I.

THERE are no true Christians, whose very being so imprints not in them a profound respect for the Councils of the Church, since they consider them as Sa­cred Conventions, wherein that Holy Mo­ther both instructs and reforms her Sons, and wherein Bishops speak forth the di­ctates of that Spirit which proceeds from [Page 2] the supreme Bishop of our souls, 1 Pet. 2. 25. thereby preserving as well the faith of their people from being undermin'd by the overgrowing malice of Heresie, as their manners from being corrupted by the remissness of her discipline.

The Catholick Church has alwaies judged them of so absolute a necessity, that when ever the Devil attempted to di­sturb her peace, so soon she gather'd her Members from all parts of the Earth to oppose him, and to learn from the Divine Scriptures, how that dreadful Enemy was to be conquer'd. So when Arius endea­vor'd to deprive us of our Redeemer, by the denyal of his Divinity, the whole Church thundred upon him in the Nicent Council. Macedonius, whose blasphe­mous Tongue inveighed against the Holy Ghost, was no better treated in the Con­stantinopolitan. That of Ephesus prov'd no less Enemy to Nestorius. A thousand Anathema's were pronounc'd against Eu­tiches, by the Fathers met at Chalcedon. And because the Nestorians, even after Ne­storius his condemnation, were resolv'd to maintain his Errors under the name of Theodorus Bishop of Mopsuestia, Theodo­ret Bishop of Cyr, and Ibas Bishop of [Page 3] Edessa, and did likewise pretend, that the first being dead in the Communion of the Church, and the two others having been receiv'd in the Chalcedon Council, the said Council had approv'd of the Nesto­rian Heresie; the fifth General Synod gather'd at Constantinople, condemn'd the three Chapters, their Authors and De­fenders; amongst whom was poor Pope Vigilius reckon'd, notwithstanding all his Infallibility.

It had been the constant desire of Men, that the Council of Trent would have taken these first Assemblies for its rule, kept both their form and spirit, and shew'd in these last Times, where Charity is so cold, some foot-steps of those where it was so flaming.

II.

There were no reasons wanting to raise in us the most ardent desires that it should have been so. There was scarce any Reli­gion to be found in men; Superstition had so blinded their minds, and fleshly lusts infected their hearts. And at the same time, that ambition had put Arms into the hands of Princes to disturb the world, the bloodless, but more pernicious and obstinate quarrels of Divines, wasted [Page 4] the face of the Church.

The immediate fore-going Ages had brought forth Councils that contradicted each other. All Europe stood amaz'd at those of Constance, Basil, Florence, and the Lateran. The sacred Persons of Kings were become so desp [...]cable, [...]s to be excom­municated and degraded without the least scruple. The Divine Authority of Bishops was brought to nothing; and it was hard to judg, whether ignorance or corrupti­on was more predominant in the Clergy.

Nay the Popes themselves (if you be­lieve their Bulls) seem'd to be sensible of so many Exorbitances. Pope ^a Pius the Fourth confessed, He could not but be struck with horror; when he saw how much both Heresie and Schism had prevail'd, and how much Christian manners stood in need to be reformed.

^b Paul the Third before him had ac­knowledg'd, That Heresie and Schism had vitiated all things.

But Adrian the Sixth goes further, and in his Letter to the German Princes, does not think it enough to say, That the whole world groans under inveterate and insuffer­able abominations; that he desires earnestly a [Page 5] Reformation: but adds, ^a That the Church of Rome, the Apostolical See, is the off-spring [...]f so many disorders. We know, saies he, [...]here have been many abominations in this [...]oly See, abuses in Spiritual affairs, exces­ [...]s in the Laws, and that all things are per­ [...]erted: and it is no wonder that the disease [...]ath flown from the head to the members, [...]rom the Popes to the inferior Prelates.

This is also the Confession of those [...]rave and learned^b Doctors, who being [...]onsulted by Paul the Third, about the [...]ntended Reformation, answered him po­ [...]tively, That such an Enterprize would [...]rove impossible and useless to the Church, un­ [...]ess it began at the Head.

III.

'Twas requisite therefore to come to that so much expected Reformation; re­cal the ancient Doctrine and manners of the Church; and demonstrate by a sud­den and efficacious remedy, that the Popes were not deaf to the cries and complaints of so many Nations.

But 'twas necessary also to make the hu­mane [Page 6] Grandeur of the Apostolick See, a­gree with the Spiritual necessities that Souls were in; exhibit some kind of help which they should be alwaies masters of, and like experienc'd Physitians, draw in­finite advantages from that universal Cri­sis of the World.

Nothing was ever better contriv'd for that purpose then the Council of Trent. And he that will survey it without being blinded with any preposterous Zeal, will easily be convinc'd that Paul the Third, the Promoter of it, was a Man of great abilities; and that his Predecessors, trepi­daverunt timore ubi non erat timor. Psal. 53. 6.

IV.

The Pope passes his word to call a Coun­cil, & against the express promise that A­drian the 6th had made of having it in Ger­many, according to the constant maxime of the Canons,^a To end Causes where their occasion began, he calls it at Trent.

This Council summoned at Trent, is so afraid not to be accounted a General and a Lawful one, that it entitles it self at the beginning of all its Sessions,^b Sancta & [Page 7] oecumenica Synodus in Spiritu Sancto legiti­me congregata.

Who now would not think, after such big words, that from all places where our Blessed Saviors name is known, Bishops did flock to Trent? Who would not have expected to meet there with some Eastern Patriarchs, or African Prelates? Who would not have promised himself in read­ing the Subscriptions of this Council, to [...]ind more than 300 Witnesses of his Faith, as at Nice; 600. as at Chalcedon; and (in our very times) 300, as at Constance; or 400, as at Basil? Who would not have [...]ntertain'd hopes of hearing there, many Athanasius's, Cyril's, Eusebius's, Spiridio's, Paphnutius's, &c? In a word, Who would not have flatter'd himself, that our holy Faith had now bin made most clear and manifest, and that Gods Spirit, a Spirit of liberty and peace, 2 Cor. 3. 17. had animated that great Body? Nevertheless, what must we say, when we see appear there not any of those remote Bishops, nay scarce any of the nearest, not so much as one of Ger­many, Poland, England, Denmark, Sueden, or France? That grand oecumenical, holy, admir'd Council, is reduc'd to three Car­dinals, five Arch-Bishops, 36 Bishops (for [Page 8] the most part without Churches) some Mendicant Divines headed by Lainez and Salmero, two stars of the Firmament, worthy sons of the grand, holy, oecumenical company of Jesus.

The Sermons which were made at eve­ry Session, and their manner of discussing the controverted Points, are an evident proof of the mean parts (not to say any thing sharper and truer) of all these Di­vines. Nay, and to supply so remarka­ble a defect, we hear of no extraordinary qualities, nor eminent and surpassing Vir­tue, nor gift of Tongues, nor working of Miracles, nor Spirit of Prophecy

Notwithstanding, this small handful [...] People take upon them to explain the most obscure and intricate matters; to give them (after a slight and precipitat [...] survey) a final determination; and to make more Canons in one Session of four hours, then the four first General Coun­cils all put together had done in four hun­dred Years.

V.

The Pope claims to himself the power of calling that Council. He does not con­sider it as a privilege, or an usurpation [Page 9] which the silence of those that are inte­rested therein seem to render lawful, but as an inseparable and inherent right to his See.^a Nos, saith Julius the Third, ad quos ut summos pro tempore Pontifices spectat Concili a generalia indicere & dirigere, &c.

Who could imagine Christs Vicar to be a man of so small sincerity?^b Eusebius; ^c Socrates and^d Theodoret affirm, that the Nicene Council was call'd by the great Constantine. The^e first Constantinopolitan; which is the second General, was called by Theodosius; that of Ephesus by Theodosiue junior; that of^f Chalcedon by Marcianus; the^g fifth General by Justinian; the ^h sixth by Constantine the Fourth; the ⁱ seventh pretended General Council by Constantine and Irene his Mother; the ^k eighth by the Emperor Basil. All these are accounted General in the Ro­man Church, and full of so evident proofs, that the Cardinals^l Cusan, ^m Jacobatius and Zabarella confess, that in the Primi­tive [Page 10] Times, the right of calling Councils belonged to the Emperors: but so many that were assembled in Germany, England, France, Spain, Italy, &c. that of Constan­tia by Sigismundus, that of Pisa by Maxi­milian (gather'd for the most part to de­pose Popes) make it appear that so great a Truth was not wholly worn out in the last Ages.

VI.

It is pleasant to consider, how different the stile of Popes in former times is from that of the present. We were in hopes, saies Pope Leo to the Emperor Marcianus, E­pist. 44. that your clemency would conde­scend so far as to defer the Council; but since you resolve it should be kept, I have sent thi­ther Paschasin. Has not the Roman Church, saies Pope ^a Stephen to another Emperor, sent her Legats to the Council when you commanded it? We do offer these things to your Piety, saies Pope ^b Adrian to the Emperor Basil, with all humility, & veluti praesentes genibus advoluti, & co­ram vestigia pedum volutando.

But Pope Paul the Third speaks quite in [Page 11] another manner, Nulli hominum liceat hanc paginam infringere, vel ei ausu temerario contraire. The Bull of Julius the Third, is yet more bold, and ill becomes the hu­mility of one that writes himself, The Ser­vant of Servants. So that it must needs be, that either former Popes were extreme­ly ignorant of the extent of their Power, or that the ambition of the later is grown too exorbitant.

VII.

The Author of the Considerations up­on the Council of Trent, seems to be per­swaded of this want of Jurisdiction in the Pope, and he is at such a loss to excuse it, that he has nothing to say, but that in the Troubles that Europe had bin engaged in, this right was devolv'd to the Pope. But was not Europe more disturb'd when Fre­derick the First gathered a Council at^b Pa­via, where the German, English, French, Italian, Hungarian, and Danish Bishops met together? When Charles the Sixth, King of France, call'd one at^c Rhemes, whi­ther (the Emperor being pleased to be pre­sent) the King of England and many o­ther ^a [Page 12] Princes sent their Ambassadors? Or when both the Pisan and Constantian Councils were indicted by the Empe­rors with so great applause of all Chri­stians?

VIII.

Nor is it more difficult to prove, that the Pope has no right of presiding in Councils: nor ought we to recur for that to many subtil distinctions or deep Ratiocinations. We need not put our selves upon the rack, as the Cardinals Ba­ronius and Bellarmine frequently do, to render that probable, which is evidently false, and to make people wavering in things, which are undoubtedly true. We need but open those Books wherein lie the precious and everlasting Monuments of Antiquity, and the precedent conduct of so many holy Bishops.

Constantine the Great presided at the first General Council, as Pope^a Stephen doth acknowledge in his Letter to the Empe­ror Basil. Theodosius senior did the same at the second: and from the small^b remains that we have of this Council it appears, that nothing was done therein but by his [Page 13] Orders.^a Theodosius junior sent Count Can­didian to preside in his stead. And some contestation happening to be amongst the Bishops, he^b writes to them in these terms, Our Majesty cannot approve of & own as law­ful, what has bin done hitherto. And these very Bishops, that had a great veneration for their Emperor, tell him in their^c Sy­nodical Epistle, They have done nothing but [...]y his motions, and that they have made use [...]f his Letter as a Light to conduct them.

The fourth General Council hath no [...]ess evident Testimonies for it. The resi­stance which was made to Pope^d Leo's Legats, requiring Dioscorus to be put of the Assembly; the affair of Juvenalis and Thalassius; that of the ten Egyptian Bi­shops; that of Bassianus and Stephen, which were all determined by the Emperors Judges, leave us no ground to doubt of this truth. Justinian was President at the Fifth, as is clear from all the Acts of that Council. And that great Prince, whom Baronius abus'd so unworthily, declares in his^e Letter written to the Synod, That he [Page 14] considered the Bishops reunion as the founda­tion and beginning of all the happiness of hi [...] Reign.

The Sixth is so clear, and its Session were so many characters of such a presi­dency, that an adorer of the Popes new Power endeavored to discredit the Act [...] of it, because, saies he,^a The Emperor, with his Judges, plena autoritate praesidet, pre­sides with full autority.

Anastasius did whatever he could to de­prive us of the Seventh, but Pope Adrian did repair abundantly that defect. We offer these things, saies he in his Letter to Constantine, to the end they may be carefully examined, for we have not exactly gather'd these testimonies we present to your Imperi [...] Majesty. We received these Letters from A­drianus B^P of Rome, ^b saies the Emperor, directed to us by his Legats, who also sit with us in the Synod. We commanded them to be pub­licly read.

There is no Italian whom these word; would not stagger.

The Eighth expresly saies,^c Praesidenti­bus Imperatoribus; and because the Popes Legats pretended, that the Bishops who [Page 15] were defenders of Photius, having bin [...]ondemned by the Pope, ought not to be [...]eard any more, as sentenc'd by their last [...]udge, the Emperors Envoies to the Council, answer'd, That the Prince com­ [...]ands them to be heard the second time; Im­ [...]erator vult & jubet.

Who, after so many Presidents clearer [...]han the light, will not wonder to hear Leo the Tenth in his Lateran Council, [...]ay imperiously, and in such a manner as gives a truer Character of him, than all [...]is Historians, The Pope of Rome only, as [...]eing above all Councils, is fully impowered to [...]all, to transport, and to dissolve them? And who, after a particular account of 100 Provincial Councils for 1000 Years, where the Pope was never spoken of but [...]or the condemning of his pretences; who, I say, will not confess with Cardinal [...] Zabarella, That the Pope has so generally [...]nvaded the Rights of particular Churches, [...]hat other Bishops signifie almost nothing; and [...] God be not merciful to his Church, Vehe­menter periclitatur?

IX.

Nor does their pretended Power o [...] confirming Councils stand upon bette [...] grounds than the other two. For if by th [...] word Confirmatio [...] they understand an ex­ternal engagement, whereby all faithful People are to obey the holy Constitution of these Divine Assemblies, such an Au­thority belongs so properly to Princes and makes so considerable a part of the [...] Dignity, that no man can appropriate [...] to himself without a manifest Usurpation and violation of the Sacred Majesty o [...] Kings. 'Tis in that sense^a Eusebius said of Constantine. Quae ab Episcopis erant sa [...] ­citae regulae, suû confirm [...]bat & consignab [...] autoritate. And to the same purpose^b J [...] ­stinian, speaking of the Canons of the first Ages saies, Sancimus vicem legum obtine [...] sanctas regulas. But if by Confirmation they understand the internal obligatio [...] laid upon all Christians, of hearing those whom God has made their guides (an [...] especially when they speak in Council [...] where the Holy Ghost has promised to b [...] with them) to reduce it to the Pope, [...] the greatest Chimera in the World. Th [...] is to make these Venerable Assemblies a [...] [Page 17] object of scorn and derision; to give oc­casion of disbeleiving the certainty of the truth they set forth, or the justice of the laws they impose; and turn all Chri­stendome into a club of Independents, given up to the guidance of their own reason.

Is it probable that the Holy Ghost should be absent from a meeting of 300. Bishops, among whom we find Athana­sius, Osius, Maximus, &c. and be pre­sent to Liberius a Subscriber of the Ari­an Heresie?

That he should not be in the Ephesin, Chalcedonian, and Constantinopolitan Coun­cils, where you have Cyril, Leo, Pro­clus, Flavian, &c. and yet in Vigilius a defender of the three Chapters?

That he should not vouchsafe his pre­sence to three hundred Bishops met at the sixth general Counci, and yet in­spire Honorius a patron of the Monothe­lites?

Is not this to include the Universal Church in the Pope, which is a dangerous heresie? To acknowledg him to be above Councils, which the^a Basilian Council (the Popes's Carthage) as well as the fa­mous [Page 18] ^a Sorbon stile an other heresie? and in fine, to open the door to a thousand in­conveniences, the renown'd distincti­on excathedra cannot help?

X.

These weighty reasons induc'd the ^b German Princes to protest against that Council. Many Kings of France had done the same before: and Francis the First (whose name alone in a World of of great Men) was so fully perswaded of its being no Council, much less a Gene­ral one, that the subscription of the Let­ters he directed to them, was only this, Conventui Tridentino.

But above all Henry the Eighth King of England, a cleer-sighted Prince, and ex­treamly well learned in the true concern­ments of Princes, oppos'd it with a grea­ter constancy. Twas not out of any mo­tion of Heresie or Schism he dealt thus; for he lived yet in the Roman communi­on. Nor out of any ambition, since all the historians, nay those themselves who en­deavoured most to defame him, acknow­ledg [Page 19] he had been all his life-time the ge­neral Arbiter of Europe. Nor yet out of any fear of, or aversion to Councils, since at the same time that he protested against the Council of Trent, he declared he was ready to submit to any other lawfully call'd, and to send thither the Bishops of his Realms. But the true and only cause was, that he perceived of how great importance an attempt of that mat­ter would be for all succeeding ages, and what slavery all Christian Princes would be reduced to, if he should let it pass. So that if the Council of Trent were as ortho­dox as the Nicene, and we had no other reasons of rejecting it, this we have al­ledged is sufficient to satisfy all unpreju­dic'd persons.

Tis an essential defect and a fundamen­tal one, at the beginning of an affair of the highest concernment. Whatever you intend to raise and build upon it, cannot be but weak and ruinous: and till the Pope be pleased to do us justice in that point, we do well to stop our ears to all others.

XI.

But should we set aside all these consi­derations, and grant that the Pope could both call and preside in this Council, we maintain he ought not to do it.

How came he to be judg of those, whose adversary he was? to sentence his own ac­cusers, and to rule in a Council deman­ded with so many tears, and obtained af­ter five and twenty years delay, only to reform him?

The heats of Leo the 10^th against Luther are very well known. That Pope who had for so many years trampled upon the neck of Europe, was almost distracted to see a despicable Frier rebel against him, and attack indulgences, of which his pre­decessors had alwaies bin most tender.

So considerable an adversary gave more credit to Luther, than either his own merit, or the justice of his cause could have done. Nor was he to be accounted an ordinary man, that had answered Pope Leo so briskly, and stoutly received all the Vatican thunders. He made his appeal to a future Council, and was the more easily induced to defer till then his con­demnation, or justification, because [Page 21] [...]e never imagin'd Pope Leo, his public [...]nd profess'd Enemy would become his [...]udg.

The German Princes went further, and [...]fter their accusation brought against [...]he Pope for Heresie and Simony, they [...] appeal'd to a lawful Council.

Twas at least the Popes duty to purge himself of so many accusations, and to [...]cknowledge according to the rule of the [...] Canonists (his most famous oracles) that [...]n such occasions he was depriv'd of all power.

The Arch-Bishop of Colen having been excommunicated by Paul the Third, refused the Pope for his Judg, as having bin attainted of Heresie and Idolatry long before; and protested that as soon as a free Council should be opened, he would appear there to accuse him according to the ancient Canons.

King Henry the Eighth declared in his Manifesto, that the Roman Bishops or­ders did not concern him at all; that the Pope had conceived a deadly hatred a­gainst him; and that he sought after all occasions to be revenged of him, for hav­ing ^{a b} [Page 22] shaken off his tyranny, and withstood the intolerable contributions exacted of his Kingdoms by that See. These diffe­rent appeals had been made in all requi­site terms: and were not intended as a pretence to annul the Council, but were offer'd before it was commenc'd without ever being recall'd. What ever sligh [...] pretences the Pope had against Luther and the Princes of Germany, he had none at all against Henry the Eight and the Arch-Bishop of Colen. The one was a Pre­late who demanded to be ruled by the Canons; the other a great King, never suspected of any Heresie; one that was ho­noured with the glorious name of De­fender of the Faith: and tho we don't pretend to canonize all the actions of that incomparable Monarch, it is well known his greatest guilt was the following the examples of his Predecessors, in conver­ting to the good of the State, those im­mense riches which the Roman Luxury and idleness was maintained with, and taking away those Monasteries, whose People were become abominable and scandalous to the Church.

XII.

For these very reasons in former ages [...]he^a Catholic Bishops, defenders of Atha­ [...]asius his person and faith, rejected the Council of Tyre, because, said they, Theognis and Eusebius were his judges; [...]nd that Gods Law, Inimicum neque te­ [...]em neque judicem esse vult. ^b St. Crysostome [...]efus'd to appear before Theophilus, only [...]ecause he stil seem'd guilty of the crimes [...]id to his charge, and was his enemy, [...]uod contra omnes Canones & leges est. And [...]his is so equitable, that Pope^c Nicholas [...]he First, and^d Celestine the Third ac­ [...]nowledged, that ipsa ratio dictat, [...]uia suspecti & inimici judices esse non de­ [...]cant.

^e Cardinal Bellarmine is so embarass'd by the laws which those two Popes con­ [...]ess to be of natural equity, that he ad­mits of them, except when it concerns [...]he supream judge. I pity that great de­fender of the Popes, for giving so mise­ [...]able an answer. For if it be true, how [...]ame it to pass that Pope Vigilius's consti­tution [Page 24] (which he certainly pronounce [...] ex Cathedra) was condemn'd in the^a Fift [...] general Council? Why does the^b Sixth a [...]so excommunicate Pope Honorius for b [...]ing an Heretique? Exclamaverunt o [...]nes Honorio haeretico anathema. And th [...] ^c Seventh, Detestamur Sergium, Honorium [...] &c. What means the^d Eight in forbid [...]ing Popes ever to be judged, but whe [...] they are Heretiques? Why did the [...] Basilean and^f Constantian make it an a [...]ticle of Faith, that the Popes are subje [...] to a superior Judg when they becom [...] Hereticks, Schismaticks or scandalous▪ Why were Pope^g Anastasius, John th [...] Thirteenth, and a 100 others depos'd? [...]o [...] must needs either condemn this shinin [...] cloud of witnesses, and with them all th [...] ages of the Church, or confess that Pop [...] Paul the third had no reasons to presid [...] at Trent.

XIII.

Tis no new thing to appeal from the Popes judgment. Saint Austin writing [...] the Donatists, and speaking of the sentence ^e [Page 25] given against them at Rome, uses these words. ‘Let us suppose,^a saies he, that the Bishops who judged their cause at Rome had not judged aright, there yet remained a Council of the Universal Church wherein your cause with your judges might have been judged again, and their sentence annul'd had it been unjust.’

But without looking back to the Pri­mitive times, the histories of our age af­ford us a thousand examples of this kind. Nothing is more frequent in the English; French and German records. Nay the Monks themselves claim'd right to such appeals. Luther was not the first who attempted to make use of them; and we read in Paul Langius his^b Chronicles, that Cesano a Frier appeal'd from the sentence of Pope Martin the fifth as being Here­tical, tho in a matter of very little con­cernment, it being only to know, to whom belong'd the propriety of the Franciscans's bread.

XIV.

But laying aside all these reasons, how could the Pope be president in a Council [Page 26] call'd only for his reformation? There is none but know that the disorders of the Church had no other Origin then the Court of Rome. Nor did Protestants only think so, but those also of the Church of Rome. And tho both were ex­treamly opposite in their opinions con­cerning the remedies for so great a dis­ease; yet they all agreed in their appre­hensions of its cause. Pope^a Adrian the sixth and the Councellors of^b Paul the third acknowledg'd it with much since­rity. This was the sentiment of Princes as well as Doctors. Their^c publique Ministers did alwaies touch upon that string. Pope^d Marcellus the second did not apprehend how his Predecessors could abhor the very name of reformation. And it is like that had God bin pleas'd to pro­long his life, he would have done great things.

The reformation of Popes was a wound never searched without making them fall into dreadful fits. All Christians desired the primitive times in matters both of [Page 27] Doctrine and discipline should be brought again. But they were afraid at that word; and the only representation of such a Council as those four which Pope Gregory the Great reverenced as the four Gospels, was a phantôme, which all the exorcisms in the World could not drive away.

We need but read Onuphrius their hi­storian to be acquainted with their fears. Cardinal Pallavicini could not conceal them; Cardinal Bellai represents in his memoires, how much Pope Paul the Fourth was frighted. And all the World was so far perswaded, that this only thing hindred them from proceeding, that Monsieur de Ferrieres Embassadour of his most Christian Majesty to the Coun­cil, told them not only in his Masters name, but also of all the Gallican Church, ‘that more than an hundred and fifty years since, a reformation of the head and members had bin expected in the Church; that it had bin required in the Constantian, Basilean, and Ferrarian, Councils, but could never be obtain­ed; that twas no hard matter to guess at the reason of so many delaies.’

XV.

The truth on't was, the Popes wounds were grown altogether incurable. There had bin a kind of prescription against all their abuses. Many holy men had in­veigh'd against them on all occasions but in vain; and thus usurpation had lasted so long, that they did account it a lawful authority. Twas so pleasing to them to thunder at all the World upon the smal­lest occasion, that they could not re­nounce it without thinking themselves undone. In a word they were not taken so much with the humble and penitent lives of the Popes Adrian and Marcellus, as with the audacious and voluptuous ones of Boniface, Leo and Hildebrand.

Nevertheless this sick and languishing person is allow'd to govern his own Phy­sitians. The general complaint of the World is, ‘that the Popes swelling am­bition has made him break through all laws; that the Court of Rome is become a sink of wickedness; that the vices of the head infected the members; that without the reforming of this head there is no hope left for laying of any solid foundation.’

[Page 29] And yet he presides in his Council. He calls, directs, and transports it by his [...]ull and sole authority (tho the 400 Pre­ [...]ates met at^a Basil had made it a point of the Catholic Faith, that 'twas not in his power:) his Spirit fits the mouth of his Legats, and the fear of him strikes the hearts of the Bishops.

XVI.

Paul the third being afraid of nothing so much as of a free Council where Pro­testants should be heard, provided so well against these two inconveniences, that the Conventicles of Tyre, of Antioch, or of Ephesu [...] in comparison of that, would have bin thought freedom it self.

Peace being the source of all freedom in an Ecclesiastical assembly, where all the members of it are stil'd by Scripture ^b Evangelists of peace, that Pope was ex­treamly diligent in fomenting War thro all Europe. This we are assur'd of by the speech of Cardinal de Monte, that of Car­dinal de Lorraine, the letters of the Lant­grave de Hesse, of the Duke of Saxony, and of that^c Pope himself to the Switzers, [Page 30] wherein he acquaints them, he has made a league with the Emperor to undermin [...] Protestants, and intends for that purpose, to raise all the forces of the Ecclesiastical state.

What name shall we give a Council which has such a Pope for its president? Do's he deal out of charity or ambition? Do's he design to convert Souls by force of Arms? What can they think of the Church, who are suppos'd to be separat­ed from her? How long is it since Coun­cils were taught to War with any other weapon then Scriptures, then tears and Praiers? Is that Pope to be trusted, who at the same time he offers to receive his Children into his bosome, can lift up his hand to strike them?

Julius the Third was of a greater since­rity, and scorn'd to deal deceitfully. When he call'd the Fathers to Trent, he openly agreed with the Emperor to make War against France, about the Duke­dom of Parma; and to speak as Onuphri­us (who is more his Panegyrist than his Historian) set Italy and the rest of Europe in a flame.

[Page 31] What peace then or freedome could a Council enjoy, when all Europe was em­ [...]roil'd, and groan'd under a bloody War? and what designs of reunion and charity could a Pope entertain, who sought no­thing but confusion and trouble?

Pius the Fourth seem'd to be asham'd of it. He was so little convinc'd of the va­lidity of what ever had bin done at Trent, that when he recall'd again his Synod the third time, he was at a loss how to term it, whether it should be considered as a new one, or but a continu­ation of the first; French-men claim'd the one, Spaniards pretended the other. The Pope (saies his^a Panegyrist) met with an expedient to make them agree, and he did so contrive his Bull, that all were equally sa­tisfied: that is to say, he daub'd up the business; he flatter'd each one with a fan­cy they had bin victorious, but he gave occasion at the same time to all clear-sighted men, to wonder at a conduct so far distant from the candor and ingenuity of the first Ages, and so full of carnal wis­dom, which the Apostle stiles^b Death, and to beleive, that he never intended to heal the wounds of the Church, but on­ly [Page 32] to cover them, and create her new ones.

XVII.

What is the reason the Pope is so ear­nest for the Council to be held in Italy and stops his ears to the cries of Germa­ny, the complaints of Protestants, and the entreaties of so many Princes and Bi­shops? Did France, where the eldest Son of the Church commands, give him any cause to fear? Did Germany, where Charles 5^th commanded? Did Spain, where people were grown adorers of his Grandeur? Was this Council for be­ing had in any of these Kingdoms, under the subjection of most Christian and Ca­tholic Princes, in danger of becoming either less free or less Orthodox?

Had the Pope bin inflam'd with the zeal of that faithful Shepherd, of whom it is written, do's he not leave the ninety & nine, & go into the Mountains, & seeks that which is gone astray ^b? how great joy should have possessed his Soul, for having the place shown him, where to find his wandring Sheep: where all European Bishops might ^a [Page 33] have met together; and England, Swe­den, Denmark, Poland, and Germany, sent their Prelates? Should he not have bin ravish'd at the occasion given him, of rendring the Protestants inexcusable? of reproaching them as Christ did Jerusalem, how often would I have gathered thy Children together, even as a hen gathereth her chicken, and ye would not, Matth. 23. 37. of ac­cusing them of Schism, and applying to them all Saint Austin's arguments a­gainst the Donatists? Had not Pope Paul the Third, and his Successors aim'd at some other end then the love of Catholic truth, why did he oppose the only thing that could render it victorious? Is there any president of such a conduct in former Ages? Is it not cleer that there is in it some mystery? And if so, was it to be wondred that Protestants should apply themselves to search into it, and prevent its consequences?

XVIII.

The choice of a free place where truth should command, had bin alwaies a ter­rour to the Popes. As long as the Apo­stolic [Page 34] See is not rul'd by Adrians and Mar­cellus's, it will never without horrour call to mind the Councils of Constance and Basil. Every Country wherein Bishops may say, It seems good to the Holy Ghost and to us, Act. 15. 28. shall be account­ed by the Bishop of Rome a Land of bon­dage. The Pisan Council shall be term'd a Latrociny by the Lateran; and most ho­ly decrees shall be lookt upon, as so ma­ny bold and rash attempts.

Paul the Third chuses therefore Trent to assemble his Council at. This Town indeed was out of the Ecclesiastical state, and the Cardinal of Trent commanded therein; but as an Author of the Roman communion pleasantly observes, the Town was subject to the Cardinal, and the Cardi­nal to the Pope.

Paul the Third had bin informed by his predecessors example, that nothing made so much to the mastering of a Council, as the choice of the place. He succeeded in it admirably well. Trent was not so far from Rome, but the Holy Ghost might come thither in a few daies, and many legions [Page 35] of Italian Bishops resort thither; as it was done at the question of Residence and di­vine right of Episcopacy, when 40 Apuli­an Bishops, set aside for the most pressing occasions, came in as fresh supply. But he had forgot how Nicholas the First, In­nocent the Third, Clement the Fifth, In­nocent the Fourth do^a teach, that no man is bound to appear in a place where he has just reasons to fear the multitude.

XIX.

The event has shown us, that the fears of those Princes were not groundless. Their intention was only to obtain a free Council, where none should be condem­ned unheard, truth examin'd without prejudice, and matters weighed with the greatest care.

For we must not imagine so many great Kingdoms, holy Bishops and learned men sought their own ruine. They desired no more then the examination of their doctrine, to persevere in it if it should be [Page 36] judged orthodox, or to renounce it if it were not so; & for this reason the favour should be granted them, which was ne­ver denied to any, to wit of being heard.

An^a Heathen does so much justice to Pope Liberius, as to confess, that he chose rather to banish then to condemn Athanasius without hearing his defence. But if they were afraid to place us in A­thanasius's rank, it is certain that Arius, Macedonius, Paul of Samasate, Nestorius, Pelagius, and the most abominable He­resiarchs have bin heard. And the Church alwaies judg'd she could not deny them a thing of natural right.

XX.

Nevertheless the Pope rids himself of all these Inconveniences of the Primitive Church; and for fear other Bishops that are present at the Council should speak for them, he deprives them of all free­dom of proposing any thing. Tho they are his^b venerable Brothers and born Judges [Page 37] of Councils as well as he, they have never the more liberty for it. All things are done proponentibus legatis, ^a and these Legats do propose but what they please.

When any one touched with a sense of his duty, intends to speak, he is silen­ced. If he be a French-man or a Spaniard, they tell him, tis unbecoming the Maje­sty of a Council to contest. But if he be an Italian (that is, a shadow and a Sceleton of a Bishop) he has his ingratitude re­proach'd, and his Soul terrified by vio­lent threats.

There is at Trent but the image of a Council. The true one is at Rome. ^b Quid à patribus judicandum proponitur, aut ab [...]is judicatum publicatur, quod non prius Ro­mam missum Pio Quarto placuerit? The main design is to cheat the People, & not to e­stablish any real good for the Church. The holy Ghost does not shine on the Fa­thers [Page 38] at Trent but by reflexion; and tho he has not promis'd to be in the conclave, but in the Council, yet he does not come to the one but as sent by the other.

What can the result be of dealings so contrary to the Spirit of God, but to in­cline men to renounce an assembly, where, as speaks Mr. Ferriers's, Pope Pius the Fourth left no place for the laws, no foot­steps of the antient Councils, no vestige of freedom.^a Ʋbi nullum legibus locum, nullum antiquorum conciliorum, nullum li­beratatis vestigium Pius Quartus relinquat.

Nor are the Authors of these last words either Protestants or Heretics. Neither is it that famour Venetian, whom they call A­theist, because he brought out of dark­ness, those artifices the Popes made use of, to betray the cause of God: but the Le­gats of the most Christian King: Men of admirable integrity and erudition, wonderfully addicted to the Church of Rome; and public Enemies to those that had separated themselves from it.

XXI.

But to be fully perswaded of the vio­lence offer'd the truth, and that its vin­dication was not the scope of their en­deavours, we need but consider the se­cret power given to the Popes Legat to transport, or to dissolve the Council ac­cording to the occurrences. Is it not a manifest and evincing argument, that the Fathers gather'd at Trent were treated like Children? made use of but only for a shew and pretence, when an occult and an overuling spirit agitated the whole mass?

Had the Pope dealt sincerely and with­out mistrust, what need such an antici­pated power? But if he could not sup­press his fears in a place he had bin so much cautious of to be made secure, are not the very same fears much more reaso­nable in such, as could there hope for no security?

The dissolving of Councils is the last shift the Popes betake themselves to. Eu­genius the Fourth attempted to secure his [Page 40] tottering power at Basil; and indeed that Council had vanish'd into smoak, but that the Emperour, Princes, and Bishops, for­ced him to repair thither:^a by threatning to condemn him for a stubborn and obstinate man, if he should refuse it. Proud^b Le [...] the Tenth succeeded more happily, and tho Alexander the Fifth testified at his death, all things had bin done at the Pi­san Council with all imaginable sin­cerity and integrity, yet he declar'd it a meer conventicle.

XXII.

Had they intended to render truth ma­nifest and palpable to all Christians, why did they take a course for discussing it o [...] suspicious and unheard of till then? What means that so extraordinary distinction of Congregations and Sessions, the first to deliberate, the other to decide and decree [...] Had they learnt this from the first Coun­cils of the Church? Must articles of Faith be handled secretly?^c Is there any thing more dreadful to the truth then to be absco [...] ­ded? [Page 41] And is there any rational man that suspects not they are willing to disguise and betray it, when he sees them so cau­tious and overprudent to conceal from him their way of examining it?

Is infallibility to be found in the Sessions or in the Congregations? not in the last, since they are compos'd of private Doc­tors; nor in the first, since nothing is exa­min'd in them.

And Gods Spirit, a^a spirit of Wisdom and discretion, forbids to determine any thing but after a long and serious trial.

XXII.

Hence we draw, how weak is an answer of the author of the considerations upon the Council of Trent, which seems to him the most solid ground of all his discourse.

The inconsiderable number of Bishops who voted in that Council is objected to him. And we say ‘that it is a great teme­rity [Page 42] in those few Bishops and Divines, to have made in so short a time, & upon so important matters, such a prodigious number of decrees; and an other yet greater and more unpardonable then the first, to have bin so bold to propose them as the decisions of the Catholic Church.’

To this he answers two things, first that those Bishops and Divines were men of an extraordinary merit. Secondly that what­ever this small number had done, was ap­prov'd of, received and ratified by the greater number, which amounted to a­bove two hundred at the least Session.

For the first part of his answer concer­ning their extraordinary merit, he must give us leave to tell him, Pope Paul the fourth was incomparably better acquain­ted with it then he is, and consequent­ly more to be beleived. And^a he said of them to Cardinal Bellay, It had bin a great weakness in his Predecessours, their ha­ving sent to the Mountains of Trent three­score [Page 43] Bishops of the less learned, Sessanta Ve­scovi de manco habili, & forty very ordina­ry Divines, & quaranta dottori de meno sufficienti.

For the second we acknowledg with him, that at the end of the Council two hundred and 50 Bishops, the greatest part Italians, ratifi'd the decrees of those other. But he ought to acknowledg with us, as a matter of fact, that after the arrival of those new Bishops, there had not bin any new examination of so many decrees, but only a simple reading. Whence we conclude many things so disadvantage­ous to him, that it would have bin more secure and handsom for him, to have let that objection alone, as he did twen­ty others.

And first that it is against all Canons, all right, and rules of common sense, that Bishops newly come should deter­mine points they never examin'd.

Secondly, the surveying of these points was either necessary, or not. If twas so, they were bound therefore to undertake it. [Page 44] But if there was no such necessity, why did the first Bishops impose it upon them­selves?

Thirdly, the last Bishops avoiding any new examination did therefore acquiesce in the precedent: and so it is a ridiculous petition of principle, and the greatest dis­honour the Council could be blemish'd with, to say the Fathers rely upon some Bishops de manco habili, and some Di­vines de meno sufficienti.

Fourthly, that by this means Prote­stants continue still in the right, for com­plaining they have bin condemned with­out being heard: that they can and ought to maintain their Doctrine till it be lawfully proscrib'd, it being probable so many great Kingdoms, three parts of Germany, and a considerable part of France and Poland, were further from being mi­staken, then a few Bishops de manco ha­bili, and a few Divines demeno suffici­enti.

XXIV.

Ther's none can forbear laughing, at the simplicity of him that collected the subscriptions of that Council; who to dazle the eyes of ignorant People, writes a patriarch of Jerusalem and six Greek Pre­lats; Greeks born in Italy, who had nothing Greek but their names; as lately Cardinal de Rets was Arch-Bishop of Corinth, tho he had never bin there. The same is to be said of the pretended Arch-Bishops of Ar­magh and Upsal who sate at Trent, when the true Prelats of those Sees protested a­gainst the Council.

And for those titular Bishops who ap­peard there in so stupendious a number, the Pope did never reflect that in send­ing them thither, he published to all the World, how much an enemy he was to the Spirit, Discipline, and rules of the Church, which hath alwaies consider'd the Election of Bishops without Bishop­rics, as constant violations of her most holy laws.

XXV.

But all these Shepherds, as well those that want Sheep, as those that are know [...] by theirs, John 11. 14. are tied up to the Pope by a more solemn and dreadful Oath, then that which obligeth them to their natural Princes.

This Oath is not only contrary to all antiquity, wherein tis impossible to find any footstep of it; not only unworthy the Episcopal rank, not only injurious and scandalous to Kings, who thereby can never hope for true and faithful alle­giances from their Bishops: but also hor­rid and abominable in all its parts.

A private author would never be be­leived, that should undertake to evince the consequences of it. They would su­spect him of being prepossess'd and sway­ed more by his own passion then the truth. But lets hear how the Pope himself inter­prets this Oath. No Bishop of the Church of Rome can disown the interpretation of his holiness. For it is the universal [Page 47] Doctrine of all Divines (except some scandalous Jesuits) that we must in all our swearings answer the meaning of the law­giver, otherwise we attempt to deride God, and make his word a witness to our falshood.

But Pope Pius the Second makes the ex­tent of this Oath so large, that writing to the Bishop of Mayence he^a tells him, It is not lawful for a Bishop to speak true against the Pope. Non licet verum dicere con­tra Papam.

If we give any credit to that Popes words (which the Author of the conside­rations cannot disown, for he spake ex Cathedrâ) in a thousand occurrences they that take such an Oath must needs be ei­ther perjur'd or betrayers of the truth of Christ.

But what can we hope from Bishops who sit in a Council thus enslav'd to the Popes will? since a Heresie maintain'd by him, (as but too many have bin) they cannot oppose, without forswearing themselves; and if they remain dumb at [Page 48] such enormities, they shamefully betray the station Christ has given them in his Church.

What would the Nicene or Chalcedoni­an Fathers have said at this acclamation of the Apulian Bishops,^a Nihil aliud su­mus praeterquam creaturae & mancipia San­ctissimi Patris? What would Domnus o [...] Dioscorus have desir'd more? and if Paph­nutius could not forbear weeping, to see Athanasius's seat fill'd by his accuser, and himself thrust into a place due to that vile man, is it possible there was not one Bishop at Trent seen to shed tears at so strange a contempt of Episcopal dignity?

XXVI.

And indeed the most holy Father us'd them all ut creaturas & mancipia. James of Clodia Fossa, saying he could not suffer tradition to be parallel'd with the Scripture, was expell'd the Council. Pe­ter of Justinianople being but suspected of what they call'd Lutheranism, was for­bidden to come there, and take place a­mongst [Page 49] the Bishops. Another was pro­claim'd Schismatical, and threatned to be rejected, for affirming there had bin ma­ny lawful Bishops never call'd or con­firm'd by the Pope. Nay another was depos'd because he said, the Pope should be contented with the title of Holy, which God is satisfied with without affecting that of most Holy. So that twas not without rea­son, the Cardinal of Lorrain complains, ^a ‘the Council was not free, since no­thing could be propos'd or resolv'd, but what was the Legats pleasure, nor could they propose any thing but what was the Popes.’

XXVI.

But to convince all unprejudic'd per­sons, we need but consider the safe con­duct granted to Protestants.

Tho the Fathers of Trent were engag­ed in honour, to blot out the memory of the Constantian Council, (whose wounds continued still bleeding) by testifying to their adversaries all imaginable sinceri­ty [Page 50] and Candour, yet they gave them greater occasions then ever to distrust.

Protestants require nothing but what had bin accorded to the Bohemians by the Fathers at Basil; but they are plainly denied. They beg at least a safe conduct which they many confide in; but tis doubted whether it may be granted them, and they are told it shall be given in the Congregation (viz. in the Friers meet­ing) and not in the Session (viz. in the Council.) At last after having bin thus baited, they o [...]tain safe conduct which has respect only to the Germans & worded in such captious terms, that there­by the Pope had reserved to himself the power of burning all the English, Swedes, Danes, and French that should come to the Council; nay the Germans themsel­ves: tho they could blame nothing but their own simplicity:

Notwithstanding whatever reasons Protestants had of declining such a Council, after the example of the Ho­ly Fathers, and the judgment of the wisest men then living, they (trusting the justice of their cause, and seeing in that noble and magnificent safe conduct [Page 51] hope was given them of disputing and proposing their difficulties) sent their Divines to Trent and exposed them to all dangers, without any other defence then the truth, which is call'd in the Scri­ture, the shield of the just. These Di­vines thus authoriz'd by their Nation, being arriv'd at Trent, conceal not themselves. They avoid not the sight of men. The whole Councill is ac­quainted with their coming. They speak to the Ambassadors, make their ad­dresses to the Popes Legats, conjure them to pitty the calamities of Germa­ny; and after having presented them with the confession of their Faith, they beg no other favour from them, but to have it read in the Council, for its being either approv'd of, or con­demn'd. The Legats do not burden them with Irons, or tumble them in­to Dungeons, they are so far from be­ing murdered, that their life could not be more secure in the Prince of Saxonies or the Landgraves Chamber. But they receive no answer; their con­fession of Faith remains buried, the Legats keep it in Petto, nor are the [Page 52] most entire submissions and ardent en­treaties able to bring it forth. Think­ing perhaps that the quality of a Priest, or of a Divine had no great influence upon an Apostolic Legat, they made use of the Emperours Ambassadors. That Prince was the Soul of the Pope, as the Pope was of the Council. But all these endeavours are frustrated, there is somwhat unknown and unper­ceiv'd which strikes dumb their Emi­nences.

Who ever heard of any such deal­ings? If Protestants decline the Coun­cil grounded upon a thousand unan­swerable reasons, all the World rises against them; nor are the names of Heretics, Schismatics, nay Atheists sufficient to express their imputed per­fidiousness. But tho they come and strike Heaven and Earth with their com­plaints, an ignorance is pretended of their being there. The Fathers have neither ears, nor hearts, nor mouths, to hear their praiers, feel their grie­vances, and answer their proposals; and they are forced to beg and expect [Page 53] from God that justice which men de­ny them.

XXVII.

Tis evident from so many instan­ces, that Protestants did never reject Councils. There is no Christian whom the Authority of the Church do's not overcome, he deserving to be debar'd from the quality, advantages and hopes of a Son, who hearkens not unto his Mothers voice. The Church has a true jurisdiction, a real and effective autho­rity. All contrary Doctrines flow from independency and Enthusiasm, two blind and furious Monsters every where to be profligated. But the very same Protestants so great admirers and de­fenders of the Church, require she should speak in lawful assemblies. When they shall be condemned in Councils like that of Nice and Chalcedon, then they will receive their sentence with as much joy as respect.

[Page 54] But when a new and unlawful meet­ing, guilty of essential, aver'd and in­contestable defects, nay acknowledg'd to be such by the most learned and dis­interested men of the Roman Com­munion, shall claim the same authori­ty as these Divine assemblies, they will be very careful to keep their ancient waies; and far from being deterr'd by the threats of that proud and uncharitable Church, which excludes from heaven all those she cannot keep blindfold in her bosom, they will augment the glorious com­pany of many holy Fathers, whom the overpowring number of unjust Councils, could never bend to be­tray the cause of Christ. Such an one was St. Athanasius who rejected the Council of Tyre; Maximus Patriarch of Jerusalem, that of Antioch; Cyril that of Syrmium; Paulinus that of Mi­lan; and Chrysostome, an example of Christian constancy, that ad quer­cum.

In a word they will receive those curses pronounc'd against them as so ma­ny blessings, and without going any [Page 55] further into the discussion of the Triden­tine Councils decrees, they will conclude with the words of Cardinal^a Bellarmine, Si legitima Synodus non fuit, planum est nullam authoritatem potuisse habere: & nullius roboris sunt illius Canones.

I.

WHOEVER peruses the Coun­cil of Trent, cannot but be strangely amazed, to find its stile so alto­gether unlike that of the ancient writings of the Church. There is in those I know not what characters of holiness and Chri­stian majesty, which command reve­rence from all: but in this we meet with a sort of so unusual and dubious expres­sions, that shew the Authors of it were incomparably better versed in political [Page 58] practices, or Books of School-men, then in the Works of the Fathers.

They never intended, in many of their Canons, to fix a true and uniform sense, which all People might rely upon, but a double and captious one, apt to receive contrary interpretations; to satisfy men of different interests, and give them the mutual pleasure of believing their asser­tions upheld by the autority of the Council.

And thus the Jesuits and Dominicans were equally contented with the Canons concerning Grace, and Justification. Each Party drew the autority of the Council to its own side: and there has not bin any Writer of these two Orders, who in their many Books, as opposite one to another as light is to darkness, has not alledged these very Canons, as invincible proofs against his adversary.

II.

But if any should enquire further, and search into that vast multitude of De­crees unknown till then, he must needs wonder to find them built upon so sandy Foundations.

The most general Basis of them is laid [Page 59] in the fourth Session, where the Council proposes two objects to our Faith; to wit,^a Books which are written, and Tra­ditions which are not written. And they pretend as a necessary consequence, that whatever we oppose against the Church of Rome, is of that kind. This is the Epitome of all the Council.

Nevertheless, least any one should be offended at the word Tradition, and per­swade himself that they intend by it to equal mens autority to that of God, or humane Ceremonies to the sacred Pre­cepts of the Gospell; they give of it a most magnificent character, calling it, ^b The Word of Christ, a Doctrine inspired by the Holy Ghost, for the ordering our Faith and manners, and preserved in the Catholic Church by a continued succession.

If that Principle be true, there is an end of all Controversies; and were the Church of Rome as able to prove it, as she is ready to advance it, we might hope to see in our daies, that blessed Word of Christ accomplish't,^c There shall be one Fold and one Shepherd.

And indeed there is no Protestant in the World, who doth not admit of a [Page 60] Tradition endued with these Qualifica­tions.

First, That it be the Word of Christ.

2. Inspired by the Holy Ghost.

3. In matter of Faith and Manners.

4. Preserved in the Catholic Church by an uninterrupted succession.

But there is no Protestant in the World that doth not maintain, such a Tradi­tion cannot be proved: and is nothing else but one of those rich and splendid Idea's, as admirable and flattering in their speculation, as impossible and deceiving in their practice.

III.

For the perfect evidencing whereof we need but consider the following Pro­posals.

First, That of all places of the Scriptures, whereby the Church of Rome asserts her Tradition, there is not so much as one al­ledged by the Fathers in her sense.

Secondly, That none of the Fathers e­ver understood Tradition otherwise, then for the unanimous consent of the Doctors of the Church, grounded upon a word which is written.

Thirdly, That no places in Scripture are [Page 61] express for the authorizing such Tradition, but many positive and clear to prove the sufficiency of Scripture.

Fourthly, That among the Traditions of the Church of Rome, she proposes many to our belief, which do not appertain at all either to Faith or manners.

IV.

The Scripture is most holy, most in­fallible, most perfect in it self. The Gospel has added what was deficient in the Law. And the Apostles Writings supplied the defect of the Gospel. There we must stay.^d 'Tis no less crime, in S. Basil's opinion, to add that which is not written, then to reject that which is writ­ten.

And 'tis a stupendious boldness, when God has vouchsafed to reveal his will to men by a certain and infallible word, to substitute another, neither clear nor un­doubtedly received.

V.

That new word, which is ascribed to [Page 62] God, has properly and by its self rela­tion to those things which cannot be proved by Scripture, as one^e of the Di­vines, present at Trent, has taken notice of, otherwise it would be a written word.

But if it be so, nothing is more un­worthy of Christ, and less agreeable to his divine Oracles. It is to render his truth suspected, or uncertain; to ex­pose Christians to infinite errors; to give them as many masters as there are persons who will profess themselves the Guar­dians of that word; and to make it the object of all mens scorn; since according to the excellent saying of S. Jerome, ^f Quod de Scripturis autoritatem non habet, e [...]dem facilitate contemnitur qua probatur.

VI.

We find not that Christ in his holy Gospel sends us to Tradition, whereby we may come to the knowledg of him.^g Search the Scriptures, they are they that testify of me.

The Apostles speak as their Master. ^h We have also a more sure word of Pro­phecy, [Page 63] whereunto you do well that ye take heed as unto a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day-star arise in your hearts. ⁱ ‘Many, saies S. Chrysostom, pretend to speak from the Holy Ghost, but they do it falsly, as long as they speak from themselves; as Christ testifies he spoke not from himself, but from the Law and the Pro­phets; so if they proffer us any other thing then the Gospel, under pretence of its being inspired by the Holy Ghost, let us be far from believing it.’

‘Is there any thing worse, saies^k Pope S. Leo, then to have impious sentiments, and yet not to be willing to assent to the more learned and wise? Those are guilty of this folly, who when they are hindred from knowing the truth by any obscurity, do not recur to the Prophetical Books, the Apostolical Writings, and Evangelical autority, but to themselves, and so become Ma­sters and Teachers of error, because they refused to be Disciples of Truth.’

It would have bin very easy for^* S. Austin, in that long and tedious Disputa­tion [Page 64] with the Donatists concerning the Catholic Church, to have made an end of it, by sending them to Tradition. But in­stead of doing so, Let us not hear, saies he, Haec dico, haec dicis, but let us hear, haec dicit Dominus. ^l ‘We have the Lords Books; Both of us acknowledg their autority, both of us believe them, ibi quaeramus Ecclesiam, ibi discutiamus cau­sam nostram: nolo humanis documentis, se [...] divinis Oraculis sanctam Ecclesiam demon­strari. We seek, as he there adds, where the Church is: what shall we do? in verbis nostris eam quaesituri sumus, an in verbis Domini? I think it is to be sought in his words who is the TRUTH, and knows perfectly her who is his Body.’ Habeo manifestissimam vocem Pastoris mei, commendantis mihi & sine ullis ambagibus exprimentis Ecclesiam. ‘If I suffer my self to be reduced and separated from his flock (which is the Church) by the words of men, I will impute it to my self’ whereas he advertiz'd me, saying, ^m My Sheep know my voice.

'Tis the constant Doctrine of that ad­mirable man in all his Works.

In his Letter to S. Jerome, ‘I confess [Page 65] your Charity, saies he,ⁿ I give those Books alone which are termed Cano­nical, that honor as to believe none of their Authors did ever err.’

In his Letter to Vincent, ^o ‘Do not oppose therefore, Brother, to so many and undoubted places, some of the writings of the Bishops, either ours, or those of Hilary, Cyprian, and A­grippinus. All these writings want the Autority of the Canon, and we re­ceive not their testimonies as things which it is not lawful to dissent from, if they are dissenting from the Truth.’

Upon the 87. Psalm, ‘You read not in the Gospel those whom you name; neither do I see those whom I alledge. Let us lay aside our Books, procedat in medium Codex Dei.’

Finally against Maximinus the Arian, who relied upon the Council of Arimi­num. ‘I ought not, saies he,^p to cite you the Nicene Council, nor you that of Ariminum, as prejudices for our cause,’ Scripturarum autoritatibus non quorum­cunque propriis, sed utriusque communibus test [...]bus, res cum re, causa cum causa, ratio [Page 66] cum ratione, concertet; & utrique tanti ponderis molibus cedamus.

Nay 'twas not only Bishops that thought so, but Lay-men themselves. ‘We are taught by the Gospel, saies ^q Constantine to the Nicene Fathers, the Apostolical Writings, and the Oracles of the Prophets, what we must know of God: let us therefore draw the expli­cation of our doubts from the words divinely inspired.’

VII.

We intend not hereby to detract from any part of the high esteem every Chri­stian ought to have for the Works of the Fathers. We consider them as the Masters of the Church, who instructed her, not only by the learned productions of their minds, but by the purity and good examples of their lives. We honor them as Preachers, who spake no less by the wounds they received for the de­fence of Christ, then by the words they made use of to make known his Doctrine. Nor could we behold without a just re­sentment a Minister of our Age to ab­use [Page 67] their Writings in a Book entitled De vero usu Patrum. We acknowledg with the great S. Austin, ^r that these holy Men were stabiles in antiquissima & robu­stissima Fide. We call with the Primitive Councils our present Faith the Faith of our Fathers ^s. But we are not convinced that our respect should endue us to believe them infallible. After Gods Word none is of greater weight to us then theirs; but we are not bold enough to mingle & con­found them. As a body grows not lumi­nous but as it comes near the Sun to re­ceive its impressions, so we do not see in them any certainty of light, but as they are conformable to the Scripture, which is certainty and light it self. And we think we give them all the praises they can ex­pect from us, when we say, as S.^t Athana­sius did, of the Nicene Fathers, that their Expositions of the Nicene Faith, according to divine Scriptures, are sufficient to destroy all Impiety, and confirm the belief of Christ.

VIII.

But that which is more to be wondred [Page 68] at, is, that none of the controverted points has ever bin preserved in the Catholic Church, as a point of Faith, and agreeable to the consent of the Fathers: a truth ex­presly maintained by a learned ^u Bishop of this Kingdom,^v who successfully challeng'd any of the Roman Communion to a con­tradiction.

I would call for no other evidence then the Canon of this very Session, §. 4. which ordains under pain of Excommunication to admit of those Books as Canonical, that had never bin such, with the same veneration as those which had bin con­stantly kept by the Church. All^x Coun­cils, Fathers, Ages, ancient and modern Writers exclaim against that Decree, and there is no man, tho but commonly read in Ecclesiastical writings, that can de­ny it.

Notwithstanding the Council doth a­nathematize those that dissent from its Canons. Pope Paul and Pius the IV. ex­act a dreadful Oath of it, and make the People swear upon the Gospel, to receive as certain and undoubted that which all [Page 69] the learned of the Church of Rome had lookt upon before as evidently false.

IX.

The Decree which consecrates the vul­gar Translation is most strange, but no­thing is like the declaration of the Cardi­nals, who assure us, Quod ne vel iota u­num repugnat in veteri vulgata Latinae lin­guae editione, tho Pope Clement VIII. con­fesses in the Preface to his Edition,^y many things were purposely omitted which should have bin changed. Let it be said with all due respect to their Eminencies, that so surprizing assurances shew either deep ignorance, or a wonderful unsincerity, or the greatest boldness in the World.

X.

The^z Articles of Justification, which establish the merit of our Works in a manner so injurious to the Grace of our Redeemer, are no less opposite to the an­cient Church. That holy Mother con­stantly instructed her Sons in all times, ^a That we are by nature the Children of wrath; ^b That God works in us both to will and to do [Page 70] of his good pleasure. ^c That we are not suffi­cient of our selves to think any thing of our selves, but our sufficiency is of God.

She has bin taught by Christ himself, ^d Without me ye can do nothing; if the Son shall make you free, you shall be free indeed, ^e and no man can come to me, except the Fa­ther which has sent me, draw him.

She has bin informed by her Doctors, that when God is pleased to Crown in us our merits, he Crowns but his gifts: that unless he gives us what he commands us, his Law instead of a spirit giving life, becomes to us a killing Letter.

She has determined in her Council ^f, That no man is free for doing any good thing, but by Gods Grace: that God expects not our will, but prepares it according to what is writ­ten in his word^g; that when we fall into any sin we do it of our selves, and of our own will, ^h but when we do any good Action, 'tis out of his alone.

Let any unprejudiced person read the Canons of the Council of Orange (where S. Hilary being President, Christs Grace triumph't so entirely over all its enemies) [Page 71] and compare them with those of Trent, he will be amazed at so strange a contra­riety.

But when we are so earnest in throw­ing down our pretended merits to raise a glorious Trophy to our Faith, we intend not to patronize Libertinism, and give way to those licentious opinions, which are the natural consequences drawn from the Doctrines of some Reformers.

Faith, whereby a man is justified, is not barren, and like that of the Devil, which is of no use but to prolong and foment his disorders. It is a Faith which, as the Apostles stiles it,ⁱ works by love; which makes us look upon Christ as the Foun­dation and only Source of our Salvation; breeds in us an ardent desire of him. That love which is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost ^k promts us to put our whole trust in him, and to practise by the So­veraign power of his Grace, what his Gospell teacheth is required of us.

S. Austin incomparably expresses this great Truth in these words, which the Church has so much admired as to make a ^l Canon of them. ^m Verily, verily, I say [Page 72] unto you, he that beleives in me hath ever­lasting life: He therefore who has not ever­lasting life, believes not in Christ: but he be­lieves in Christ that has Charity, for to beleive in Christ est tendere in ipsum amando, is to be enclined to him by Love. It is to this the re­missions of sins hath bin promised, huic remis­sio peccatorum promittitur. But if Love cannot be separated from Christian Faith, how can he that wants Charity have Christian Faith, that is, believe in Christ?

Faith is therefore the Spring of our love, and love the Source of our Works. ⁿ What is it to love God, continues that holy Doctor, but to be inwardly adherent to him; to conceive an ardent desire of seeing him, an hatred of sin, a distast to the World, a Charity for our Neighbor, whom he has commanded us to love, and so strictly to observe in our Charity the rules he has prescribed us in his Law, as never to pervert its order.

But let it be far from Christians to think our Faith or Love come from us. If any beleives, saies the ^o Council of Orange, he can do any good action, quod ad salu­tem pertinet vitae aeternae, by the strength of nature, and without being enlightned and [Page 73] inspired by the Holy Ghost, who poures into our hearts a suavity which makes us assent to, and believe the truth, that man haeretico fal­litur spiritu, not attending to what Christ pronounces in his Gospel,^p Without me ye can do nothing. Nor to the words of the Apostle, ^q We are not sufficient of our selves to think any thing as of our selves, but our sufficiency is of God.

There are in man, saies the same Coun­cil, ^r many good things, which man doth not do; but in those he doth, there are none but what God doth in him.

No man, saies another Canon, ^s has of himself but falshood and sin; but if any hath truth and righteousness, 'tis of him Quem de­bemus sitire in hac eremo, ut ex eo quasi qui­busdam guttis irrorati non deficiamus in via.

Good God! how far are the Canons of Trent from the holiness and humility of these! how repugnant to the establisht Doctrine of the Church, and the senti­ments of the Fathers, are the proud and Pelagian principles of the Jesuits!

XI.

The Anathema's of the seventh Session [Page 74] being no better grounded, are not more to be feared; the Council cuts off from the Church, which is the Body of Christ, those who admit of more or less then seven Sacraments.

It is evident that such a Principle can­not be proved by the Scripture. We must then recur to the unwritten Word. Sure so important a truth has bin preserved in the Catholic Church, and nothing ought to be more obvious in the writings of the Fathers.

Nevertheless, not a word for twelve whole Ages; and that so long uninterru­pted silence had never bin broken, had not the master of the Sentences and other Scholastics brought it into the World.

Indeed we find every where in the writings of the Fathers that the Adult must give an account of the Faith they professed at their^t Baptism, and receive the^u imposition of hands from the Bishop. We meet every where with Repentance, Penance, and Confession of Sins. We see ^* every where the power of ordaining Priests so committed to the Bishops by Christ, that all Ordinations from other [Page 75] hands were esteemed unlawful and sacri­legious. But we find no where all these things to be Sacraments. And no man can sufficiently wonder how the Fathers at Trent propose as an Article of Faith grounded upon Tradition, a thing they are obliged to confess was never spoken of in the Church for twelve hundred years.

XII.

The Ʋnwritten word doth no more fa­vor the Canon which establishes Tran­substantiation then the others, and we have from the ancient writings so many places against this Doctrine, that we can­not conceive how it came into the World.

^x Tertullian writing against Marcion, who denied that Christ had a real Body, tells him, Christ made his Body of the Bread he distributed, saying; This is my Body, that is, the figure of my Body, Fi­gura Corporis mei; but it had never bin a Figure, Si veritatis corpus non esset, had not the Truth, (Christ) had a real Body.

Christ, saies ^y Theodoret, honored the Symbols and signs of the Sacrament with the [Page 76] name of his Body and Blood, not changing their nature, [...], but adding his Grace to their nature.

S. ^z Jerome is no less positive then Theo­doret, The Flesh and Blood of Christ, saies he, are understood two several waies, either of that spiritual and divine Flesh, of which he saies himself, My Flesh is meat indeed, and my Blood is drink indeed, and,^a Except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his Blood, ye have no life in you; or, my Flesh which was nailed upon the Cross, and my Blood which was shed by the Souldiers Spear.

S. ^b Austin, who is justly esteemed the Oracle of the Western Churches, adds a pregnant testimony to this Assertion. The first heresy, saies he, in the Disciples of Christ was occasioned by the hardness of his words; for when he told them,^c Except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his Blood, ye have no life in you: they not ap­prehending him, said one to another,^d This is a hard saying, who can bear it? In saying [Page 77] this is hard, they separated themselves from him. But he remained with his twelve Dis­ciples, and taught them saying,^e It is the spirit that quickneth, the flesh profiteth nothing; the words I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. Do you understand them in a spiritual manner, they are spirit and life; do you understand them in a carnal manner, they they are no less spirit, but not for thee who un­derstandest them not spiritually. Spiritually apprehend what I have said, Non hoc corpus quod videtur manducaturi estis, & bibituri sanguinem quem effusuri sunt, qui me cruci­figent. The Sacrament I recommend to you quickneth when it is understood spiritually, but the flesh profiteth nothing. They answered him according to their apprehension, for they understood this flesh, as it is used to be sold in a carcass, or torn in the shambles. Jesus knowing their error, said to them, What I told you of giving you my Body to eat, and my Blood to drink, scandalizeth you; but what will you say, if you see the Son of Man ascend­ing to the place where he was before? He re­solves here what he had proposed to them; he shews them that which they were scandalized [Page 78] by, to the end they might apprehend him. In this manner they thought he would have given them his Body, Ille dixit se ascensurum in coelum, utique integrum, When you shall see the Son of Man ascending to the place where he was before, then you will know he gives not his Body as you understand it. You will then apprehend that his Grace non consumitur mor­sibus; till the end of the World the Lord is above, but yet the truth of the Lord is upon Earth with us; Corpus enim in quo resurrexit in uno loco esse oportet, veritas autem ejus u­bique diffusa est.

That incomparable Doctor speaks af­ter the same manner when he teacheth, that all places of the Scripture, which seem contrary to truth and good man­ners, are to be understood in a figura­tive sense.

If you find,^f saies he, a Commandment which forbids a crime, or enjoins any good action, then its sense is not figurative; but it is otherwise when it seems to command a crime, and prohibit a good action.^g Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his Blood ye have no life in you, saies Christ. That word seems to command a crime, [Page 79] figura est ergo, it is therefore a figure, which bids us communicate in the Passion of our Lord, and recall into our memo­ries with suavity and utility, that his flesh hath bin wounded and nailed upon the Cross for us.

XIII.

To what the Church of Rome believes concerning Transubstantiation, we may add her practice in taking away the Cup. She is not contented with changing the nature of a Sacrament, but thinks it lawfull to tear and divide it.

All the learned men of her Commu­munion assent to the following Propo­sitions.

First, That Christ instituted the Sa­crament of his Body and Blood under both kinds of Bread and Wine.

Secondly, That he instituted it thus for all Christians, and said^h drink, as he said eat, without any distinction of of Priests and Lay-men being the Savior of all.

Thirdly, That at least for twelve hun­dred years such a practise hath bin faith­fully [Page 80] observed in all the Churches in the World, and is still in the Eastern.

Fourthly, That its intermission is not grounded upon any invincible reason, or irremediable inconveniences. For it would be the greatest piece of non-sense in the World to affirm, that the Church of Rome in the thirteenth Age hath seen inconveniencies, which the Catholic Church could not foresee in twelve hun­dred years, and the Greek is still igno­rant of.

Yet the Council of Trent perseveres in so considerable an innovation, stops its ears to the cries of an infinite number of Souls, who beseech their Fathers sub­stance might not be so cruelly divided, and stiles this a Liberty the Church has al­waies bin Mistress of, to dispense Sacra­ments as she judges it convenient.

But suppose the Sacrament to be no less compleat under one kind then both, and that the Cup is but an addition to it: We, notwithstanding, maintain the Church hath no autority to change any thing Christ hath instituted, and pre­scribes the observation of. All reasons in such occasions must be suspected, when Christ himself speaks, promulgates him­self [Page 81] his own Laws, and commands them to be put in execution, as he hath done here, all our pretended inconveniences are then gross errors; nor must we af­fect to be wiser then the eternal Wisdom, who foresaw better then we can do, the reasons of our scandals.

Had Christ instituted all the Ceremo­nies the Church judged necessary for the greater decency of her Worship, and commanded the observation of them, it would be a dreadful crime to cut off the least.

But Pope Gelasius speaks not of that division as of the taking away of a simple Ceremony;ⁱ We heard, saies he, that some by I know not what superstition, after ha­ving received the sacred Body refused the Cup of the precious Blood. But for such, aut integra Sacramenta percipiant, aut ab in­tegris arceantur. The reason of that learned Pope is worthy to be weighed, because, saies he, divisio unius ejusdemque mysterii sine grandi sacrilegio non potest per­venire. One and the same mystery can­not be divided without a grand sacri­ledge.

[Page 82] Pope Gelasius and the Fathers of Trent are wonderfully opposed: these say the Sacrament is no less perfect under one kind then under both; that such a division is a wise dispensation, which cannot be reasona­bly contradicted: the other calls the di­stribution of the precious Body and Blood one and the same Sacrament, and stiles that prudent dispensation, a di­vision of two things united by Christ, which cannot be done without an horrid sacriledg.

Which then of the two, Gelasius or Paul III. must be supposed to have pro­nounced ex Cathedra? If the Jesuits are chosen Judges between them, Gelasius shall be condemned: for Salmero and an­other of his Society were so impious as to say in the midst of the Council, that sometimes the Devil transforms himself into an Angell of Light, but now appears covered with the Cup of Christs Blood to of­fer a draught of poyson.

But as if it had not bin enough to have committed so great an enormity, with­out adding to it an insufferable igno­rance, these two most holy and learned Fathers (as a most holy and learned Je­suit styles them, all the members of that Society being ipso facto most holy and [Page 83] learned) begged of Cardinal Madruccio, That it might be added to the Canons al­ready made, that the Sacrament was insti­tuted under both kinds only for the Apostles and Priests.

XIV.

The Canons of the fourteenth Session are no less opposite to Antiquity, where­in the Council defines Repentance to be a Sacrament: a Doctrine unknown till the time of Eugenius IV. The Arch-Bishop of Caesarea tells us in a Book he entitled De Reformatione Scholasticae (which he considered as a great step to that of the Church) that Eugenius ascribed it to the Florentine Council, tho such a De­cree had never bin read or seen there. 'Tis an effect of the Popes usual sincerity. So that for twelve hundred years together the Church is silent in this point.

Now what must a Christian think of a Council, that gives to our human satis­factions and poor Sacrifices the power due only to the unspeakable merits of Christ?

Who without just indignation can hear that our Alms and Fastings expiate our sins, and preserve us from eternal Death? Did ever any Councils, Fathers, or Divines [Page 84] run into such excesses? nor do we pre­tend to embrace the other extreme, and diswade Christians from that life, w^ch the Saints term a Cross and a Martyrdom. We think that it not only obliges Penitents but Innocents also, and we are struck with fear at these words of Christ,^k Except ye repent ye shall all likewise perish. But far be it from us to confine our Repen­tance to some trausient and slight exer­cices of Piety. We require that sinners die continually to themselves, that they think no pleasures lawful but such as the miseries of humane life render necessary and unavoidable; that they endure ra­ther then enjoy them, and bewail the blindness and obdurateness of an infinite number of Souls, who being made drunk by the pride and wantonness of the World, are irrecoverably ruined.

But when a sinner groans under a vo­luntary pressure, fasts, praies, and im­poverisheth himself to enrich the poor, instead of puffing him up with self-con­ceit, and flattering him with a perswa­sion that he satisfies God, we depress him more and more, still repeating to him this Lesson, That according to the Oracles [Page 85] of the Word of God, and the practise of his Saints,^* the most laudable life exa­mined in his Justice, is an abomination in his sight, and that the greatest penitent in the most burning fervor of his Penance for his sins past, stands in need at every moment of new mercy to obliterate and forgive the present.

XV.

Nor do we less wonder at the Ana­thema pronounc'd by the Fathers at Trent, against those that think Attrition with Confession insufficient for the pardon of sins. That is, those who believe the very same that till then was constantly a part of the Churches belief, and are perswaded that a man desisting from sin against God, out of fear of punishment, is not account­ed guiltless by him.

This their Assertion is so true, that the learned men of the Church of Rome are at a loss to give a favorable interpreta­tion to the words of the Council. And we have seen a^l Bishop in Flanders so ad­mirable and profound every where else, scarce understood when he endeavors to make the Council speak, what he is per­swaded it should.

[Page 86] To perceive at first sight all the con­sequences of this Principle, we need but consider the abominable interpretations Jesuits have given of it. Both the doctrine & practise of these Friars is so enormous upon that point, that we want words to express it. This is the foundation where­on Bauny, Escobar, Tambourin, Sanchez, Vasquez, and other such Monsters, build their infamous Morals. Wherein they are not contented to teach all manner of crimes, but afford means how to commit them with impunity, and as much as in them lies, cheat both God and their con­sciences. But leaving these favorers of sin to Gods judgements, let it suffice us to say, that we are so far from blaming Fear in general, that we acknowledge ^m there is a chast fear which endureth for ever more. We learn from the sacred Writings, that fear of eternal pains is the beginning of Wisdom. None, saies S.ⁿ Au­stin, can come to love but by fear, he must begin with the chain of Iron, before he be adorned with the Golden Neck-lace.

So when God strikes a sinner with the fear of his Judgements, 'tis the first step to his Conversion: but if he never goes [Page 87] further he shall never be justified in his sight. Love is at least an essential con­dition for the forgiving our sins. We are justified by Faith, but it is by Faith that worketh by Love ^o, not by a dead Faith, which brings forth nothing, nor by a sterile one, which goes not so far as to produce fear; nor by a slavish one, which only refrains us thro the apprehensions of punishment, and would never leave off sinning, did it not still behold the thunder of Divine vengeance alwaies hanging o­ver it; but by a Faith full of Love and pious zeal, which in the strictest bonds unites our hearts to our crucified Savior, gives us a lively representation of his suf­ferings, revives in us an ardent desire of shaking off the vices of the old Man, to be invested with the life and vertues of the New. To renounce all things for our Re­deemer, and at least to love our God, as S. Austin excellently prescribes, with as much fidelity and ardency as we have loved the Creatures.

In the Epistles of the Apostle^p we find that the great advantage of the Sons of God, above those of the Devil, and their true and intrinsecal distinction, is, to [Page 88] have bin divested of the spirit of bondage to fear; which belongs properly to the Jews, and to have received the spirit of Adoption, which is the lot of Christians. The one brings them to God as to their Father, the other frights them as with the pre­sence of their Judge.

But till Faith,^q which worketh by Love, hath enlarged our hearts, and begotten in us the disposition of Sons, there is no hopes of pardon. For let us dispute to the end of the World, tire our Readers with the multitude and subtlety of our distinctions, and make our fancies the Rules of Gods Decrees, those only shall receive pardon whom Grace hath con­verted, and made his Sons.

Fear is good and usefull,^r bonus est iste timor, utilis est, those that are struck with it, saluberrimo timore quatiuntur. But 'tis insufficient, and something more is re­quired. 'Tis the Jews gift, the Character of the Slaves, the spirit of the old Te­stament, ^s ibi plebs longè stabat, timor erat, amor non erat. 'Tis an effect of that uni­versal infirm Grace God has granted to all men, but not of that particular and [Page 89] victorious one which Christ hath got for us by his death, and poured into our hearts by the Holy Ghost.^t Cum enim a­dest vivificans spiritus, hoc ipsum intus con­scriptum facit diligi, quod foris scriptum lex faciebat timeri.

The Fathers of the Primitve times ap­prehended the nature of that fear quite in another manner then the Fathers of Trent did.

First, They did consider that its Source was nothing else but a prodigious self-love. They that are in those disposi­tions of fear the Council is satisfied with, do not seek so much to return to their God, and give themselves to him, as to preserve their quiet and their bodies in the future life.^u Propterea enim timentur apud inferos poenae, & dolores ac tormenta Gehennarum.

Secondly, They knew that a man whom fear only refrains from sinning, loses not the love and desire of sin, but sins still in his heart,^x Sic profecto in ipsa intus voluntate peccat, qui non voluntate, sed timore non peccat.

[Page 90] S.^y Austin compares these persons to a wife who is not true to her husband but because she is afraid of being pu­nished if she be found not so. 'Tis certain she commits adultery in her heart, since she would not persevere innocent if she could contract guilt without punish­ment.

'Tis like a Wolf, saies that holy Do­ctor, who being surprized by the watch­full Shepherd, and the cry of the Dogs, is obliged to fly without doing any harm: he is not cruel and bloody, he tears no Sheep in pieces. Venit fremens, redit tre­mens, ^z he came on raging, returns trem­bling, but in these two circumstances he is still a Wolf. He doth not execute his bad design, nor yet doth he leave it. Lupus est tamen & fremens & tremens.

Thirdly, They were perswaded that the righteousness which fear produces in a sinner is from the Law and men, which the Apostle counts ^a but dung; who sees not, saies one of the Fathers, ^b that righteous­ness which is from the Law comes from men, [Page 91] but that which is by Christ comes from God? Justitiam vero quae ex fide Christi est, non esse nisi ex Deo. A man may be still sin­full and Gods enemy with such a right­eousness. Ideo cum in illa quae ex lege est justitia sine querela conversaretur Apostolus, fuisse se impium non negat.

Fourthly, they taught, That sorrow conceiv'd only out of fear of punishment, is a sorrow of Infidels, and that if God were satisfied with that, there is no man in the World that could chuse but be in­nocent; since no man that has but the least Idea of the life to come, but is moved with its apprehension.^c Non enim peccare metuit sed ardere.

This is a principle the Fathers have with unanimous consent maintained. This the Popes in former Ages taught. Nay those that sit now in the Apostoli­cal See would do so too, if with the mo­desty and humility of their Predecessors they had not also rejected their do­ctrine.

XVI.

The Council seems, in its last Session, [Page 92] to gather all its strength against those who reject Purgatory, and deprive Saints, Images, and Reliques of their due ho­nor.

Yet it appears the Fathers of Trent a­greed, that all those things, Purgatory excepted, are not founded upon Scri­pture, but only upon the General Coun­cils and Writings of the Fathers. This is ^d collected out of the very words of the Decree, the Council there speaking of Ecclesiastical antiquity, but not a word of the Scripture.

A Person of extraordinary merit has undertaken to lay open the mysteries of Purgatory; and as he leaves nothing un­said on that subject, so none can take it ill if I refer my Reader to him.

For those other things, Invocation of Saints, Images, and Reliques, 'tis easy in a few words to shew how infirm their ground is in the ancient Doctrine of the Church.

All learned men in the Church of Rome admit of the following Propositions.

First, That nothing in the Scripture authorizes these practices, or at least, [Page 93] nothing sure, fixt, cleer, and un­doubted.

Secondly, That all places taken out of Scripture, by modern Writers, to prove these things, have never bin made use of by the Ancients for that purpose, and so are of no autority, the ancients being most holy and assured Interpreters of the Scriptures.

Thirdly, That till the seventh pre­tended General Council, that is, for eight hundred years, there was not any deci­sion made of them.

Fourthly, That to this pretended General Council, we oppose others ac­knowledged General by the Collector of the Councils, but as all learned men con­fess, endued with these Qualities.

• 1. More exact in the Discussion of mat­ters, as it appears by their Acts.
• 2. Called by an holy Emperor and pecu­liar Benefactor to the Church of Rome.
• 3. Free from all Suspicions of oppression which the seventh is guilty of.
• 4. That the consent of the Fathers upon that Doctrine is neither clear nor una­nimous, [Page 94] and that if in any of later date there be some places tending that way, there are in the same, and many others a thousand contrary places to invali­date them.
• 5. That if we speak according to the Principles of the Church of Rome it self, there can no more then a simple probability be pleaded in this case, and that none of the greatest neither, but to both parties favorable.

But there is not a Divine in the World who dares affirm, that an Article of Faith can be built upon a simple probability, nor declare them impious and blasphe­mous who have a contrary probability, nor excommunicate them and separate them from the Church, that is, inflict upon them the most dreadful punish­ment.

How could the Fathers of Trent there­fore do this? why did they not fear that threatning of the wise Man ^e, Sicut avis in incertum volans & quolibet vadens, sic ma­ledictum frustrà prolatum venit super eum qui misit illud? Nor that of Origen^f when [Page 95] a man is unjustly put out of the Church, he ceaseth not to be within, when he that thinks himself within may be really out?

XVII.

Saints pray in general for all Christians. For tho they triumph in Heaven, yet they are her members, who strives and com­bats upon Earth. They are indeed united to their Head, which is Christ, but yet they still preserve the remembrance of the Body, which is the Church.

They are a part of that Spouse, who, as S. Bernard ^g saies, sighs after the Bride­groome, and begs a kiss from his mouth; wisheth for the end of the World, that Christ would hasten his Judgment, and manifest that day wherein he will begin to be all in all.

'Tis in that very sense the Apostle saies, ^h The whole Creation groans and travails in pain till now, even we our selves groan within our selves, waiting for the Adoption, to wit the Redemption of our Body, [...].

[Page 96] So S. Cyprianⁱ assures us, That the Saints being secure of their immortality are careful of our Salvation.

S. Jerome argues against Vigilantius in this manner. If the Apostles and Martyrs being yet in their Bodies, can pray for others, much more when they have conquered, are crowned and triumph.

And S. Austin yet more perfectly, The Saints in Heaven, saies ^k he, offering their prayers for the necessity of those that pray, God grants to every one all those comforts he judges most suitable to them in the miseries of the present life.

But there is a vast difference between the Invocation whereby we direct our Prayers to the Saints, and the interces­sion of the Saints for us. And none of these things are to be found in the Tra­dition.

• 1. That the Saints pray for any particu­lar person.
• 2. That they obtain any favors for us by their own merits.
• [Page 97] 3. That it is lawful to honor them with a religious worship.

XVIII.

And to discover with how little since­rity the Council of Trent speaks of this custom, that it has bin preserved^l à pri­maevis Christianae Religionis temporibus, it is enough to say, that their most learned Men confess it was the sentiment of the Primitive Fathers, that the Souls of the Saints should not enjoy the sight of God till the day of Judgement; and consequently could neither speak in fa­vor of us, no offer to him our praiers. S. [...]ene, Justin, S. Clement, Tertullian, Origen, Lactantius, S. Ambrose, S. Chry­sostom, S. Augustin, Eutimius, Theodoret, Oecumenius, Aretas, are said to have bin of that opinion. Nay S.^m Bernard preach't it: which shews that this Doctrine continued till the twelfth Age of the Church.

XIX.

Indeed we cannot too much honor those holy men, who preserve with an undaunted resolution the precious Tre­sures committed to their charge. We must admire them in the powerful ef­fects of Christs Grace, who in a cor­ruptible flesh and a sinfull World has preserved them pure and undefiled. The constancy of Martyrs, the austerity of Penitents, the inviolated purity of Vir­gins, who despised all other ambition besides that of being near the Lamb, deserve all our Praises. Nay a true Chri­stian makes his actions conformable to his Praises, imitates what he extolls, and considers those excellent Patterns as so many reproches to the disorders and remisness of his life. But he is not induced thereby to invocate them, to ascribe to them what is due to God alone, and offer them Prayers, which being commanded neither by the Pre­cepts of Christ, nor his Apostles, spring rather from a blind Superstition, then a well ordered Piety.ⁿ Non Religioni [Page 99] sed Superstitioni deputantur.

XX.

But supposing the Church of Rome had some small ground in Antiquity for the Invocation of Saints, she has not the least shadow of reason for the worshipping their Images.

Nor is it difficult to prove, that Images ^o are a remnant of heathenish Ceremo­nies, which a blind zeal for the me­mory of the Apostles brought into the Church. Hence the Fathers of the Pri­mitive times became extremly zealous to interdict not only their worship, but their very sight in the Churches. So Origen, Eusebius ^p Justin Martyr, &c. inveigh on all occasions against Images. The Eliberitan Council, where the great Osius ^q was present, he whom the Coun­cils ^r stile their Father and Master, con­demns by an express Canon the placing any sort of Images in Churches. S.^s E­piphanius [Page 100] forbids the having Images in Churches, or in the Crypts of the Mar­tyrs. And to shew that his practice did not contradict his Precepts, he gives an account to John Patriarch of Jeru­salem, how having found at the en­trance of the Church at Anablatta an Image of our Savior, painted upon a Curtain, he tore it, and wished the Priests to make use of it for the burial of some poor person.

XXI.

But it is clearer then the light, that by the word Adoration the holy Fathers meant all manner of Worship. Those famous men had a Divinity of sense not of terms: they were not acquainted with those Distinctions which became the whole business of Scholastics in suc­ceeding Ages. They no less included external worship then internal, and thought not the one less dangerous then the other.

S. Augustin was not perswaded that a man could so purify his intentions in adoring an Image, but that the Wood [Page 101] and Stone must needs bear some part in it. Who is the man, saies that holy ^t Doctor, who looking upon an Image, ei­ther worships or praiseth, qui non sic offi­citur, ut ab eo se exaudiri putet? hoc e­nim facit & quodammodo extorquet figura membrorum. I know, saies the same Saint, in his admirable ^u Book De Moribus Ecclesiae Catholicae, That there are many wor­shippers of the Sepulchres and Pictures of Martyrs, Multos Sepulchrorum & Pictura­rum adoratores. But I advise you not to take occasion thence of slandering the Ca­tholic Church, in aggravating the faults of those People whom she her self condemns, quos ipsa condemnat & corrigere studet.

This excellent place shews that there are many disorders in the Church, the Church is not at all guilty of; and that those are in the wrong, who charge a whole Society with the faults of some of its particular members.

So that when we speak against wor­shipping of Images, we exclaim not a­gainst that shameful traffick exercised in the Churches of the Mendicants, neither [Page 102] against those Chappels set round with pieces of wax and silver, nor against those false Miracles, which are only so many baits, whereby covetous Monks delude the ignorant and simple, and en­rich themselves.

All these things Ecclesia Romana con­demnat & corigere studet. It is well known the pious men of these Monasteries are troubled at such abuses, and Bishops wish they were able to apply a remedy to them. But we combat the Decrees and Canons of the Roman Church; things to which the contrary sentiments are by her stiled Impiety. We give them no other sense, then she her self would put upon them; and we maintain in their most favorable interpretation, that she has made Laws of some points, quas ipsa Ecclesia Catholica condemnat, & corrigere studet.

XXII.

There is not a learned person in the Church of Rome, who doth not consent, that to paint God Almighty has bin ac­counted [Page 103] a crime for twelve hundred years.

'Tis not lawfull for a Christian, saies S.^x Austin, to put in any Church the Image of God in a humane shape. Nevertheless the Council of Trent makes it a Virtue to admit of them. There is not a Church in which you may not see the unworthy Pictures of an immense and incompre­hensible God, whose most perfect deli­neation consists in the impossibility both Men and Angels lie under of conceiving any. The Popes Chappell is filled with them, and his holiness is pleased to for­get that one of the cheif Patrons^y of I­mages calls it a folly and an extreme Impiety.

XXIII.

Neither is there any understanding person who doth not acknowledge, that [...]he most obstinate Defenders of Images never went so far as to maintain, that [...]his soveraign Worship should be ren­ [...]red to them which is due to God alone. [...]Tis by this only reason, they pretend to [Page 104] free themselves of that Idolatry which was laid to their charge. So that it is a meer evasion of those who answer to all the authorities of the fifth, sixth, and seventh Ages against Images, that they were levelled only against Divine and supreme worship, being a ridiculous dealing, no way chargeable upon grave Men. But the Church of Rome to per­swade the receiving of these things, calls them with an incredible insincerity, An­cient practices; strives to amuze people by swelling and high flown words; and because he miserably abandons himself to his own reason, and sinks under the most horrid Impiety who respects not true Councils and Fathers, that of Trent speaks of nothing but Apostolical Tra­ditions, Consent of Fathers, and autho­rity of Councils.

XXIV.

All these magnificent promises are reduced to a miserable Conventicle, held in the eighth Age, to which no Western Bishops, nor any of the two parts of the East, not one of the three [Page 105] Patriarchs of Jerusalem, Antioch, and A­lexandria, came; which Pope Nicholas I. and Adrian II. durst never call Gene­ral.

A Council^z called by a cruel and disordered Prince, wherein Irene his mo­ther sate President, so ambitious and un­natural a woman, that she commanded the eies of her own Son to be plucked out.

A Council, at which the most consi­derable person present was Thalossius Pa­triarch of Constantinople, a man who, as Pope Adrian ^a describes him, from a Lay-man became Bishop, from an illi­terate Courtier, Patriarch of Constanti­nople, whom the same Pope (saies^b he) abhorred as a Monster, ut monstrum ex­horruit, made Bishop against all Ordinances and Canons.

A Council that founded its Decrees upon Visions and meer Fables, such as one of the meanest spirit must needs be offended at. The Image of our Saviour given to King Abgarus, the Leprosy, Baptism, and miraculous recovery of [Page 106] Constantine are things of that nature, as the learned in the Church of Rome do now account supposititious; not to al­ledge many others, which deserve that the Council of^c Francfort should object, That those Nicene Fathers not being able to prove their Decrees, either by the autority of the Scripture, or the testimonies and examples of the Saints, had recurred to fancies and Dreams.

A Council which the Assembly at Francfort ^d of 300. Bishops, headed by Charles the Great, declared to be so an­nulled and abrogated, that it ought not to be put in the order of Councils, un­less of such as Ariminum.

Lastly, a Council which the learned Defenders of Images were so loath to defend, that it had continued buried in a deep oblivion, had not the Jesuit Main­bourg ^e three years since raised it from its Grave, but alas! in what a manner!

First, he affected (and this is his con­fession and glory) to write in a Roman­tick stile upon one of the gravest Con­troversies in Religion; as if matters of [Page 107] Divinity, and the Oracles of the living God, were of the same metal, as those abominable Books.

Secondly, in writing against Iconoclasts he never directed his arrows against them, but designed to fix them in the hearts of the Jansenists. Preposterous and irrational fancy! being put to it how to recover the lost honor of his Society so trampled on in the sight of all Christendom, he resolved to attack once more his Conquerors, not out of any hopes of Victory, but out of im­patience the natural product of Pride.

He durst not therefore come into the open Field, and renew that Quarrel his Society had so shamefully begun, and so unhappily prosecuted; but betook himself to by waies, and thought it more secure and glorious to represent the Jansenists under the notion of Ico­noclasts, and the imputed rebellion of the one against the Apostolical See, un­der the history of the other.

Thirdly, He so ill contrived his de­sign, that he lost the Character of both, and only betrayed himself to be of a spirit bold and temerarious; who with [Page 108] more then a Jesuitical impudence deli­vers lies as confidently as others do truth.

His History of the Arians, and this of the Iconoclasts, both daughters of the same brain, both written with the same design, had also the same fate. Nei­ther was answered; those whom they were chiefly levelled against, being there so unskilfully delineated as not to know themselves: nor indeed would they e­ver have done so, had not that Au­thor, doating upon his so well resem­bling Babe, and the Jesuits (who like the Spaniards, triumph as well when beaten as when Conquerors,) spread it through the World. But I have spent too many words upon so inconsiderable a Writer.

XXV.

To return then to our purpose: who of any sense or reason, hearing the Fa­thers of Trent ^f say, that they permit the worship of Images, juxta Catholicae Ecclesiae usum à primaevis Christianae Re­ligionis [Page 109] temporibus receptum, Sanctorum­que Patr [...]m consensionem, & Sacrorum Con­ciliorum Decreta; and then seeking all these great things, finds,

• 1. That for 800. years the Catholick and Apostolick Church has deter­mined nothing of it.
• 2. That all the Fathers are contrary to it.
• 3. That those sacred Councils so ma­gnificently alledged, are nothing but a miserable Conventicle at the end of the eighth Age.
• 4. That England, Germany, the Low-Countries, Sweden, Denmark, part of France and Poland, declare a­gainst it.

What man of any sense, I say, con­sidering all this will not conclude,

1. That we ought to distrust all the Decrees of Trent, and some being evi­dently false, give little credit to the most true.

[Page 110] 2. That the Fathers of Trent had not the Charity of the Apostles, whose Suc­cessors they were, since they excluded from their Communion so many consi­derable Churches for a point, which themselves acknowledg not to be ground­ed on Scripture.

Not necessary to Salvation,

Not related to Faith, Manners, Sa­craments and Discipline.

And Protestants not requiring Images to be pulled down, as did S. Epiphanius, and S. Serenus, but only their use to be ordered, as it was in S. Austin and S. Gregory's time.

3. That the Church of Rome being immoveable upon the Controverted points, she must give us leave to ad­dress to her Council the same words the Fathers of ^g Francfort did to the Ni­cene. Out of what fury or rather madness doth unius partis Ecclesia attempt to esta­blish that which has never bin establisht by the Apostles or their immediate Successors, and oblige them either to undergo the Ana­thema so vainly pronounced against them, [Page 111] or disobey the Apostolical Constitutions?

Were they not promted by her, who is called in Scripture, the ancient poison, the guide of Death, the root of all evil, they would never strive to fix the name of General Council to their Assembly, had without the consent of many Catho­lick Churches. They would never take upon them to anathematize with such boldness so many and so considerable Churches, which are no less then they the Body of Christ.

I.

WHatever Ecclesiastical disor­ders are recorded in the Writings of the Antients, they seem in no respect equal to those which infested the Church about the time of the Council of Trent. In the first Ages [Page 122] indeed, the zeal and severity of Christi­ans rendred every fault conspicuous; but in the last the most pious could hardly suffice to express her real and constant e­vils. This produc'd the desires of a ge­neral Reformation; especially that he who pretends to be upon Earth the su­preme Judg of all men, would judg him­self, take some pity of his own Soul; and since the distempers of the Church ow'd their original to the Apostolical See, begin at that part from whence the cure of all the rest was hoped for.

II.

Whereas then the Worlds recovery de­pended on that of the Popes, they ought willingly to have embraced the occasion of doing so great a good. Nor could less be hoped, then that considering the pro­motion of Piety as their proper Interest, they would sacrifice all others to it: and the Council of Trent, which lasted eigh­teen years, rais'd the expectations of all good Christians, that the tears of so ma­ny Nations would not be shed in vain. But by the dreadful judgment of God it miserably baffled the Churches cries, and instead of closing her wounds, opened and created new ones.

[Page 123] For to evince the truth of which so great reproach, we need only consider two particulars,

1. The distempers of the Church.

2. The remedies applied to them. And from the consideration of these, there will none, I hope, but confess, that the Fathers of this Council acted the part of an unfaithful Chirurgion, who to cure a less noble part, inflicts a deadly wound to the heart of his Patient.

III.

We intend not here to treat of any per­sonal defects, which shew'd themselves in the Popes private life, but shall confine them only to those which were public, when they dealt as Popes, ‘as infallible, as the Oracles of the Holy Ghost, as masters both of Men and Angels, as judges both of the quick and dead: in a word, ;as men of whom, according to their own^a Books, 'tis not allow'd to en­quire, Domine cur ita facis?’

IV.

That Ambition and Covetousness have bin the two originary sins of the Popes; [Page 124] and that to these two Heads may be re­duc'd all the rest, the very complaints of their own Historians, and most famous Authors do evince. By the first, they made a shift to raise themselves above Spi­ritual and Temporal Powers, to excom­municate and depose Kings, to invade the jurisdiction of other Bishops, to break thro all ancient and modern Canons; and instead of being rul'd by the General Councils of the Catholic Church, to ex­alt themselves above them. By the se­cond they made use of all sacred and pro­fane means to enrich themselves, reduc'd all Benefices into that state, as not to be at­tain'd but by^a Simony, and sacrific'd all things to the raising of their Families. As for the honor of their Dignity, the glo­ry of the Gospel, and the consideration of the scandal of the Church, these could never over-power in them the more strong impressions of Flesh and Blood. The invention of Croisados being worn out, they had recourse to that of Indul­gences, set to sale the absolution of sins; and^b whosoever fill'd the Apostolic Trea­sure, tho he were more profligate than the [Page 125] bad Thief, became more innocent then the good.

V.

Nor was it enough barely to fall into so many disorders, unless they undertook al­so to Canonize them, and thereby bring themselves under that dreadful Curse which God pronounces against those that call evil good. 'Twas for this purpose that Rome hath bred up such Doctors, as flatter the Popes even to Idolatry, stiling them Gods upon Earth. These gave birth to the monstrous Doctrine of Infallibili­ty, never before heard of in the Church for 1400 years. These had the face to maintain, that if all the World should oppose their Sentiment, all the World must be slighted. And to sum up in a word, all that can be said on that matter, they have so far enslav'd themselves to their passion, as to decree in one of their Canons, that^a if the Pope should be neglect­ful of his Brethrens salvation, improfitable to the Church, dumb in what concerns her good, tho he should carry along with him to hell an innumerable number of souls, yet no man living can presume to correct him.

VI.

These things are neither exaggerations nor slanders, but meer matters of Fact, which the best Authors of the Roman Church, as Monsieur D'Espences, Gerson the Chancellor of Paris, Marsilius of Pa­via, the Cardinal of Cambray, the Car­dinal Cusan, Aeneas Sylvius afterwards Pope, do equally complain of. And without ever mentioning the imper­tinencies of Canonists,^a some of whom teach, The Pope hath power to excommuni­cate Angels; or the Impieties of some^b Di­vines who maintain, he can establish any thing against the Law of God and Nature both: What can be more amazing, then to hear the Popes speak themselves?

Nicholas the First, in his Letter to Mi­chael, ^c saies, That the Pious Emperor Con­stantine, had call'd the Pope God, and that 'tis evident God can be judged by no man. This piece of madness his successors lik'd so well, that they made an express^d Canon of it.

Boniface the Eighth defines in a^e De­cretal of his, That all humane Creatures [Page 127] are bound, necessitate salutis, to submit to him as to the King of kings, and both Spi­ritual and Temporal Lord over all the World.

His successor^e pretends lawfully to dispense with that which was contrary to the Apostles commands, Bene dispensat Do­minus Papa contra Apostolum. Let all the World know, ^f saies Gregory the Seventh, out of an excess of modesty and humility, That we give and take away all Kingdoms, Empires, Principalities, and all Goods men are capable of possessing.

VII.

Nor did these Servants of the Servants of God live any otherwise then they taught. There could no Crown in their times be assur'd upon the Head of any Prince, whatsoever Right, Birth, or Electi­on had there established it. And indeed, we would scarce believe the precedents of Philip, Frederic, Lewis, &c. had we not be­held in our own daies what Leo the Tenth, Julius the Third, and Sextus the Fifth had done. The public Records of England, Germany, and France, are fill'd up with their bold enterprises; the raising Subjects in rebellion against their natural Princes, [Page 128] the absolving them from their Allegiance; the putting great Kingdoms into combu­stion, at once undermining them by civil Dissentions, and procuring them to be in­vaded by Foreign Enemies; the swear­ing Friendship with Francis the First, and at the same time helping Charles the Fifth to subvert him; and again, entertaining correspondence with Charles the Fifth, whilst he solicited Francis the First to war again, are part of the transactions of St. Peters Successors, the heads of the Church, and Vicars of Christ.

VIII.

But for their Convetousness, who is able to express it? Annats, expectative Gra­ces, sacred Reservations, Preventions, Mandats; things abominable in all their parts, were call'd by them, Pious artifices to maintain the Apostolic See. That which in its own nature was properly a Crime, an Abomination, and a Simony, was turn'd into an holy action by a Pasce oves meas.

IX.

All Friers who grew weary of being go­vern'd by their Bishops, and kept in the hardships of Penance, sent mony to Rome, [Page 129] where there was not a door in the Conclave but was open to their Gold. Great sums to the Datary, prevail'd more then all their tears could have done. No Canons, no Councils, no Fathers, resist­ed their bribes. They purchas'd Privi­leges, substracted themselves from the Sacred Jurisdiction of their Bishops: and tho the very Injunction of their new gain'd liberty, was a real Simony, a dis­obedience, and an effect of the corrupti­on of their hearts, yet the disturbers of it were threatned in their^a Bulls with St. Peter and St. Pauls indignation.

X.

But that his Holiness, not satisfied with the oppression of the Clergy, should not spare the Lay-men neither, is above all imagination. The Records of the Parlia­ment of Paris, speak every where of the Popes oppressions. Sir Roger Twisden hath writ an excellent account of the insup­portable Taxes England groan'd under; the natural piety and generosity of the English inviting the Popes to abuse it into an occasion of leaving no limits to their Covetousness. For Germany, and o­ther [Page 130] Provinces, who in the World is un­acquainted with their grievances? And is there any Roman Catholic, who if he consider things impartially, confesses not, that Leo the Tenth was the cause of great­er evils to the Church then Luther?

XI.

The Pope himself verified that word of the Prophet, The Priests shall eat the sins of the people. There was no^a crime which had not an Asylum at the Penitentiaries. The obscene Books of the Jesuits Sanchez, and Hurtado, are purity it self, compar'd with the Book of the Apostolical Tax. All the Casuists together never taught the World so many crimes as this one profli­gate Book. We suppress it, because we would not offend the modesty of our Reader. There are no tongues or words pregnant enough to express so great an in­famy: but yet to give some hint of it, let us hear the Popes Secretary, Our sins, saies ^b he are rais'd to such an height, that we have scarce any hope of mercy left us. 'Twere a vain attemt to describe the greatness of the Priests covetousness, especially of them that govern. How unbounded is their ambition, [Page 131] obscenity and luxury? How deep is their igno­rance both of themselves and Christs doctrine also? How full is the little Piety they had left, of hypocrisie and dissimulation? and how instead of concealing the crimes they commit, do they affect rather to make them ap­pear?

XII.

This then was the disease of the Roman Church: let us now examine whether the Council of Trent has truly reform'd so many abuses; whether it hath preserv'd the respect due to Princes, render'd the rights of Bishops inviolable, taken away the Simonies and Extortions of the Court of Rome; and whether Mr. d'E­spences complains wrongfully, Quod tot annis & tot annorum centenari [...]is nil in ea e­mendatur.

XIII.

As for Princes, the injuries which the preceding Popes had done them, were so far from being repaired, that Julius the Third was so bold as to excommunicate the Queen of Navar, give her Kingdom over to depredation, and confiscate her Goods.

XIV.

As for the Holy Father, they work out his reformation in a pleasant manner. It is consider'd as a Crime to speak of re­forming him, of searching into his wounds, or taking any account of his ex­cesses. And when the Cardinals, hurried on by the force of truth, and the cries of all men, are oblig'd out of meer shame to propose the mending any abuse, they alwaies add, Salva tamen Apostolicae sedis au­toritate. So when plurality of Benefices is condemn'd, it is Salva semper Aposto­licae sedis autoritate: when that into­lerable abuse of Dispensations is cut off, 'tis salva semper sedis Apostolicae autoritate: when any Penance is imposed upon non­resident Bishops, 'tis salva semper Aposto­licae sedis autoritate: when Friars are put again under the jurisdiction of their Or­dinaries, and obedience to their Canons, 'tis salva semper Apostolicae sedis autoritate: that is to say, The autority of that Apo­stolic See, which has patroniz'd their first violation of the discipline, shal be at liber­ty to do it a second time. They dare con­demn no crimes, without impowring the Apostolic See to commit them over a­gain. [Page 133] A Law, however just and necessary in it self, cannot be enacted without lea­ving to the Apostolical See the liberty of infringing it. And thus they make of the Apostolical See, a sanctuary and retreat for all disorders.

XV.

Nothing is better known at Rome, then the lives of a great many Cardinals. Hea­ven and Earth are offended at their Pride. Their plurality of Benefices, Bishoprics, and Abbies, is monstrous. No secular Princes are attended with greater magni­ficence. Never had the most luxurious Heathens either Palaces so gloriously a­dorn'd, or Tables so delicatly furnished: and whatever we read of the Gardens of Lucullus, or the pleasures of Tempe, is far short of the luxury of their Country Hou­ses. Yet they are Clergy-men, that is, a sort of people who not only vowed in their Baptism to renounce the World, but declar'd it also in their Ordination, That the Lord was the lot of their inheritance, and his Gospel a commandment to die and bu­ry themselves with him.

Notwithstanding, when their Refor­mation was spoken of in the Council, the [Page 134] Legats presently declar'd, that the Re­formation ought not to extend unto their Eminencies; to which a Pious and Learn­ed Bishop, more daring then the rest, moved to see Sacred Episcopacy so tram­pled upon by them, made^a answer, that the most illustrious Cardinals, ought to have a most illustrious Reformation, Illustrissimi Cardinales indigent illustrissima reforma­tione. But they are deaf to this voice of Heaven; and instead of sincerely advanc­ing the Interest of the Gospel among themselves, to the end that the spring it self being purified, the stream might be so too, 200 Bishops and five Cardinals busie themselves in ordering the subsi­stence of Franciscans, and shaping the habit of Nuns.

XVI.

Nothing is so certain as the shameful traffic of the Datary and Chancery; none but the wilfully blind can deny it to be a gulph which swallows up the riches of many Kingdoms, and sucks the purest Blood of the people. But they must first have renounc'd the Gospel and their own reason, who confess not, that it is a con­tinual commerce of abominable Simony, [Page 135] a violating of the most Holy Canons, and a pernicious attemt upon the autority of Princes and Bishops. What Council in for­mer Ages, what custom of the Church, what legitimate Title impowers the Popes to give Benefices of other King­doms? What new Gospel teaches him to raise vast sums upon the account of Spiri­tual matters? What right hath he over those Churches he hath never ministred unto? Which of the Fathers, or what Authors can he allege to maintain such u­surpations? Nay, who in the latter times [...]id not rise against such an execrable a­buse, and spoke not to him in the words [...]f a famous Emperor, Cesset altaribus im­ [...]inere profanus ardor avaritiae, & sacris [...]dytis repellatur piaculare flagitium?

Yea, the Council very well saw all this; was in the Diocess of all these Bishops, [...]hat so intolerable disorders spread their [...]ranches. The Canons of the Sacred [...]ouncils of Nice and Chalcedon are set be­fore their eies as so many eternal Witnes­ [...]es of the Churches Spirit; but instead [...]f following their rules, they wholly bu­ [...]e themselves in cutting off some small [...]uses, reforming of a Country Vicar; [...] for the rest, Salva semper Apostolicae [...]dis autoritate.

XVII.

Of all the different kinds of Simony the Court of Rome is guilty of, none is so certain and aver'd, as the Annats. ^a Bo­niface the Eighth, and John the Twenty second, invented them; two Popes, Ba­ronius stiles Monsters. The Council of ^b Basil prohibited them under pain of Ex­communication; and because the Fathers were inform'd that they came from no o­ther source then the Pope, who by a Pasce oves meas, Joh. 4. 6. makes all crimes lawful, they add those so remarkable words, That if the Bishop of Rome, who more then any other, ought to observe and execute the Canons of the Councils, comes to scandalize the Church, attempting any thing against such a prohibition, let him be proceed­ed against by a General Council.

The most considerable Authors of the Church of Rome, both for Learning and Piety, complain most bitterly of this The Faculty of Sorbon calls it, not only a Crime, but an Heresy. Paul the Third his Counsellors, who had bin first ob­lig'd under pain of Excommunication to declare the truth (that being necessary to [Page 137] make truth reach the Pope) spake after the same rate.

Nevertheless, The sacred, holy, and oecume­nical Council met at Trent, in the name of the Holy Ghost, to be rul'd there by the word of God, the writings of the Fathers, and the Apostolical Tradition, thinks not fit to take away the Annats. The Holy Ghost just goes so far as to correct small abuses, fri­volous nothings, but reaches not to He­resies and Crimes; Salva semper Apostolicae sedis autoritate. There is not in so vast a number of Bishops one single Nathan, or Elijah; or if it be too much to seek Pro­phets among them, there is not a single Ambrose or Basil; none of all these Vi­cars of Christ, who durst say with his Ma­ster, Our friend sleepeth, but I go that I may awake him out of sleep, Joh. 11. 11.

XVIII.

And indeed it would have bin a kind of Murder to have cut off Annats. Rome would have bin no more a triumphant Ci­ty, all its Palaces would have bin either pull'd down, or interrupted in the build­ing, and especially that of Pius the Fourth, rais'd during the Council, of [Page 138] which the Arch-Bishop of^a Brague told him, That the stones would have serv'd bet­ter to build an Hospital.

To banish Painters, Musicians, Poets, from St. Peters See: to make a Pope in our daies live like S. Leo or S. Gregory: to rule a Cardinal-nephew according to the Council of Carthage, and the examples of S. Charles: to require the same severity of life from an eminentissimo Cardinale, as we saw in Cardinal Baronius, and some years ago in Cardinal Bona: Such demands, I say, would have brought a blemish upon the Council never to be obliterated; and instead of procuring its confirmation, fir'd upon them all the Vatican thunders. How could a Cardinal undergo the hard­ship of riding, without a retinue of 200 Coaches, and an infinite number of staf­fieries? In the Apostles time, the most common Motto was, The world is crucified to me, and I to the world, Gal. 6. 14. Priests then had no other liveries then the blood of Martyrs, no other retinue then a vast number of poor, no other Palaces then Prisons; but in our Age, you cannot walk in the streets of Rome without hear­ing People cry out, The equipage of his E­minence, [Page 139] the Mules of his Eminence, the staffieries of his Eminence, the perfumes of his Eminence, the Music of his Eminence, the Abbies and Bishopricks of his Eminence, &c. that is, of a Deacon in the Diocess of Rome, of a Parson in the City or Suburbs, of a man maintain'd by the alms of the Church, dead to the World and its vani­ties, perswaded that there is a life to come, and that the shortest way to enjoy its happiness, is to renounce all the pleasures and honors of the present.

XIX.

The Fathers therefore at Trent were not cruel to the Pope, nor Pius the Fourth ungrateful to them. He confess'd in a full Conclave, They had us'd him more gently then he would have done himself: and that Council, which otherwise had pass'd for a Conventicle, became so sacred, that this Pope never spake afterwards without an honorable mention of it in all his dis­courses. But this Popes own confession is too puissant a proof against him, 'tis the testimony of his own Conscience. Those Physitians flatter'd so much their Patient, that he was asham'd of it, and in­stead of applying powerful Remedies to [Page 140] his inveterate Distempers, they took no notice of them. 'Tis wrongfully there­fore they accuse the Popes self-love, or the blindness incident to those who sepa­rate themselves from unity to constitute a particular order, as speaks St. Gregory and St. Austin.

Pius the Fourth was convinc'd of the need he stood in of being reform'd. But the Fathers put a bar to his desires, huc usque venies; without them he would have gone further.

XX.

Nay, least the small Reformation they made of some few things, should last too long, they found out an expedient from which experience shew'd, the success of the whole was expected; and this was the liberty left to the Pope, of dispensing with all the Ordinances of the Council. That only favor deserv'd all Pope Pius's acknowledgments: he and his successors made so good use of it, that it will not be amiss to give some examples thereof.

It had bin observ'd for many Ages, how much the exemtions of Friars were inju­rious to Episcopacy, and scandalous to the Church; wherefore the Council cuts them [Page 141] off: but Pius the Fourth using his power of dispensing, re-establishes them with greater autority then before; so that there has bin scarce any Bishop since, zealous of his duty and the honor of his Divine Cha­racter, whom a pitiful Friar, whether more fraught with boldness or ignorance, I shall not determine, arm'd cap apied with his privileges, durst not impudently op­pose.

Some abuses concerning Dispensations, Expeditions for Benefices, and other pre­tended favors of the Apostolical See were remov'd; the Pope uses his right of dispen­sation, and scarce had the Trent Fathers got home from reforming them, before Pius the Fourth had again brought up all those Impieties.

XXI.

The Council had^a handled the matter of Indulgenc [...]s with as great dexterity as moderation, and in its Decree not one of the following Propositions, which the Fri­ars have since b [...]nd [...]ed about with so vio­lent heat, is to be [...]een.

• 1. That Indulgences are authoriz'd by the Scripture.
• [Page 142] 2. That they are granted and receiv'd for the dead.
• 3. That they are a super-abundance of the merits of the Saints.
• 4. That they are any thing else but a relaxation of Canonical Penance, ac­corded only to those who pray, who de­mand, who work, ^a petenti, operanti, roganti.
• 5. That the Pope has greater power to grant them, then any particular Bi­shop.

No man had reason to complain of so wise and moderate a Decree; but the Pope uses his right of dispensing, too many People being interessed in keep­ing Indulgencies. The Vatican magnifi­cence, the softness of the Cardinals, and the Friars idleness, ow'd their mainte­nance to that solid and clear Revenue. You see therefore Bulls both for the living and the dead, dispers'd into all parts of the World; every Church hath its privi­ledg'd Altars, and a thousand Books are made public, most of them dedicated to the Pope, and approv'd by the Inquisiti­on, wherein they are call'd Heretics and Atheists, who oppose the Opinions [Page 143] which the Council hath left undeter­min'd.

The stile of these Bulls is as extraordi­nary as their matter; the Popes grant two, four, six, or seven thousand years of true pardon (and indeed the word true looks very pleasantly in that place;) he remits not only the pain due to sin, but the sin also into the bargain; somtimes to make the most on't he divides it, and pardons but a third part; somtimes one half; somtimes all, just as his Holiness is in humor. And that we may not tire our selves with too much pains, in getting so preci­ous and rare a favor as the pardon of our sins, a man most deeply engag'd in the love of the World, most buried in all its pleasures, the most taken with its glory, one that is a public sinner, guilty of all the excesses which libertinism or atheism are able to inspire; such an one as this must be excus'd from too much troubling himself. The bearing of a Medal, bow­ing to a Saint, walking to such a Church, or the like, will wash him whither then snow, and presently render him as in­nocent in the eyes of God as the best of them, who think it worth their while to work out their salvation with fear and trem­bling, [Page 144] Phil. 2. 12. who are at the trouble of mortifying in themselves the body of sin by an incredible perseverance, by con­tinual Fasting, Praiers, and Alms, that they may present their bodies a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable unto God, Rom. 10. 1.

XXII.

Thus the power of Dispensing opens the door to infinite scandals. But the Pope was impowr'd to do what he would, the Council^a granting him that which he could never hope for, viz. the affertion of his infallibility, and pre-eminence above general Councils: two Opinions that had never bin heard of for 14 Ages, and were scarce brought forth into the World, but all learned and pious Men opposed them, the 400 Bishops at Basil, and the famous Sorbon, stiling them pernicious Heresies; but the Fathers of Trent, being afraid to contradict openly so considerable an au­tority, and yet desirous to have their in­tent, dealt after a most pleasant manner, they take away these two words, Infallibi­lity and Superiority, but preserve carefully the thing.

• [Page 145]1. The Council declares, the Church of Rome is Mother and Mistress of all Churches.
• 2. The Council affects to stick at many matters, and remits their deci­sion to the Popes judgment.

Now what man of sense is there, who would not draw these two Consequences?

• 1. The Church of Rome being Mother of all Churches in the World, and a general Council being compos'd but of particular Churches; the Pope being Bishop of Rome, is therefore Father and Master of all Bishops & Councils.
• 2. There is Infallibility in the Church: this must either be in the Pope or in the Council; not in the last, since the Council cannot and dares not give their Opinion in many and weighty matters: therefore in the first, whose Church is Mistress and Mother of all Christian Churches in the World, and whose sentence an oecumenical Council submits unto, as to an Oracle, which must fix its un­certainty.

But the same man should, with their good leave, to these consequences add a third, which is,^a

XXIII.

These two Points, Infallibility and Su­periority, being once stated, what refor­mation could be expected in the Church. If the Pope be infallible, What an inso­lent boldness is it to subject him to other rules then his own? And if the Church of Rome be Mistress and Mother of all Churches, What right have these Churches to give Laws instead of recei­ving them from her? And therefore I cannot sufficiently admire how the author of the Considerations upon the Council of Trent, durst assert, That the Pope had bin ill us'd at Trent, and nothing was said of his Supremacy. We leave it to all per­sons to judg of the truth of this Assertion, [Page 147] we can only say, That the Authors who had written till then with the greatest ar­dor to promote the Apostolical Gran­deur, had never given her the ambitious qualifications of Mother and Mistress; nay, they were so far from raising the Pope above Councils, that they call such a Do­ctrine a Schism and an Heresie.

XXIV.

But as if Infallibility and Superiority were not enough, the Council adds a third, a Vow of true obedience. The word true obedience, is no less pleasant then the trae pardon of sins. The Court of Rome is so us'd to equivocations and ambiguities, that her fears appear in her own Decrees.

All Christians therefore, whether Clergy or Laity, are tied up, or rather sacrificed to the Pope by a solemn Oath; so as let him be as much Arian as Libe­rius, as much a Monothelite as Honorius, as unlearned as Celestine the Fourth, as Simoniacal as John the Twenty second, as unclean as Alexander the Sixth; let him be as insolent towards Kings, as Hilde­brand to Frederic, Boniface to Philip August, Innocent to John King of England, Leo the Tenth to Henry the Eighth, Julius the [Page 148] Third to the Queen of Navar, yet he can­not be resisted; 'tis not lawful to disobey the Father and Master of all Churches, to believe him in the wrong, whose judg­ment is above all Councils, and to oppose him to whom you are sworn upon the four Gospels.

XXV.

These reasons occasion'd the doleful complaint of Monsieur ^a d' Espences, then present at the Council, who saies openly, That the Church is in a more desperate con­dition then before, and that by reason of the Italian Bishops, whom he calls the Helena which triumph'd at Trent, there is no hope to cure her wounds.

Gentianus Hervaeus, Doctor in^b Sorbon also, and present at the Council, speaks after the same rate, and differs only from the others, in that he ascribes all the mis­carriages of the Council to Lainez and Salmero, both Jesuits.

^c Julius Sanelius being return'd from Trent, whether he had bin brought by the Cardinal of Lorrain, gave an account [Page 149] of that Assembly in these terms, That in the Council of the Apostles it had bin said, Visum est spiritui sancto & nobis, it seem'd good to the Holy Ghost, and to us; but in that of Trent, Plus nobis quam Spiritui Sancto, more to us then to the Holy Ghost.

It appears therefore, that the pretend­ed Reformation of the Pope and Court of Rome is a meer Chimera; nor is it an harder matter to evidence, that the Refor­mation of the Church is a meer disorder. It may be said, and very truly, that the sins which Lay-men lie under, have no other source then the bad examples of the Clergy; and we may learn both from profane Writings and Divine, from Hi­storians as well as Prophets, that the good or bad life of Priests hath ever had an un­speakable influence on mankind. But 'tis another truth no less certain, that if the sins of the people come from the Priests, those of the Priests spring from the Bishops: this being a daily experi­ment, that as the Clergy is holy when it is govern'd by Saints, so it becomes abo­minable to God, when the life of its head does not answer the duties and ex­cellency of his dignity. The shortest way therefore to reform the Church, was se­riously [Page 150] to reform the Bishops.

But instead of reforming the Episco­pal Order, the Fathers of Trent gave it two mortal wounds.

• 1. To declare Bishops in many cases the Popes Delegates.
• 2. To leave the question of their resi­dence and jurisdiction undecided.

1. The first of these two things brings Episcopacy unto a strange abate­ment, renders the Pope master of all Bi­shops Jurisdictions, breaks all ancient Ca­nons, runs down the interests of all Prin­ces, encroaches upon the Rights and Li­berties of Churches, gives the Bishops a quality unworthy the successors of the A­postles, and forces them to receive that as a borrowed and begg'd privilege which belongs naturally to them.

The second, causes Episcopacy to be look'd upon as a meer humane emploi­ment, or Civil Magistracy. Such a Bi­shop could never have the confidence to say with the Apostle, 2 Cor. 13. 3. Do you seek a proof of Christs speaking in me? Nay, he would no more value his sacred character, then one of the Kings officers do his, and regard the duties of his Divine calling, rather as rules instituted for de­cency, [Page 151] then as unchangeable obligations, so strictly requir'd from him, that with­out them he has no hope of salvation.

XXVI.

Jurisdiction is no less essential to Epis­copacy, then the power of ordaining Mi­nisters; a proposition we could easily de­monstrate to be unanswerable, would it not render this Discourse too big; and had it not bin already done by a learned hand, against the infamous Doctrine of [...]oth English and French Jesuits. (For Je­suits are every where the same.) Ordination and Jurisdiction are so twisted together, that they cannot be divided without their [...]utual destruction. Bishops receive both from the same hand, and are no less insti­tuted by Christ in the Church to govern [...], then to continue the succession of the Governors.

XXVII.

Nay, may it not be affirm'd, that Jurisdi­ction is both as essential to Episcopacy, & [...] necessary to the Church as Ordination. [...]or the Church being, as St. Paul saies, a [...], i. e. a society consisting of Rulers, ^a [Page 152] and others submitted to them, without Jurisdiction it can no more be such a so­ciety, then without Ordination those rulers can be continued. Therefore as no [...] Bishop ordains in the Catholic Church, a [...] the Popes, or any other Patriarchs de­legate, but by the fulness of power he re­ceives from Christ, so no Bishop exercise [...] any act of Jurisdiction by any delegation but by that power he is invested with a [...] Bishop, successor of the Apostles, and Vi­car of Christ.

A Bishop that acts or believes otherwise betraies that dignity intrusted to hi [...] by Christ, which he ought to maintain [...] the last drop of his blood.

XXVIII.

Nor pretend we thereby to say th [...] such a Jurisdiction may be exercis'd in [...]very place, and over all persons; the pa­tition of Dioceses shews the extraord [...]nary wisdom of Councils and Prince [...] Nor may any one transgress the limi [...] they have put among Bishops, without d [...]claring himself an enemy to all disciplin [...] Now all the following Propositions a [...] certainly true, at least to all admirers [...] former times, whom I take to be in E [...]England [Page 153] in a greater number then else­where.

• 1. That no man, or no part of a Dio­cess, can be substracted from a Bi­shops Jurisdiction, but by the auto­rity of a Prince or Council.
• 2. That no man can be substracted from the Jurisdiction of his Bishop, with­out being put at the same time un­der another.
• 3. That however a Bishop deals with any man, either substracted from his Jurisdiction or added to it, 'tis al­waies of himself, and by the power he receiv'd from Christ.
• 4. That the exemtions of Friars and Monks, are a Schism rais'd by the Popes.
• 5. That the name of the Popes Dele­gates (in its most favorable sense) given to the Bishops in things which belong to them, is plenojure, and by all Laws a most shameful injury to the Episcopal order.
• 6. That nemo est qui non perhorrescat, to use the words of a Learned ^a Do­ctor of Sorbon, at the speech of the Jesuit Lainez in the Council of [Page 154] Trent, That all the power of Juris­diction hath bin by Christ conferr'd on the Bishop of Rome, so that the Ju­risdiction of Bishops is not fundamen­tal but deriv'd.

XXIX.

Now concerning the divine right of Episcopacy, the Fathers of Trent com­mitted two great faults: the one to bring it into question, and the other to leave it undecided. As for the first, it had bin re­ceiv'd in the Church for fourteen ages taught by the Fathers, embraced by their Disciples, and only impugn'd by the Ita­lian Canonists. For the second, such an in­decision is a ground for any man in the Church of Rome to deny, doubt of, and contradict the institution of Bishops; these three things being the nature of all unde­cided points. So a man may maintain there is no government at all in the Church, and consequently no Church, since it does not appear that Christ hath instituted any other then Episcopacy: and certainly to find any other, the Scripture must be strain'd in many places, & the constant, universal, and never oppos'd practice of fourteen hundred years be impudently contradict­ed.

XXX.

But what is most pleasant in this Inde­cision, is, that the Pope has verifi'd the word of the Prophet, Psal. 35. 8. Let the net that he hath hid catch himself, for all these following consequences flow from it.

1. That the Holy Father is no Pope by divine right, Jure divino, for the Pope­dom being nothing else but an extension of Episcopacy, he is no Pope but because he is Bishop. No Divine durst yet advance any other opinion.

But the Episcopacy of the Holy Fa­ther is not different from that of other Bishops, being in all respects of the same kind, Episcopatus unus est. And the Ita­lians, who are so abundant in novelties, when they undertake to raise up the cre­dit of their Master, have bin dumb in this matter.

Therefore if the Popes Episcopacy is not Jure divino, his Papacy is not so neither, since one is engrafted upon the other; and if the Holy Father is not Pope Jure divino, what ground can be laid for the ambition and usurpation of ^a [Page 156] the Apostolical See? What shall we do with the fine and rare Doctrine of In­fallibility.

2. The Council has impos'd the belief of its new Decree upon all Christians, under pain of eternal damnation; but if they are only Ministers from the Church, and not from Christ, with what eies shall we consider so stupendious a boldness? Who hath impowr'd a company of men to make Decrees of divine Faith? And how, without being authoriz'd by God, did they exact an obedience only due to Ministers sent from Heaven?

3. 'Tis a crime in a Roman Catholic to believe the Council of Trent did not law­fully what it did, otherwise such a meet­ing is a dream and a chimera. But who is that Roman Catholic of any sense, who can be perswaded of it, seeing 'tis allow'd in the Church of Rome to deny any of those Bishops had the least autority from God to do what they did.

XXXI.

And indeed who will not wonder the Fathers of Trent so peremtorily give their verdict of things they confess not ground­ed upon Scripture, and which were con­verted [Page 157] for many Ages, as Images, Praiers to the Saints, Indulgencies, &c. and leave undecided a point so evident in Scripture, and so constant in Tradition.

XXXII.

It highly therefore concerns the truth, to find out the mystery why they were so obstinate at Rome in an undecision so ex­tremely pernicious to the whole Catho­lic Church, to that of Rome in particular, and to the Pope himself.

The truest cause is the pride of the E­minentissimi Cardinali. They were used long since to trample on the necks of Bi­shops, and to keep them in quality of their Secretaries, or Stewards. An enormity proceeding from the poverty, weakness, and sad condition of the Italian Prelates. A Bishop, to gain respect, needed to be privy to the pleasures or designs of the Cardinal. At Pope Pius the Fourths Counsel, Bishops stood bare-headed, whilst gli Eminentissimi sat, and were co­vered. And by a disorder no where to be found but at Rome, a gray hair'd Bi­shop, or Arch-bishop exhausted with au­sterities, and considerable for services done the Chur [...]h, was seen at the feet of [Page 158] a young, powdered, perfumed Cardinal, puft up with pride, softned by wanton­ness; and in a word, whose Eminency had usually nothing more eminent then most eminent vices.

XXXIII.

'Twas then impossible to speak in the Council of the Bishops Institution, with­out putting Cardinals in mind of theirs: one is so ancient and divine, the other so new and humane, that the very thoughts of them could not chuse but make Cardi­nals asham'd.

For if they consider their dignity as Spiritual, they are only Priests or Dea­cons, submitted for that very reason to their Bishops, and without power of vo­ting in Councils.

Or if they consider it as a temporal ho­nor, they have nothing to do with the affairs of the Church. They are in the order of the sheep, not of the Shepherd, and instead of being so proud as to am­bition speaking and ruling in Councils, must beg with a profound humility to hear and be ruled.

Or at last, if they are in a middle state, as a Jesuit (a man of a middle state also, [Page 159] as fit as the rest of his company to unite great extremes) describes them, they ought to fear the condemnation Christ has interminated to those who serve two masters.

And thus it was of a very high con­cernment for Cardinals to leave a questi­on undecided, which would have restored them to their ancient condition, and done justice to the sacred character of Bishops. How dangerous soever seemed the con­sequences of such undecision, they fol­lowed the Italian maxim, To keep the pre­sent usurpations at the price of the most equi­table Laws.

XXXIV.

Nor were they less interess'd at the question of Residency. For if the deci­sion of the divine institution of Bishops destroied their honors, that of residency finished their pleasures, sent them to their Diocess, and cut off the sweet and luxu­rious life of Rome.

Nevertheless, it was required by the Spanish and French Bishops, that Resi­dency should be declared Jure divino. Of all Christian Truths, none is so powerful­ly expressed in the Scripture, so conform­able [Page 160] to good sense, so inculcated to us by the Writings and Examples of the Fa­thers.

Nay, without gathering a thousand te­stimonies from all parts of the Scripture, let us only say to the Bishops what Saint Jerome saies to Nepotian, Interrogent nomen suum, and no doubt 'tis enough to per­swade them.

There is none of these Bishops absent from their Dioceses, who dares read with­out fear that parable of the Gospel, where­in Christ calls himself the good Shepherd, expresses in a stile full of love, that [...] takes all imaginable care for hindering them from going astray; that he has a voice whereby his sheep know him, and discern him from foreigners, or mercen [...]ries; and, what is more, that he has [...] life to spend for saving them from death.

XXXV.

Now Bishops are in the Church to re [...]present Christ to the life, either because he has committed to their care the go [...]vernment of his people, or because they succeed the Apostles who are his wit [...]nesses. A Bishop that wants a watchfu [...] care to look after his sheep, a voice to ca [...] [Page 161] them, and above all, a life to lose for their sakes, is a thief, that comes not but to steal, to kill, and to destroy.

This great duty gave occasion to the Fathers to call Bishops, Sponsos Ecclesiarum suarum, the Bride-grooms of their Church­es. Thence they drew these important con­clusions.

1. That the polygamy of Dioceses is no more lawful to a Bishop, then polygamy of Wives to a Christian.

2. That as in a Christian Marriage, a husband must be entirely to his wife, con­center in her all his desires, and love her after God above all the world; so a Bi­shop that is tyed to the Church, must ba­nish all other thoughts, then to live and die in her bosom.

3. That as we learn from the sublime Divinity of the Apostle, that Christ lo­ved entirely his Church, never abandon­ed her, died for her, and remains with her till the end of the world; so a Bishop must be jealous of the Church Christ has entrusted him with, watch continually for her; and because she lies in the midst of a thousand enemies, persevere in her defence till his last breath.

XXXVI.

We need but read St. Pauls Epistles to Timothy and Titus, to see the Disciple Preaching as he had bin taught by his Master. All those great qualities he re­quires in a Bishop, that irreprehensible life, that exact watchfulness, that sound doctrine, that incredible patience in exhorting, that prudent behavior amongst so many diffe­rent sorts of people, old men, youths, widows and virgins, have no other foun­dation but residency.

And the Fathers were so throughly convinc'd of this duty, that when they speak of Episcopacy, they stile it a bur­den dreadful to the shoulders of angels them­selves, along and tedious death, a source of infinite cares and solicitudes; all which ex­pressions are meer mockeries, if they did not suppose residency Jure divino.

Their examples are more pressing then their precepts. And St. Athanasius, St. Austin, and Pope St. Gregory, did actions answering to, and surpassing their words.

Nay, God has not permitted the Church of Rome it self, in the darkness of its incredulity, to be destituted of such precedents. St. Charles, nephew to Pope [Page 143] Pius the Fourth, retir'd to his See, mau­gre all the intreaties of his uncle. Car­dinal Bellarmin, the Popes great adorer, would never accept of a dispensation pro­fer'd to him for non residing; and he has left us an excellent Letter to a nephew of his, wherein we may see that tho Jesuit and Cardinal, he could never be induced by the Pope himself to betray his con­science.

XXXVII.

But the Cardinals presiding at Trent, and the Italian Bishops did not care very much to shake the very principles of Re­ligion, and so recur to the softest interpre­tations of Casuists. The first foresaw, that if residency be declared of Divine Right, there would be no pretence or ex­cuse at all to live at Rome. The loss of Rome for a Cardinal is no small sacrifice; and there is a great difference between these two, to lie conceal'd in his Diocess, and to shine in a Court known to be the most proud, rich, and voluptuous in the World.

The second should have hazarded too much in striving against the Cardinals. They lived in their families, eat the crumbs [Page 164] which fall from their tables, and made a part of their retinue. Those of them who were less despis'd, had also more am­bition: they aim'd at Cardinalship; and Residency was the nearest way to be de­priv'd of it. They forgat therefore that they were Bishops, and chose rather to be­tray their character, then leave their pre­tences and pleasures.

XXXVIII.

What then has the Council done in its so much boasted of Reformation? Great things indeed.

Those two hundred Bishops that had bin five and twenty years before they could meet, and eighteen after they had met, answer'd perfectly the expectation of all Chri­stendom.

1. They have forbidden Praiers in a known Tongue.

2. Ruled the Church-wardens.

3. Ordained, that Friars could not vow but being sixteen years old.

4. Approv'd the Jesuits's order, that is, strengthn'd the enemies of Christ.

5. Shaped an Index expurgatory, as barbarous in its form as in its name.

6. Establish'd Inquisition, a new tri­bunal [Page 165] which may be properly call'd, the eleventh persecution of the Church.

XXXIX.

But to speak seriously, we must say with Mr. D'Espences, and the most consi­derable men of the Roman Communion.

1. They have encroached upon the li­berties of all Churches.

2. Rais'd the Popes power, and brought Episcopacy to nothing.

3. Cut off all hopes of Reformation, and canoniz'd all the vices of Rome.

4. Made breaches in the Discipline which shall never be made up; and in­duc'd those who have some knowledge of the ancient Canons, to ask them in Saint Austin's words, Curare est hoc, an occidere? Levare de terra, an praecipitare de coelo?