papistae aiunt says Bullinger Dec. 4. Ser. 10. Veteres orasse sacrificasse pro Defunctis Scio quid Doctor Ecclesiae Insignis Augustinus quid Eloquentissimus Chrysostomus aliique viri vetusti ac clari hac de re scriptum relinquerunt Sed quaero num hi rectè fecerunt Scio damnatum fuisse Aerium quod hujusmodi Orationes Oblationes improbaret Afferunt secundum Maccabaeorum librum Sed is nihil probat cum non sit Canonicus Adjiciunt Traditionem Apostolicam Sed mihi id non videtur nec illi unquam in scriptis ita praecipiunt This is the Sum of the Case and honestly said and therefore I shall conclude this part with it Such is the Folly Passion and Inconsiderateness of Men that they many times bring such Causes to Tryal as upon their own shewing and hearing their own Evidence only appears to all intelligent and indifferent Persons to be against them And such I believe will this Cause of these Men appear to be to all competent Judges without more a do Notwithstanding for the more plain and full Conviction and Satisfaction of such as are less intelligent and more scrupulous and that those Honourable Persons to whose Consideration I present it may themselves judge of the Evidences which extort these Confessions from such as would elude them if they could I will produce so much as is sufficient for the purpose and that I be not tedious I will forbear all that which would prove it to have been a true Catholick Practice of the whole Church for above 1200 years last past and confine my self to the time allowed and approved by the Church and State of England that is the time of the first four * 1. Of Nice Anno 325. 2. Constant Anno 381. 3. Ephesus Anno 431. 4. Chalced Anno 481. general Councils and that preceeding to the time of the Apostles that is from that to the Year of our Lord 451. As for the succeeding Ages to this day that it was observed all along per totum Orbem and therefore believed to have been delivered by the Apostles as the most ancient Writers upon the Church Offices affirm I presume no Man will deny and therefore I shall only mention one Observation concerning those Ages I have made all the Search that possibly I could both by Manuscripts and printed Books to discover the most ancient Forms of celebrating the Holy Eucharist in the Latin Church and tho' I have met with divers Variations in other parts yet I never could discover any Alteration in that that is the principal part and as Dr. Barlow late Bishop of Lincoln says the most innocent part of the publick Office called The Canon of the Mass since Gregory the Great nor indeed by him 〈…〉 believe the whole Canon is not of less Antiquity than Gelasius or S. Ambrose if not much ancienter divers particulars of it being found in more ancient Authors It is not long since a very Reverend and Learned Bishop since deceased speaking to me of it said it was a Noble piece of Antiquity and Dr. Barlow hath left under his hand a just Censure of one who cut that part out of an ancient Missel at Oxford for an ignorant half learned Fellow This alone is an ample Evidence of the Practice of all the Latin Churches for these Ages which from thence I shall indeavour to trace back to its Original S. Austin and S Paulinus both lived within the time prescribed and died 20 years before the last of the said four Councils about An. 431. S. Augustin was a Person of great Natural parts acquired Learning Piety Holiness and of great Authority and Reputation in the whole Catholick Church especially in the Latin Church of which he is reckoned one of the chiefest Doctors He had in his younger time taught Rhetorick at Rome and afterward at Millan so that he was acquainted with the World as well as with Books and every way as well qualified to bear his Testimony in the Case as possibly could be S. Paulinus was a Person of great Quality and Estate in great Esteem with the Emperor and of so great Devotion that imbracing our Saviour's Counsel he Sold all distributed it to the Poor and pious Uses and betook himself to a strict Religious Life in Poverty after he had been preferred to great publick Offices he was a Man of Parts and Learning and well acquainted with the Western parts especially Italy France and Spain and for his great Virtues and eminent Sanctity was by the Importunity of the People made Bishop of Nola in Campania so that he also was every way qualified for another Witness in this Case and these two I suppose sufficient for their time especially for the Latin Church S. Paulinus in an Epistle to St. Augustin says as much as need to be in few Words that * Vacare non posse quòd universa pro Defunctis Ecclesia supplicare consâ—evit ap Aug. de Cura pro Mort. pr. It cannot be in vain that the Vniversal Church is accustomed to pray for the Dead Not the Church but the Vniversal Church not only did at that time but was accustomed so to do that is time out of mind without any known beginning And what was it accustomed to do Not barely to commemorate but to pray and supplicate for them Vniversa pro Defunctis Ecclesia supplicare consuevit As ample a Testimony I think as can be expressed in so few words S. Augustin in confirmation of this alleadgeth the Book of Maccabees and addeth ‖ Sed etsi nusquam in Scriptuâ—is veteribus omnino legereâ—ur non parva tamen est Universae Ecclesiae quae in hâ—c consuetudine claret Authoritas ubi in preâ—ibus saceâ—dotis quae Domino Deo ad ejus altare funduntur locum suum habet etiam Commendatio Mortuorum S. Aug. de Cura pro Mortuis c. â— But altho'
we did no where at all read this in the ancient Writings yet is not the Authority of the Vniversal Church which is clear in this Custom a small matter when in the Prayers of the Priest which are poured out to the Lord God at his Altar the Commemoration of the Deceased hath also its proper place In this Testimony are divers things observable and very considerable 1. The Authority of the Universal Church not of a Particular Church of a City of a Province of Hippo or Africa but of the Universal Church which however manifested or declared is no small matter 2. But in this it is declared in the most Solemn Acts of the Church her most Solemn Address to Almighty God at his Altar So that here is the greatest Authority that is among Mankind and that most solemnly declared 3. It is no new Resolution but a Custom Consuetudo Vniversae Ecclesiae an ancient Custom and a universal Custom which he elsewhere upon another occasion expresseth in this manner * Hoc à Patribus traditum Universa observat Ecclesia ut pro eis qui in Corporis Sanguinis Christi Communione Defuncti sunt cum ad ipsum Sacrificium suo loco commemorantur oretur pro illis quoque id offerri commemoretur S. Aug. de verb. Apost Ser. 32. c. 2. This being delivered from the Fathers à Patribus traditum doth the Vniversal Church observe that for them who are departed in the Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ when they are remembred at the Sacrifice it self in their place Prayer be made and it be commemorated that that is offered for them also Not only for the Living but for the Dead also and in their proper place 4. This Custom and Tradition was not only for a general Commemoration but for a special Commendation And here because this excellent Person hath written much and therefore affords more observable matter than is ordinary in any one Author I will indeavour out of him alone to present the honest and ingenuous Reader with a Scheme of the whole Custom and Practice of the Ancients whereby he will the better understand their Testimonies and decern the Fallacies Evasions Cavillings and Shufflings of the Adversaries of it What was done by them on behalf of the Deceased was either Publick or Private What was done in Private was Prayers such as S. Augustin offered for his Mother in his Confessions lib. 9. cap. 13. Fasting and Alms c. What was Publick was done either by the Relations or Friends of the Persons deceased and that was presenting their Oblations whether ordered by the Deceased or freely offered by their Friends on their behalf Which if they departed in Communion of the Church were received otherwise rejected unless they were in the State of Penitents and were surprized in such case as the Priest should have absolved them if he could have been present or what was done by the Bishop or Priest with the rest of the Clergy and People And this was either a general Commemoration pro omnibus in Christiana Catholica Societate defunctis as he speaks de Cura pro Mat. c. 4. for all departed in the Christian and Catholick Society or Communion without any particular recitation of their Names or a more particular Memory of them by Name with others or a more special Commendation of a particular Person at his Death and besides certain other days upon their Anniversaries And these were all performed at the Altar and with the Holy Sacrifice except that at his Death in case that happened after the Priest had eaten and then by some Canons it was to be performed solis Orationibus with Prayers only but otherwise Orationibus Oblationibus that is with Prayers and Sacrifice both for that is there to be understood by Oblationibus And as S. Augustin did intend all this in what he saith of the Universal Custom by Tradition from the Fathers so did he believe that the Souls departed were benefitted by them all For his words immediately preceeding those before-recited out of his Serm. de Verb. Apost are * Orationib vero S. Ecclesiae Sacrificio salutari Eleemosynis quae pro eorum spiâ—itibus erogantur non est dubitandum mortuos adjurari ut cum eis misericordius agatur à Domino quam eorum peccata meruerunt It is not to be doubted that the Dead are helped by the Prayers of the H. Church and the Salutary Sacrifice and the Alms which are distributed for their Spirits that the Lord should deal more mercifully with them than their Sins have deserved This was one End and Benefit of those Commemorations and Prayers and therefore was not only comprehended in the general Intendment of the general Commemorations but was expressly prayed for both in the Common Prayers and in the more special Commendations as we shall see further hereafter but this does not exclude Others of which I think fit to take notice of one in this place which is mentioned by S. Austin and others and which concern two Articles of our Creed but little understood or consider'd amongst us It is in his Book de Civ Dei lib. 20. cap. 9. in these words †Neque enim piorum animae mortuorum separantur ab Ecclesia quae etiam nunc est regnum Christi Alioquin nec ad altare Dei fieret corum memoria in communione Corporis â— Christi Nor are the Souls of the Pious deceased separated from the Church which even now is the Kingdom of Christ Otherwise neither at the Altar of God should Memory be made of them in the Communion of the Body of Christ. In these words is couched one general Intendment of the Church For as the Holy Rite of the Eucharist was intended not only for the Peculiar Solemnity of the Churches Address to God here upon Earth with the Memorials of our Saviour's Passion the great Propitiation for the Sins of the World but also for Communion between our Head and the Members of his Mystical Body here upon Earth and also between the Members of his whole Mystical Body themselves so the Church in that Holy Solemnity hath always performed Acts of Communion not only with the Head but with all his Members both present in external Communion and Participation of the sanctified Creatures and with all absent whether in the Body or out of the Body by Commemorations Thanksgivings and Prayers And because they were in several States they were accordingly remembred distinctly in order which is what S. Augustin expresseth suo loco This Communion was by the ancient Christians reputed a matter of very great Importance and accordingly they were equally careful whose Oblations they did receive and whose Names they did remember whether Living or Dead and those who were ejected or rejected or refused were looked upon as out of Communion and excluded from all the Privileges of the Church both on Earth and also in the separate State according to
our Saviour's Promise It was then believed that the Souls departed which should be saved were all indeed with Christ but not at the Right-hand of his Father but some before the Throne some upon Mount Sion some in the Holy of Holies some in the Temple but not in that place some in Paradice in Abraham's Bosom in the Third Heaven in very different Mansions or Receptacles as one may be said to be with the King who is with him in foreign Parts tho' but in his Army or at his Court tho' never admitted into his Presence Chamber and that by some the Church here upon Earth her self received much Benefit but others received Benefit by her Communion and Prayers and stood in need of it Nor ought we to think that these two Articles of the Holy Catholick Church and the Communion of Saints were put into the Summary of the Christian Faith and Profession and in the Order they are but for special and weighty Reasons and indeed such as are little taught or understood or regarded amongst us in this Age. S. Augustin hath many Testimonies concerning this matter of Fact and known Practice of the Church in these distinct Orders of Commemoration of the Dead so plain that the Arch-Bishop himself could not but confess that in the Church Service there was made a several Commemoration first of the Patriarchs Prophets Apostles and Martyrs after one manner and then of the other Dead after another pag. 194. and one or two he cites in the Margin but was so wise as not to recite the words It is Serm. 17. de Verbis Apost * Ideòque habet Ecclesiastica disciplina quod fideles noverunt cum Martyres eo loco recitantur ad altare Dei ubi non pro ipsis oretur pro caeteris autem commemoralis defunctis oretur Injuria est enim pro Martyre orare cujus nos debemus orationibus com mendari And Tr. 84. in Evang Johan This hath the Church Discipline which the Faithful know when the Martyrs are recited at the Altar of God in that place where Prayer is not made for them but Prayer is made for others who are commemorated For it is an Injury to pray for a Martyr to whose Prayers we our selves ought to be commended And Tr. 84. in Evang. Johan * Ad ipsam mensam non sic eos commemoramus quemadmocum alior qui in pace requiescunt uâ— etâ—am pro eis or mus sâ—d magis ut crentipsi pro nobis ut eorum vestigiis adhaeâ—eamus quia impleverunt ipsi charitatem qua Dominus dixit non posse esse majorem At the Table it self we do not so commemorate them as others who rest in Peace that we should also pray for them but rather that they pray for us that we may tread in their Steps because they themselves have fulfilled that Charity than which our Lord saith there cannot be greater And here I cannot but take notice of the Partiality and Disingenuity of this magnified Man in this place for it is a Scandal and Offence to me Having cited the words of S. Augustin in Euchrid ad Laurent cap. 110. ‖ Cum sacrificia sive altaris five quarumcunque Eleemosynarum pro baptizâ—tis defunctis omnibus offeruntur pro valdè bonis gratiarum actiones sunt pro valdè malis etsi nulla sunt adjumenta moâ—tuorum quaâ—â—icunque vivorum consolationes â—uâ—t That the Oblations and Alms usually offered in the Church for all the Dead that received Baptism were Thanksgivings for such as were very Good Propitiations for such as were not very Bad but for such as were very Evil altho' they were no Help for the Dead yet were they some kind of Consolations of the Living He calls this a Private Exposition not only as he pretends because it is not to be found in the Writings of the former Fathers but also because it suiteth not well with the general Practice of the Church which it intendeth to interpret p. 194. If it had not been in the Writings of any of the former Fathers had not the notorious Practice of the Church which he often mentions with special notes of the Notoriety of the matter of Fact been sufficient and much more than any thing mentioned dogmatically by others tho' more ancient But besides that is false for we shall see it hereafter attested by Cyril of Hierusalem and not by the by but in a professed Description and Explication of the Greek Liturgy which shews the Agreement of all both Greek and Latin Churches And therefore it is but reasonable that the honest Reader be admonished to beware of this Author how he trusts him for he is a partial and crafty Writer of which other instances may be produced But perhaps it may not only do right to S. Augustin but be a Satisfaction to the Reader to see him more fully declare his mind which he doth in the words precedent to this effect * Neque negandum est Desu ctorum animas pietate suorum viventium relevari cum pro illis sacrificium Mediaâ—oris offertur vel Eleemosynae in Ecclesia fiunt Sed eâ—s haec pro unt qui cum viverent ut haec sibi postea prodesse possent meruerunt Est enim quidem viveâ—di modus nec tam bonus ut non requirat ifta post moâ—tem nec tam malus ut ei non prosint ista post mortem Est vero talis in bâ—no ut ista non requirat est rursus talis in malo ut nec his valeat oum ex hâ—â— vita transiâ—rit adjuvari Quo circa hic omne meritum comparatur quo possit post hâ—nc vitam relevaâ—i quisplam vel gravari Nemo autem se speret quod hic neglexerit cum obierit apud Deum promoreri Non igitur ista quae pro defunctis commendandis frequentat Ecclesia ilâ—i Apostolicae sunt adversa sententiae qua dictum est Omnes enim astabimus ante Tribunal Christi utreserat unusquâ—sque secundum ea quae per corpus gessit sivebonum sive malum quia etiam hoc meritum sibi quisque cum in corpore viâ—eret comparavit ut ei possent ista prodesse Non enim omnibus prosunt quare non omnibus prosunt nisipropter differentiam vitae quam quisque gessit in corpore Cum ergo sacificia c. Nor is it to be denied saith he that the Souls of the Deceased are relieved by the Piety of their living Relations when the Sacrifice of the Mediator is offered or Alms given in the Church for them But to those are these things profitable who when they lived merited that these things might be profitable for them afterward For there is one sort of Life neither so Good that it might not need those things after Death nor so Evil that they cannot profit after Death But there is such in Good that it may not require them and there is again such in Evil that it cannot be helped
this matter is so confirmed by this and by more ancient Authority that it cannot reasonably be questioned The other is S. Epiphanius Bishop of Salamis the Metropolis of the Isle of Cyprus a Man of good Reputation for Ability and Piety and particularly studied in all the Doctrines and Practices of the Church and the several Heresies contrary thereunto In him we have a double Testimony that of Aerius and his own in a Book of all the Hereticks and Heresies In that of Aerius is observable 1. The Matter of Fact and common Practice viz. commemorating the Names of the Dead and Praying for them 2. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The End for which it was done viz. That they might be benefitted by the Pardon of their Sins at the Prayers c. of their Surviving Friends and the Church Both these he opposeth and that is a Proof of both and by the Testimony of an Adversary which is reputed the most convincing 3. The Opposition without any denial or question of the Antiquity or Universality of the Practice or Observation or of the Tradition of either the Practice or the Intention and Doctrine which if he had had any colour or pretence for it he would certainly never have omitted but he is able to say nothing against either the Practice or Benefit of it but If it be so it is in vain to be pious it would be sufficient to get People to pray for the Pardon of ones Sins after his Death In all these respects is the Opposition of Aerius a very considerable Testimony of both the Practice and Intention and consequently of the Doctrine of the Church in this case But because our great Man useth his utmost Skill and very grossly to evade and elude these Testimonies I will here present them both intire according to his own Translation with Notes of the Pages where most of the distracted Parcels may be found in his Book that the Reader who hath a mind to entertain himself with a Prospect of his Ingenuity may the more plainly discern it The Objection of Aerius For what reason do you commemorate after Death the Names of those that are departed He that is alive prayeth or maketh Dispensation of the Mysteries what shall the Dead be profited hereby And if the Prayer of those here do altogether 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 profit them that be there then let no body be Godly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let no Man do Good but let him procure some Friends by what means it pleaseth him either by persuading them by Money or intreating Friends at his Death and let them pray for him that he may suffer nothing there and that those inexpiable Sins which he hath committed may not be required at his hands p. 238. Epiphanius his Answer and Testimony As for the reciting of the Names of those that are deceased what can be better than this What more commodious and more admirable that such as are present do believe that they who are departed do live and are not extinguished but are still Being and Living with the Lord and that this most pious Preaching might be declared that they who pray for their Brethren have hope of them as being in a Peregrination p. 240. But the Prayer also which is made for them doth profit altho' it doth not cut off All their Sins 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here answers to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Objection Yet forasmuch as whilst we are in the World we oftentimes slip both unwillingly and with our Will it serveth to signifie that which is more perfect For we make a Memorial both of the Just and for Sinners For Sinners intreating the Mercy of God of the Just both the Fathers and Patriarchs Prophets and Apostles and Evangelists and Martyrs and Confessors Bishops and Anchoretes and the whole Order that we may sever our Lord Jesus from the Rank of all other Men by the Honour that we do vnto him and that we may yield Worship unto him while we thus judge p. 240. That our Lord is not to be compared unto any Man tho' a Man live in Righteousness a thousand times and more for how should that be possible considering that the one is God the other Man and the one is in Heaven the other in Earth by reason of the Remains or Reliques of the Body yet resting in the Earth p. 242. Except those who being raised from the Dead entred together into the Bride-Chamber as saith the Holy Gospel c. But forbearing these things I return to what I was about The Church doth necessarily perform this having received it by Tradition from the Fathers And who may dissolve the Ordinances of his Mother or the Law of his Father p. 237. as Solomon saith Hear my Son the Words of thy Father and reject not the Laws of thy Mother declaring by this that our Father that is God the Only begotten and the Holy Spirit hath taught us both in Scriptures and without Scripture But our Mother the Church hath Ordinances settled in her which are inviolable and may not be broken Seeing then there are Ordinances established in the Church and they are well and all things are admirably done this Seducer is again refuted p. 237. This is the Answer of Epiphanius the words inclos'd in Crochets are not in Vsher To this we may well apply what he saith before concerning Easter the Observation of which was another thing which Aerius quarrelled at But who knows these things best This seduced Fellow who is but newly sprung up and now living amongst us or they who were Witnesses before us and who held the same Tradition in the Church before us which they had received from their Parents and their Parents had learned from their Ancestors as the Church to this day observes the true and sincere Faith which it received with the Traditions from the Fathers In all this we may observe 1. The Practice of the Church both in the General Commemorations and in the Prayers agreed on both Sides 2. The End and Intendment of the Church that it was the Profit and Benefit of the Deceased also agreed 3. The Question between them Whether the Prayer of the Living could profit or benefit the Dead as the Church intended 4. That this was what Aerius did principally deny and therefore that the Practice was reasonable as a necessary consequence 5. His only reason was that it would make Piety and good Life needless 6. Epiphanius his Answer 1. from Reason 1. as it is a seasonable and excellent Declaraction of the Faith and Hope of the Church 2. as an Act of Charity for the Benefit of the Deceased 2. from Authority as received in the Church by Tradition from our Saviour and the Holy Spirit And now how does our great Man elude this Epiphanius saith he doth not Name this viz. That Prayers and Sacrifice profiteth not the depa ted in Christ an Heresie 2. Nor doth it appear that himself did hold that
to the Principal Doctrines of Religion Tertul and the first Montanists were of the same Opinion with the Church c. saith Du Pin p. 82 83. Montanism And what is this to the Prejudice of his Testimony concerning Prayers for the Dead It is so far from that that it is the greatest Confirmation and Amplification of it that this Practice and Tradition was no part of Montanism for nothing could have been a greater Prejudice to the Church of Rome against it and it had certainly been condemned by them nor peculiar to the African Church but the known Practice of the Catholick Church and of the Roman Church in particular quite contrary to what the Objectors would persuade us But such Infatuations are the greatest of Men subject to when they will obstinately persist in the Maintenance of an ill Cause We may here therefore fix upon as good ground as can reasonably be desired this Practice and Tradition of the Catholick Church And now it is time to consider how much we are short in our Evidence of the Apostles Age and from what Original this Practice did in truth proceed It is agreed that St. John wrote his Gospel about the beginning of the second Century and that Tertullian fell to the Sect of Montanus in the beginning of the third Vid. Du Pin p. 44. and p. 70. And S. Hierom informs us that he lived to a great Age usque ad decrepitam atatem and that after he had continued usque ad mediam aetatem a Presbyter of the Church invidia postea contumeliis Clericor Romanae Ecclesiae ad Montani dogma delapsus * After having continued in the Church 40 or 45 Years he separated from it in the beginning of the 3d Centutury c. saith Du Pin p. 70. So that he lived the greatest and best part of his Life in the same Age wherein St. John wrote his Gospel and did live some time And here comes as seasonably as unexpectedly to my hand at the very instant that this is at the Press a Book of a learned Opponent who seeing this too plain to be dissembled and supposing that he can otherwise evade the force of this Evidence presents us with a plain Confession of the Matter of Fact †Of the Sibyls l. 2. c 23. David Blondell I make no difficulty saith he to affirm that it might be practised some time before the Year 200 in as much as Tertullian the most ancient of all those that say any thing of it numbred it even then among the Customs received in his time writing in the Year 199. Oblationes pro Defunctis pro Natalitiis annua die facimus c. and recites also the other two Testimonies only in that de Monogamia mistakes the Husband for the Wife and then adds From the things which this great Person the most Ancient and most Learned of all the Latines that we have remaining does advance as to Matter of Fact concerning the Oblations which were publickly made and the Employment of the Priests the only Ministers of the publick Service as a thing Ordinary and grown into Custom it is manifest that Praying for the Dead was in his Time used not only by particular Persons but also in the Body of the Church and that the Liturgies thereof were full of it Thus we see not only by plain Proof but also by the * The same is confessed by John Dalle since recommended to me as one who hath written learnedly on this Subject but I find not any thing in him added to Blendel but such Pride Arrogance Insolence Contempt and reproachful Expressimsoâ— the Anciâ—nt Holy Christians Martyrs as cannot but be very offensive to any true Christian Spirit being most apparently the common Spirit and Genius of all wicked and obstsnate Hereticks leading to Atheism and Ap stâ—cy and as contra ry to the Pare Word of God which they pretend as to the true Spirit of Christianty Confession of a learned Adversary that this was not only a Practice in the Church when Tertullian wrote but a Received Custom in his time and therefore of some standing before and of such standing as he knew no other Original of it but Apostolical Tradition and for such doth he alleadge it and not only so but for an unquestionable Proof of such unwritten Traditions as this Author also confesseth and asserts cap. 24. p. 142. And what other Original could it have in that little time and such a Man as he have been ignorant of it And had any other been known could He have been guilty of so great Weakness as to have alleadged this for an unquestionable Proof in such a Case if he had had so little Honesty But we have here a learned Man who under pretence of detecting an Imposture presumes by his Learning to impose upon the World How well he hath used his Learning in other Matters some Learned Men of the Church of England I think besides others have sufficiently shewed and how far his Judgment is to be relied upon In this I shall shew the like in a word He would perswade that not only Tertullian but the whole Church of Christ hath been imposed upon in this Matter by a counterfeit Sibyl written between the Years 138 and 151. and of Tertullian saith positively That he relied upon no other Hypothesis than those proposed by the Author of the pretended Sibylline Writings But in these few words there is no less than at least one notorious Fallacy and two Falsities a Fallacy in the word Hypothesis for he relied not upon any Hypothesis but upon the received Custom of the Church And that he did rely upon as is confessed But he did not in the least rely upon any thing at all of the pretended Sibyl Nor hath this Champion produced I think any one Proof that either Tertullian or any other of the Ancient or Modern Christians did at all rely upon any such Authority for that Practice but all unanimously relied upon Tradition from the Apostles His whole Book is full of Fallacy and Deceit and of the very Spirit and Genius of an Heretick who makes no scruple to abuse the whole Church of Christ and the most Excellent Persons in it to maintain his own Principles It is certain that divers of the great Truths of Christianity were known to the Gentiles long before and received by Tradition from the Common Parents of Mankind but received as Articles of Faith by Christians upon the Authority of Christ and his Apostles And such was this which he fathers upon an Impostor and pretends the Church received it from him without any Proof of either whereas if he was a Christian it is much more likely that he received the Hypothesis from the Practice of the Church at that time and is therefore rather an Evidence of it Other matters of this Book have been considered by learned Men of our own Country and I think I need say no more of this with any regard to
him But as to the Practice besides all this positive and Affirmative Evidence I do deny that any competent Evidence can be produced among all the Churches of the World of any where the Christian Religion was planted without it or where it was introduced by any particular Person upon any special Occasion at any different time after the first planting of Christianity there in all those Ages since the Apostles being verily persuaded that no such thing can be produced but what will strongly confirm and illustate the contrary Evidence like Mr. Vsher's Flourish with his most ancient Manuscript Missals wherein the Commemoration of the Dead doth no where appear which yet were but two in all if not all but one mentioned by two several Authors and that no compleat Missal neither but only Liber Sacramentorum an Abstract and it self at last not to be found as his expression habebatur seems to imply a good Argument of the Agreement of all or most others in that particular that so industrious a Searcher into ancient Records and Monuments of Antiquity of that kind especially could neither see nor hear of any other either at home or abroad wherein it was not Such another Exception may perhaps be met with which may serve to confirm the general Rule but not any thing considerable I believe to any other purpose Certain it is it must either have been settled in all those several Places in the World where Churches were planted together with the rest of the Christian Doctrines and Institutions and then it must have proceeded from the same Founders who agreed as unanimously in this as they did in other necessary things of which sort this may therefore be concluded to be one or it must have had a several distinct particular Introduction by it self in all or most of those several Places and be derived from several Authors Originals Occasions and Times and then the Accounts of its special and particular Introduction in all probability would have very much varied in several places at least have remained upon Record or by Tradition in some But not a word of any such thing can I find that was ever heard of in any part of the World but a Unanimous Agreement in all both in the Practice continued by Custom and Original by Tradition from the Apostles And thus much for Proof à posteriori from Evidence of Matter of Fact which I think enough to satisfie any reasonable Man of competent Ability and to convince any Man of Modesty and Sincerity yet because simple genuine Truth is always consistent with all that is such it may ex abundanti gratifie an honest ingenuous Reader to observe briefly the Vniversal Agreement of this Catholick Practice of the Church of Christ 1. With common Reason and the Nature of things 2. With the common Sentiments of the Primitive Christians concerning the middle State of Souls 3. With divers plain Texts of the Holy Scriptures And 4. with the common Practice of the Jews in and before our Saviour's time never reprehended by him or any of his Apostles and therefore allowed by all and indeed practised by them and on the contrary the Inconsistence of the obstinate Opposition with Truth and Justice in divers respects As for Common Reason The Universe is of vast and unconceivable extent in it we see are many great Bodies Orbs and Regions the Life of Man upon this of the Earth is very short the Time from the Resurrection of our Saviour to this is near 1700 years and how much more it may be to the General Judgment no Mortal knows in the mean time the Souls of Mortals go out of their Bodies in infinitely various States of Purity and Impurity And certainly it is most reasonable that there should be not only one general Distinction of Souls but moreover many distinct Places States and Conditions wherein the separate Souls are disposed according to their several Qualifications when they go out of the Body And as that curious Observer of the Works of Nature as well of the Holy Scriptures the late Lord Chief Justice Hale speaking of towardly Plants by Death transplanted into another Region a Garden of Happiness and Comfort adds And possibly by continuance of time as they received Improvement and Perfection here so in that other Region they add to their Degrees of Perfection and are promoted to farther Accessions and Degrees and Stations of Happiness and Glory till they come to the State of Spirits of just Men made perfect Now in all these Varieties of States is there nothing capable of receiving Benefit by the Prayers of the Living Is there no Communion of Saints between those in the Body and those out of the Body But if there be how can it better be exercised or expressed than in the solemn Offices of the Church For the Common Sentiments of the Primitive Christians because it would be too long to recite so many Testimonies in this place and they are collected already to my hand by Sixtus Senensis and others I need but refer the Reader to them But this also is confessed and asserted by Blondel and Dalle but they would have us believe that they received them from an Impostor a Counterfeit Sibyl a groundless impudent and impious Calumny The Agreement with plain Scriptures is observable in that expression of our Saviour concerning the Sin which shall not be forgiven neither in this World neither in the World to come Mat. 12.32 and that which agrees with this of being cast into Prison and not coming out by any means till Payment of the last Farthing Mat. 5.25 Prisoners of Hope Zechar. 9.11 12. Sins blotted out when the times of Refreshing shall come Act. 3.19 Such as shew the Incertainty of many Souls in their separate State even such as were Professors of a high Form in this World of what their final Doom shall be at that Day as Mat. 7.22 23. and 25.44 45. c. And the Recompence of Rewards at that day 2 Thess 1.6 7. 1 Cor. 5.5 Luk. 14.14.2 Tim. 4.8 c. Which if our confident Opposers had sufficiently considered one would think they should not have presumed to make so light of that middle State as for the maintaining of Parties to deprive so many Souls there of all Benefit they might receive by their surviving Friends here which many Apparitions even among Protestants do frequently signifie The Practice of the Jews I have noted already and shall add only here That in Discourse lately with one of them he assured me that the Form they now use for that purpose is generally believed by all to have been composed by Ezra and the Great Congregation I there also remembred an instance of the Practice of the Apostles themselves in St. Paul's Prayer for Onesiphorus in such a Form as is hardly to be met with for any Person living however proves it not in vain to Pray for any Person of whom there is Hope but not Certainty till that day So that tho' our great Man with more Considence I doubt than Conscience and without any Proof or Reason at all doth positively affirm him then living p. 210. he gets nothing at all by it Thus we see in this a Universal Agreement in all things but on the contrary if we examine the Obstinate Opposition of it throughout we shall find nothing solid and consistent in it neither with Truth nor Honesty nor any good Consequence but a plausible Pretence of the Pure Word of God to cover an impure Inclination and Desire to set aside the Authority which God instituted and set up themselves and their own Conceits in the place of it 2. Inconsistent with it self first denying or cavilling at the Antiquity or Universality of the Practice and then when they thought they had found out an Evasion confessing that which they could no longer for shame deny and betaking themselves to their new Invention 3. Inconsistent with the Sincerity Simplicity and Ingenuity of the Gospel in their shameless Shuffles Cavils and Evasions of which I have noted divers and many more might be observed but there is one not to be omitted here their alleadging the Writings of Epiphanius Chrysostome Augustin and others against not only their own but the confessed ancient Practice of the Church in their time in this Case Inconsistent with that Modesty Respect and Decency which the Gospel requires toward all in their Censuring as delirous not only some particular Persons but generally all the most Holy Ancient Christians in what was their common Sentiments and is believed by the most learned of the Church of England to be plainly taught in the Holy Scriptures 5. Inconsistent with that Reverence and Regard that Christians should have for the Honour of the Church of Christ his Promises to it and Care of it in so foul and scandalous an Imputation as that they received their common Notions of the present State of separate Souls in the other World from an Impostor which was not their Impudence therein as notorious as it is groundless and destitute of any proof at all might prove a Tentation to unsettled Souls to suspect all to be no better And for other Consequences it is plain they lead the way to all others to reject their own usurped Authority with the same Ease and Impudence that they do that of the Church of Christ and to set up their own Conceits against theirs and pretend Scripture for it and so to an endless Course of Separations Schisms Sects and Confusions and in conclusion set up that Authority over others which they themselves in the mean time reject as by their Synod of Dort and others in France appears And besides all this it is much to be feared that they lead multitudes of Souls into that miserable Security and Presumption wherewith our Saviour hath acquainted us that many will find themselves deceived at that day Mat. 7.22 And therefore if these be not pertinacious Schismaticks and Hereticks speaking perverse things to draw away Disciples after them and therefore carefully to be avoided I know not who are or what so many Cautions in the Scripture to that purpose do signifie FINIS