Sect. 1.

De uni [...]. Ec­cles. cap. 6.IT was the challenge of S. Augustine to the Donatists, who (as the Church of Rome does at this day) in­clos'd the Catholick Church within their own cir­cuits: [Ye say that Christ is Heir of no Lands, but where Donatus is Coheire. Read this to us out of the Law and the Prophets, out of the Psalms, out of the Gospel it self, or out of the Letters of the Apostles. Read it thence and we be­lieve it.] Plainly directing us to the Fountains of our Faith, the Old and New Testament, the words of Christ, and the words of the Apostles. For nothing else can be the foundation of our Faith, whatsoever came in after these, foris est, it belongs not unto Christ.Ecclesia ex facris & cano­nici [...] Scripturi [...] osteudenda est. quaque exillis aftendi non po­test, Ecclesia non est, S. Aug. de­ [...]tit. Eccles. c. 4. &c. 3. Ibi quaeramus Ec­clesiam, ibi de­at namus cau­sum nostram.

To these we also add, not as Authors or Finishers, but as helpers of our Faith, and Heirs of the Doctrine A­postolical, the Sentiments and Catholick Doctrine of the Church of God, in the Ages next after the Apo­stles. Not that we think them or our selves bound to every private opinion, even of a Primitive Bishop and Martyr; but that we all acknowledg that the whole Church of God kept the Faith entire, and transmitted faithfully to the after-Ages the whole Faith, [...] the form of Doctrine, and sound words, which was at first [Page 5] delivered to the Saints; and was defective in nothing that belong'd unto salvation, and we believe that those Ages sent millions of Saints to the bosom of Christ, and seal'd the true faith with their lives and with their deaths, and by both, gave testimony unto Jesus, and had from him the testimony of his Spirit.

And this method of procedure we now choose, not on­ly because to them that know well how to use it, to the Sober and the Moderate, the Peaceable and the Wise, it is the best, the most certain, visible and tangi­ble, most humble and satisfactory, but also because the Church of Rome does with greatest noises pretend her Conformity to Antiquity. Indeed the present Ro­man Doctrines, which are in difference, were invisible and unheard of in the first and best Antiquity, and with how ill success their quotations are out of the Fathers of the three first Ages, every inquiring Man may easily discern. But the noises therefore which they make are from the Writings of the succeeding Ages; where sae­cular interest did more prevail, and the Writings of the Fathers were vast and voluminous, full of Controversie, and ambiguous senses, fitted to their own Times and Questions, full of proper Opinions, and such variety of Sayings, that both Sides eternally and inconfutably shall bring Sayings for themselves respectively. Now al­though things being thus, it will be impossible for them to conclude from the Sayings of a number of Fathers, that their Doctrine, which they would prove thence, was the Catholick Doctrine of the Church; because any number that is less than all, does not prove a Catholick consent, yet the clear Sayings of one or two of these Fathers truly alledged by us to the contrary, will cer­tainly prove that what many of them (suppose it) do [Page 6] affirm, and which but two or three as good Catholicks, as the other do deny, was not then matter of Faith or a Doctrine of the Church; for if it had, these had been Hereticks accounted, and not have remain'd in the Com­munion of the Church. But although for the reasonable­ness of the thing we have thought fit to take notice of it; yet we shall have no need to make use of it; since not only in the prime and purest Antiquity we are indubita­bly more than Conquerours; but even in the succeeding Ages, we have the advantage both numero, pondere, & mensurâ, in number, weight, and measure.

We do easily acknowledge, that to dispute these que­stions from the sayings of the Fathers, is not the readiest way to make an end of them; but therefore we do wholly rely upon Scriptures as the foundation and final resort of all our perswasions, and from thence can ne­ver be confuted; but we also admit the Fathers as ad­mirable helps for the understanding of the Scriptures, and as good testimony of the Doctrine deliver'd from their fore-fathers down to them of what the Church esteem'd the way of Salvation: and therefore if we find any Doctrine now taught, which was not plac'd in their way of Salvation, we reject it as being no part of the Christian faith, and which ought not to be impos'd upon consciences. They were wise unto salvation, and fully instructed to every work; and therefore the faith which they profess'd and deriv'd from Scripture, we profess also; and in the same faith, we hope to be sav'd even as they. But for the new Doctors, we understand them not, we know them not: Our faith is the same from the beginning, and cannot become new.

But because we shall make it to appear that they do greatly innovate in all their points of controversie with [Page 7] us, and shew nothing but shadowes instead of substances, and little images of things instead of solid arguments; we shall take from them their armour in which they trusted, and choose this sword of Goliah to combat their errors; for non est alter talis; It is not easie to finde a better than the Word of God, expounded by the prime and best Antiquity.

The first thing therefore we are to advertise is, That the Emissaries of the Roman Church endeavour to per­swade the good people of our Dioceses from a Religion that is truly Primitive and Apostolick, and divert them to Propositions of their own, new and unheard of in the first ages of the Christian Church.

For the Religion of our Church is therefore certainly Primitive and Apostolick, because it teaches us to believe the whole Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, and nothing else as matter of faith; and therefore unless there can be new Scriptures, we can have no new matters of belief, no new articles of faith. Whatsoever we cannot prove from thence, we disclaim it, as not deriving from the Fountains of our Saviour. We also do believe the Apostles Creed, the Nicene with the additions of Con­stantinople, and that which is commonly called the Symbol of S. Athanasius: and the four first General Councils are so intirely admitted by us, that they, toge­ther with the plain words of Scripture, are made the rule and measure of judging Heresies amongst us: and in pursuance of these, it is commanded by our Church that the Clergy shall never teach any thing as matter of Faith religiously to be observed, but that which is agreea­ble to the Old and New Testament, and collected out of the same Doctrine by the Ancient Fathers and Catholick Bi­shops of the Church. Lib. Cano, discipl. Eccles. Angli [...]. & in­junct. Regi [...]. Elis. A. D. 1571. Can. de concionatoribus. This was undoubtedly the Faith [Page 8] of the Primitive Church, they admitted all into their Communion that were of this faith; they condemned to Man that did not condemn these; they gave Letters communicatory by no other cognisance, and all were Brethren who spake this voice. [Hanc legem sequentes, Christianorum Catholicorum nomen jubemus amplecti, reli­quos verò dementes, vesanosque judicantes haeretici dogma­tis infaemiam sustinere] said the Emperors, Gratian, Valen­tinian, and Theodosius, [...]at. 3. Calend. Mart. Th [...]ssa­ [...]onicae. in their Proclamation to the Peo­ple of C. P. All that believ'd this Doctrine were Chri­stians and Catholicks, viz. all they who believe in the Fa­ther, Son, and Holy Ghost, one Divinity of equal Majesty in the Holy Trinity; which indeed was the summe of what was decreed in explication of the Apostles Creed in the four first General Councils.

And what faith can be the foundation of a more solid peace, the surer ligaments of Catholick Communion, or the firmer basis of a holy Life and of the hopes of Heaven hereafter, than the measures which the Holy Primitive Church did hold, and and we after them? That which we rely upon is the same that the Primitive Church did acknowledg to be the adaequate foundation of their hopes in the matters of belief: The way which they thought sufficient to go to Heaven in, is the way which we walk: what they did not teach, we do not publish and impose; into this faith entirely and into no other, as they did theirs; so we baptize our Catechumens: The Discriminations of Heresie from Catholick Doctrine which they us'd, we use also, and we use no other: and in short, we believe all that Doctrine which the Church of Rome believes, except those things which they have su­perinduc'd upon the Old Religion, and in which we shall prove that they haue innovated. So that by their con­fession, [Page 9] all the Doctrine which we teach the people, as matter of Faith, must be confessed to be Ancient, Pri­mitive and Apostolick, or else theirs is not so: for ours is the same, and we both have received this Faith from the Fountains of Scripture, and Universal Tradition; not they from us, or we from them, but both of us from Christ and his Apostles. And therefore there can be no question whether the Faith of the Church of England be Apostolick and Primitive; it is so, confessedly: But the Question is concerning many other particulars which were unknown to the Holy Doctors of the first Ages, which were no part of their Faith, which were never put into their Creeds, which were not determined in any of the four first General Councels, rever'd in all Chri­stendom, and entertain'd every where with great Reli­gion and veneration, even next to the four Gospels and the Apostolical writings.

Of this sort, because the Church of Rome hath in­troduc'd many, and hath adopted them into their late Creed, and imposes them upon the people, not only with­out, but against the Scriptures and the Catholick Doctrine of the Church of God; laying heavie burdens on mens Consciences, and making the narrow way to Heaven, yet narrower by their own inventions; arrogating to themselves a Dominion over our Faith, and prescribing a method of Salvation which Christ and his Apostles ne­ver taught; corrupting the Faith of the Church of God, and Teaching for Doctrines the Commandments of men; and lastly, having derogated from the Prerogative of Christ, who alone is the Author and Finisher of our faith, and hath perfected it in the revelations consign'd in the Holy Scriptures; therefore it is, that we esteem our selves oblig'd to warn the People of their danger, and [Page 10] to depart from it, and call upon them to stand upon the wayes, and ask after the old paths, and walk in them; lest they partake of that curse which is threatned by God to them, who remove the ancient Land-marks which our Fathers in Christ have set for us.

Now that the Church of Rome cannot pretend that all which she imposes is Primitive and Apostolick, ap­pears in this; That in the Church of Rome, there is pre­tence made to a power, not only of declaring new Articles of Faith, but of making new Symbols or Creeds, and imposing them as of necessity to Salvation. Which thing is evident in the Bull of Pope Leo the Tenth against Martin Lu­ther, in which, amongst other things, he is condemn'd for saying, [It is certain that it is not in the power of the Church or Pope to constitute Articles of Faith.] We need not adde that this power is attributed to the Bi­shops of Rome by Turrecremata Quod sit metrum, & regula, a [...] sci­entia cre­dendorum. Summae de Eccles. l. 2. c. 203., Augu­stinus Triumphus de Ancona Novum Symbolum condere solum ad Papam spectat, quia est capu [...] fidei Chri­stians, cujus authoritate omnia quae ad filem spectant firmantur & roborantur. q. 59. a. 1. & art. 2. sicut potest novum symbolum condere, ita potest novos arti­culos supra aelios multiplicare., Petrus de Ancorano Papa potest sacere novos ar [...]i [...]ulos fi­dei, id est, quod modo credi oporteat, cum sic prius non oportere [...]. in cap. cum Christ. de hate. n. 2., and the famous Abbot of Panormo Papa potest inducere novum articu­lum fidei, in idem., that the Pope cannot only make new Creeds, but new Articles of Faith; That he can make that of neces­sity to be believ'd, which before never was necessary; That he is the measure and rule, and the very notice of all cre­dibilities; That the Canon Law is the Divine Law; and what-ever Law the Pope promulges, God, whose Vicar he is, is understood to be the promulger. That the souls of men are in the hands of the Pope; and that in his arbitration Religion does consist: which are the very words of Hostiensis Super 2. De­cret. de jure­jur. c. minis. n. 1., and Ferdinandus ab Inciso Apud Petrum Ciezam. [...]o. 2. instit. peruinae, cap. [...]9., who were Casuists, and Doctors of Law, of great authority [Page 11] amongst them and renown. The thing it self, is not of dubious disputation amongst them, but actually practis'd in the greatest instances, as is to be seen in the Bull of Pius the fourth at the end of the Council of Yrent; by which all Ecclesiasticks are not only bound to swear to all the Articles of the Council of Trent for the present and for the future, but they are put into a new Symbol or Creed, and they are corroborated by the same decretory clauses that are us'd in the Creed of Athanasius: that this is the true Catholick Faith; and that without this no man can be saved.

Now since it cannot be imagined that this power to which they pretend, should never have been reduc'd to act; and that it is not credible they should publish so inviduous and ill sounding Doctrine to no purpose, and to serve no end; it may without further evidence be believed by all discerning persons, that they have need of this Doctrine, or it would not have been taught, and that consequently without more adoe, it may be concluded that some of their Articles are parts of this New Faith; and that they can therefore in no sense be Apostolical, unless their being Roman makes them so.

To this, may be added another consideration, not much less material, that besides what Eckius told the Elector of Bavaria, that the Doctrines of Luther might be overthrown by the Fathers, though not by Scripture; they have also many gripes of Conscience concerning the Fathers themselves, that they are not right on their side; and of this, they have given but too much de­monstration by their Expurgatory Indices. The Serpent by being so curious a Defender of his Head, shewes where his danger is, and by what he can most readily be [Page 12] destroyed. But besides their innumerable corruptings of the Fathers Writings, their thrusting in that which was spurious, and like Pharaoh, kil­ling the legitimate Sons of Israel, Iohannes Clemens aliquos folia Theodereti laceravit & abjecit in socum, in quibus contrae Transub­stan [...]iaetionem praeclare disseruit. Et cum non itae pridem Originem ex­cuderent, totum illud capu [...] sextum Iohannis & quod commentabaetur Origenes omiserunt, & mutilum ediderunt librum propter candem causam. though in this, they have done very much of their work, and made the Testimonies of the Fathers to be a Record infinitely worse, than of themselves uncorrupted, they would have been (of which divers Learned Persons have made publique complaint and demonstration) they have at last fallen to a new trade, which hath caus'd more dis-reputation to them, than they have gain'd advantage, and they have virtually confess'd, that in many things, the Fathers are against them.

For first, the King of Spain gave a Commission to the Inquisitors to purge all Catholick Authors; but with this clause, iique ipsi privatim, nullisque consciis apud se indicem expurgatorium habebunt, quem eundem neque aliis communicabunt, neque ejus exemplum ulli dabunt: that they should keep the Expurgatory Index privately, nei­ther imparting that Index, nor giving a Copie of it to any. But it happened, by the Divine Providence, so ordering it, that about thirteen years after, a Copie of it was got­ten and published by Iohannes Pappus and Franciscus Iunius, and since it came abroad against their wills, they finde it necessary now to own it, and they have Printed it themselves. Now by these expurgatory Ta­bles what they have done is known to all Learned Men. In S. Chrysostom's Works printed at Basil, these words. [The Church is not built upon the Man, but upon the Faith.] are commanded to be blotted out: and these [There is no Merit but what is given us by Christ,] and yet these [Page 13] words are in his Sermon upon Pentecost, and the former words are in his first Homily upon that of S. Iohn. Ye are my friends, &c.] The like they have done to him in many other places, and to S. Ambrose, and to S. Austin, and to them all, Sixtus Senensis Epist. Dedicat. ad Pium Quint. laudat Pontificem in haec verba, Expurgari & emaculari cur [...]st [...] omnium Catholicorum Scriptorum, at prae­ciput veterum Patrum scriptae. inso­much that Ludovicus Saurius the Cor­rector of the Press at Lyons shewed and complain'd of it to Iunius, that he was forc'd to cancellate or blot out many sayings of S. Ambrose in that Edition of his works which was print­ed at Lyons 1559. So that what they say on occasion of Bertram's book [In the old Catholick Writers we suffer very many errors, and extenuate and excuse them, and finding out some Commentary, we fain some convenient sense when they are oppos'd in Disputations] they do in­deed practise, but esteem it not sufficient; for the words which make against them, they wholly leave out of their Editions. Nay they correct the very Tables or Indices made by the Printers or Correctors; inso­much that out of one of Frobens Indices, they have com­manded these words to be blotted [The use of Images forbidden.] The Eucharist no sacrifice, but the memory of a sacrifice.] Works, although they do not justifie, yet are necessary to Salvation.] Marriage is granted to all that will not contain.] Venial sins damne.] The dead Saints, after this life cannot help us.] Nay out of the Index of S. Austin's Works by Claudius Chevallonius at Paris 1531. there is a very strange deleatur [Dele, Solus Deus ado­randus] that God alone is to be worshipped, Index Expur­gator. Madrili. 1612. in Indi [...]e libror. expurga­torum pag. 39. is command­ed to be blotted out, as being a dangerous Doctrine. These instances may serve instead of multitudes, which might be brought of their corrupting the witnesses, and razing the records of antiquity, that the errors and No­velties [Page 14] of the Church of Rome might not be so easily re­prov'd. Now if the Fathers were not against them, what need these arts? Why should they use them thus? Their own expurgatory indices are infinite testimony against them, both that they do so, and that they need it.

But besides these things, we have thought it fit to re­present in one aspect, some of their chief Doctrines of dif­ference from the Church of England, and make it evi­dent that they are indeed new, and brought into the Church, first by way of opinion, and afterwards by power, and at last, by their own authority decreed into Laws and Articles.

Sect. II.

FIrst, we alledge that this very power of making new Articles is a Novelty, and expresly against the Do­ctrine of the Primitive Church; and we prove it, first, by the words of the Apostle, saying,Gal. 1. 8. If we, or an Angel from Heaven shall preach unto you any other Gospel (viz. in whole or in part, for there is the same reason of them both) than that which we have preached, let him be Anathema: and secondly, by the sentence of the Fathers in the third General Council, that at Ephesus. Part 2. act. 6. c. [...]. [That it should not be lawful for any Man to publish or compose another Faith or Creed than that which was defin'd by the Nicene Council: and that whosoever shall dare to compose or offer any such to any Persons willing to be converted from Paganism, Iu­daism, or Heresie, if they were Bishops or Clerks, they should be depos'd, if Lay-men, they should be accursed.] And yet in the Church of Rome, Faith and Christianity increase like the Moon; Bromyard complain'd of it long since, and the [Page 15] mischief encreases daily. They have now a new Article of Faith, ready for the stamp, which may very short­ly become necessary to salvation; we mean, that of the immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Whe­ther the Pope be above a Council or no; we are not sure, whether it be an article of faith amongst them or not: It is very near one if it be not. Bellarmine would fain have us believe that the Council of Constance approving the Bull of Pope Martin the fifth, declar'd for the Popes Supremacy. But Iohn Gerson, De potest. Ec­cles. consi [...]. [...]. who was at the Council sayes, that the Council did abate those heights to which flattery had advanc'd the Pope; and that before that Council they spoke such great things of the Pope, which afterwards moderate men durst not speak; but yet some others spake them so confidently before it, that he that should then have spoken to the contrary, would hardly have escap'd the note of Heresie: and that these Men continued the same pretensions even after the Council. But the Council of Basil decreed for the Council against the Pope; and the Council of Laeteran under Leo the tenth, decreed for the Pope against the Council. So that it is cross and pile; and whether for a peny, when it can be done; it is now a known case it shall become an article of Faith. But for the present it is a probationary article,De Consi [...]. au­thor. l. 2. c. 17. Section 1. and according to Bellarmine's expression, is fere de fide, it is almost an article of Faith; they want a little age, and then they may goe alone.Sess. 21. cap. 4. But the Council of Trent hath produc'd a strange new Article, but it is sine controversia cre­dendum, it must be believ'd, and must not be contro­verted: That although the ancient Fathers did give the Communion to Infants, yet they did not believe it ne­cessary to salvation. Now this being a matter of fact [Page 16] whether they did or did not believe it, every man that reads their Writings can be able to inform himself: and besides that it is strange that this should be determin'd by a Council, and determin'd against evident truth (it be­ing notorious, that divers of the Fathers did say it is ne­cessary to salvation;) the Decree it self is beyond all bounds of modesty, and a strange pretension of Empire over the Christian Belief. But we proceed to other in­stances.

Sect. III.

THe Roman Doctrine of Indulgences was the first oc­casion of the great Change and Reformation of the Western Churches, begun by the Preachings of Martin Luther and others; and besides that it grew to that intolerable abuse, that it became a shame to it self, and a reproach to Christendome, it was also so very an Innovation, that their great Antoninus confesses,Part. 1. Sum. tit. 10. c. 3. that concerning them we have nothing expresly, either in the Scriptures, or in the sayings of the Ancient Doctors: and the same is affirmed by Sylvester Pri [...]rias. Bishop Fisher of Rochester sayes,In art. 18. Luther. that in the beginning of the Church there was no use of Indulgences; and that they began after the people were a while affrighted with the tor­ments of Purgatory; and many of the School-men con­fess that the use of Indulgences began in the time of Pope Alexander the third, towards the end of the XII Century: but Agrippa imputes the beginning of them to Boniface the VIII; who liv'd in the Reign of King Edward the First of England; 1300. years after Christ. But that in his time the first Jubilee was kept [Page 17] we are assur'd by Crantzius. This Pope Intravit ut vulpes, regna­vit ut leo, mo­riebatur ut ca­nis, de eo sae­pius dictum. lived and died with very great infamy, and therefore was not likely from himself to transfer much honour and repu­tation to the new institution. But that about this time Indulgences began, is more than probable; much before it is certain they were not. For in the whole Canon Law written by Graetian, and in the sentences of Peter Lombard there is nothing spoken of Indulgences: Now because they liv'd in the time of P. Alexander III. if he had introduc'd them, and much rather if they had been as antient as S. Gregory (as some vainly and weakly pre­tend, from no greater authority than their own Le­gends) it is probable that these great Men, writing Bo­dies of Divinity and Law, would have made mention of so considerable a point, and so great a part of the Ro­man Religion, as things are now order'd. If they had been Doctrines of the Church then, as they are now, it is certain they must have come under their cognisance and discourses.

Now least the Roman Emissaries should deceive any of the good Sons of the Church, we think it fit to ac­quaint them, that in the Primitive Church, when the Bi­shops impos'd severe penances,Tertull. l. ad Martyr. c. 1. S. Cyprian. lib. 3. Ep. 15. apud Pameli­um 11. and that they were almost quite perform'd, and a great cause of pity intervened, or danger of death, or an excellent repentance, or that the Martyrs interceded, the Bishop did sometimes indulge the penitent, Concil. Nicen. 1. can. 12. and relax some of the remaining parts of his penance; and according to the example of S. Paul, in the case of the incestuous Corinthian, gave them ease,Conc. Ancyr. c. 5. Concil. Laodicen. c. 2. S. Basil. in Ep. canonicis ha­bentur in No­mocanone Pho­tii. can. 73. least they should be swallowed up with too much sor­row. But the Roman Doctrine of Indulgences is wholly another thing; nothing of it but the abused name re­mains. For in the Church of Rome they now pretend [Page 18] that there is an infinite of degrees of Christs merit and satisfaction beyond what is necessary for the salvation of his servants: and (for fear Christ should not have e­nough) the Saints have a surplusage of merits,Communis o­pittio DD. tam Theologorum, quaem Canoni­corum, quod sunt ex abun­dantiae merito­rum quae ultrae mensuram de­meritorum suo­rum sancti su­stinuerunt, & Christi. Sum. Angel. v. In­dulg. 9. or at least of satisfactions more than they can spend, or themselves do need: and out of these the Church hath made her a treasure, a kind of poor mans box; and out of this, a power to take as much as they list to apply to the poor souls in Purgatory; who because they did not satisfie for their venial sins, or perform all their penances which were imposed, or which might have been imposed, and which were due to be paid to God for the temporal pains reserved upon them, after he had forgiven them the guilt of their deadly sins, are forc'd sadly to roar in pains not inferiour to the pains of hell, excepting onely that they are not eternal. Lib. 1. de in­dulgent. cap. 2. & 3.That this is the true state of their Article of Indulgences, we appeal to Bellarmine.

Now concerning their new foundation of Indulgences, the first stone of it was laid by P. Clement VI. in his ex­travagant Vnigenitus, de poenitentiis & remissionibus, A. D. 1350. This constitution was published Fifty years after the first Jubilee, and was a new device to bring in customers to Rome at the second Jubilee, which was kept in Rome in this Popes time. What ends of pro­fit and interest it serv'd, we are not much concern'd to enquire; but this we know, that it had not yet passed into a Catholick Doctrine, for it was disputed against by Franciscus de Mayronis In 4. l. sent. dist. 19. q. 2. and Durandus Ibid. dist. 20. q. 3. not long before this extravagant; and that it was not rightly form'd to their purposes till the stirs in Germany, rais'd upon the occasion of Indulgences, made Leo the tenth set his Clerks on work to study the point, and make something of it.

[Page 19]But as to the thing it self: it is so wholly new, so meerly devis'd and forged by themselves, so newly crea­ted out of nothing, from great mistakes of Scripture, and dreams of shadows from antiquity; that we are to admonish our Charges, that they cannot reasonably expect many sayings of the primitive Doctors against them, any more than against the new fancies of the Quakers, which were born but yesterday. That which is not cannot be numbred, and that which was not could not be confuted. But the perfect silence of antiquity in this whole matter, is an abundant demonstration that this new nothing was made in the later laboratories of Rome. Ubi supra. For as Duran­dus said, the Holy Fathers, Ambrose, Hilary, Hierom, Au­stin speak nothing of Indulgences. And whereas it is said that S. Gregory DC. years after Christ, gave Indulgences at Rome in the stations; Magister Angularis, who lived about 200 years since, says, He never read of any such any where; and it is certain there is no such thing in the writings of S. Gregory, nor in any history of that age, or any other that is authentick: and we could ne­ver see any history pretended for it by the Roman Wri­ters, but a Legend of Ledgerus brought to us the other day by Surius: which is so ridiculous and weak, that e­ven their own parties dare not avow it as true story; and therefore they are fain to make use of Thomas A­quinas upon the Sentences, and Altisiodorensis for story and record. And it were strange, that if this power of giving Indulgences to take off the punishment, reserv'd by God after the sin is pardoned, were given by Christ to his Church, that no one of the antient Doctors should tell any thing of it: insomuch that there is no one Writer of au­thority and credit, not the more antient Doctors we have already named, nor those who were much later, Ruper­tus [Page 20] Tuitensis, Anselm or S. Bernard ever took notice of it; but it was a Doctrine wholly unknown to the Church for about MCC years after Christ: and Car­dinal Cajetane told Pope Adrian VI. that to him that readeth the Decretals it plainly appears, that an Indul­gence is nothing else but an absolution from that penance which the Confessor hath imposed; and therefore can be nothing of that which is now a dayes pretended.

True it is, that the Canonical penances were about the time of Burchard lessen'd add alter'd by commutations; and the antient discipline of the Church in imposing pe­nances was made so loose, that the Indulgence was more than the Imposition, and began not to be an act of mer­cy but remisness, an absolution without amends: It be­came a trumpet, and a leavy for the holy War, in Pope Vrban the Seconds time; for he gave a plenary Indul­gence and remission of all sins to them that should go and fight against the Saracens: and yet no man could tell how much they were the better for these Indul­gences: for concerning the value of Indulgences, the complaint is both old and doubtful, said Pope Adrian; and he cites a famous gloss,In lib. 4. sent. which tells of four Opinions all Catholick, and yet vastly differing in this particular:Verb. Indul­gentia. but the Summa Angelica reckons seven Opinions concern­ing what that penalty is which is taken off by Indul­gences: No man could then tell; and the point was but in the infancy, and since that, they have made it what they please: but it is at last turn'd into a Doctrine, and they have devised new propositions, as well as they can, to make sense of it; and yet it is a very strange thing; a solution, not an absolution (it is the distinction of Bellarmine) that is, the sinner is let to go free without punishment in this World, or in the World to come; and [Page 21] in the end, it grew to be that which Christendom could not suffer: a heap of Doctrines without Grounds of Scri­pture, or Catholick Tradition; and not onely so, but they have introduc'd a way of remitting sins, that Christ and his Apostles taught not; a way destructive of the re­pentance and remission of sins which was preached in the Name of Jesus: it brought into the Church, false and fantastick hopes, a hope that will make men asham'd; a hope that does not glorifie the merits and perfect satisfaction of Christ; a doctrine expresly dishonourable to the full and free pardon given us by God through Jesus Christ; a practise that supposes a new bunch of Keys given to the Church, besides that which the Apostles receiv'd to open and shut the Kingdome of Heaven; a Doctrine that introduces pride among the Saints, and advances the opinion of their works beyond the measures of Christ, who taught us,Vt quid non praevides tib [...] in die judicii, quando nemo poterit per ali­um excusari, vel defendi; sed unusquisque sufficiens onus erit sibi ipsi. Th. ae Kempis. l. 1. de imit. c. 24. That when we have done all that is commanded, we are unprofitable servants, and therefore certainly cannot supererogate, or do more than what is infinitely recompenc'd by the Kingdome of Glory, to which all our doings and all our sufferings are not worthy to be compar'd; especially, since the greatest Saint can not but say with David, Enter not into judgement with thy servant; for in thy sight no flesh living can be justified; It is a practise that hath turn'd Penances into a Fayr, and the Court of Conscience into a Lombard, and the labors of Love into the labors of pilgrimages, superstitious and use­less wandrings from place to place; and Religion into vanity, and our hope in God to a confidence in man, and our fears of hell to be a mere scarcrow to rich and con­fident sinners: and at last, it was frugally employed by a great Pope to raise a portion for a Lady, the Wife of Franceschetto Cibo bastard son of Pope Innocent VIII. [Page 22] and the merchandize it self became the stakes of Game­sters, at dice and cards, and men did vile actions that they might win Indulgences; by gaming making their way to heaven easier.

Now although the H. Fathers of the Church could not be suppos'd in direct terms to speak against this new Doctrine of Indulgences, because in their days it was not: yet they have said many things which do perfectly de­stroy this new Doctrine, and these unchristian practises. For besides that they teach a repentance wholly redu­cing us to a good life; a faith that intirely relies upon Christs merits and satisfactions; a hope wholly depend­ing upon the plain promises of the Gospel, a service perfectly consisting in the works of a good conscience, a labor of love, a religion of justice and piety and moral virtues: they do also expresly teach that pilgrimages to holy places and such like inventions, which are now the earnings and price of Indulgences, are not required of us, and are not the way of salvation, as is to be seen in an Oration made by S. Gregory Nyssene wholly against pil­grimages to Ierusalem; in S. Chrysostom Homil. 1. in ep. ad Philem., S. Austin Serm. de Martyrib., and S. Bernard Serm. 1. de Advent.: The sense of these Fathers is this, in the words of S. Austin: God said not, Go to the East, and seek righteousness; sail to the West that you may re­ceive indulgence. But indulge thy brother, and it shall be indulg'd to thee: you have need to enquire for no other indulgence to thy sins; if thou wilt retire into the Clo­set of thy heart, there thou shalt find it. That is, All our hopes of Indulgence is from GOD through IESVS CHRIST, and is wholly to be obtain'd by faith in Christ, and perseverance in good works, and intire mor­tification of all our sins.

[Page 23]To conclude this particular: Though the gains, which the Church of Rome makes of Indulgences, be a heap almost as great as the abuses themselves, yet the greatest Patrons of this new doctrine could never give any cer­tainty, or reasonable comfort to the Conscience of any per­son that could inquire into it. They never durst determine whether they were Absolutions, or Compensations; whe­ther they onely take off the penances actually impos'd by the Confessor, or potentially, and all that which might have been impos'd; whether all that may be paid in the Court of men; or all that can or will be required by the Laws and severity of God. Neither can they speak ra­tionally to the Great Question, Whether the Treasure of the Church consists of the Satisfactions of Christ onely, or of the Saints? For if of Saints, it will by all men be acknowledged to be a defeisible estate, and being fi­nite and limited, will be spent sooner than the needs of the Church can be served; and if therefore it be neces­sary to adde the merits and satisfaction of Christ, since they are an Ocean of infinity, and can supply more than all our needs, to what purpose is it to adde the little minutes and droppings of the Saints? They cannot tell whether they may be given, if the Receiver do nothing, or give nothing for them: And though this last particular could better be resolv'd by the Court of Rome, than by the Church of Rome, yet all the Doctrines which built up this new Fabrick of Indulgences, were so dangerous to determine, so improbable, so unreasonable, or at best so uncertain and invidious, that according to the ad­vice of the Bishop of Modena, the Council of Trent left all the Doctrines, and all the cases of Conscience quite alone, and slubber'd the whole matter both in the que­stion of Indulgences and Purgatory in general and recom­mendatory [Page 24] terms; affirming, that the power of giving In­dulgence is in the Church, and that the use is whole­some: And that all hard and subtil questions (viz.) con­cerning Purgatory, which (although (if it be at all) it is a fire, yet is the fuel of Indulgences, and maintains them wholly;) all that is suspected to be false, and all that is uncertain; and whatsoever is curious and super­stitious, scandalous, or for filthy lucre, be laid aside. And in the mean time, they tell us not what is, and what is not Superstitious; nor what is scanda­lous, nor what they mean by the general term of In­dulgence; and they establish no Doctrine, neither curi­ous, nor iucurious, nor durst they decree the very founda­tion of this whole matter, The Churches Treasure: Nei­ther durst they meddle with it, but left it as they found it, and continued in the abuses, and proceed in the practise, and set their Doctors, as well as they can, to defend all the new and curious and scandalous questions, and to up­hold the gainful trade. But however it be with them, Doctrine it self is prov'd to be a direct Innovation, in the matter of Christian Religion, and that was it which we have undertaken to demonstrate.

Sect. IV.

THe Doctrine of Purgatory is the Mother of Indulgen­ces, and the fear of that hath introduc'd these: For the world hapned to be abus'd like the Countrey-man in the Fable, who being told he was like to fall into a delirium in his feet, was advis'd for remedy to [Page 25] take the juice of Cotton: He feared a disease that was not, and look'd for a cure as ridiculous. But if the Parent of Indulgences be not from Christ and his Apo­stles; if upon this ground the Primitive Church never built, the Superstructures of Rome must fall; they can be no stronger than their Supporter. Now then in or­der to the proving the Doctrine of Purgatory to be an In­novation,

1. We consider, That the Doctrines upon which it is pretended reasonable, are all dubious, and disputable at the very best. Such are,

• 1. Their distinction of sins Mortal and Venial in their own nature.
• 2. That the taking away the guilt of sins, does not suppose the taking away the obligation to punishment; that is, That when a mans sin is pardon'd, he may be punished without the guilt of that sin, as justly as with it; as if the guilt could be any thing else but an obli­gation to punishment for having sinned: which is a Pro­position, of which no wise man can make sense; but it is certain, that it is expresly against the Word of God, who promises upon our repentance, so to take away our sins,
  Ezek. 18.22.
  that he will remember them no more: And so did Christ to all those to whom he gave pardon; for he did not take our faults and guilt on him any other way, but by curing our evil hearts, and taking away the punish­ment.
  Neque enim ab i [...] quos sanas lenid languor abscedit, sed ili­co quem restit [...]is ex integro [...]o [...] ­valescit, quiae consummatum est quod facis, & perfectum quod largiris. S. Cyprian. de coena Domini: vel potius Amoldus P. Gelasius de vincul. anathem. negat poenam deberi culpae si culpa corr [...]igatur.
  And this was so perfectly believ'd by the Pri­mitive Church, that they always made the penances and satisfaction to be undergone before they gave absolution; and after absolution they never impos'd or oblig'd to punishment, unless it were to sick persons, of whose reco­very [Page 26] they despaired not: of them indeed, in case they had not finished their Canonical punishments, they expected they should perform what was enjoyn'd them formerly. But because all sin is a blot to a mans soul, and a foul stain to his reputation; we demand, in what does this stain consist? In the guilt, or in the punishment? If it be said, that it consists in the punishment; then what does the guilt signifie, when the removing of it does neither remove the stain nor the punishment, which both remain and abide together? But if the stain and the guilt be all one, or always together; then when the guilt is taken away, there can no stain remain; and if so, what need
  Delet gratiae finaelis peccatum veniale in ipsa dissolutione corporis & animae. Ho [...] ab antiquis dictum est. Albert. Mag. in compend. Theolog. verit. l. 3. c. 13.
  is there any more of Purgatory? For since this is pretended to be necessary, onely lest any stain'd or unclean thing should enter into Heaven; if the guilt and the stain be remov'd, what uncleanness can there be left behinde? Indeed Simon Magus (as Epiphanius reports, Haeres. 20.) did teach, That after the death of the body there re­main'd [...], a purgation of souls: But whether the Church of Rome will own him for an authentick Do­ctor, themselves can best tell.
• 3. It relies upon this also, That God requires of us a full exchange of Penances and Satisfactions, which must regularly be paid here or hereafter, even by them who are pardon'd here: which if it were true, we were all undone.
• 4. That the Death of Christ, his Merits and Satis­faction do not procure for us a full remission before we dye, nor (as it may happen) of a long time after. All which being Propositions new and uncertain, invented by the School Divines, and brought ex postfacto, to dress [Page 27] this opinion, and make it to seem reasonable; and be­ing the products of ignorance concerning remission of sins by Grace, of the righteousness of Faith, and the in­finite value of Christs Death, must needs lay a great prejudice of Novelty upon the Doctrine it self, which but by these, cannot be supported. But to put it past suspi­tion and conjectures:

Roffensis and Polydore Virgil affirm,Art. 18. con [...]. Luther. Invent. rerum, l. 8. c. 1. That whoso search­eth the Writings of the Greek Fathers, shall finde that none, or very rarely any one of them, ever makes men­tion of Purgatory; and that the Latine Fathers did not all believe it, but by degrees came to entertain opi­nions of it: But for the Catholick Church, it was but lately known to her.

But before we say any more in this Question, we are to premonish, That there are Two great causes of their mistaken pretensions in this Article from Antiquity.

The first is, That the Ancient Churches in their Offices, and the Fathers in their Writings, did teach and practice respectively, prayer for the Dead. Now because the Church of Rome does so too, and more than so, re­lates her prayers to the Doctrine of Purgatory, and for the souls there detain'd, her Doctors vainly suppose, that when ever the H. Fathers speak of prayer for the dead, that they conclude for Purgatory; which vain conjecture is as false as it is unreasonable: For it is true, the Fathers did pray for the dead; but how? That God would shew them mercy, and hasten the resurrection, and give a blessed sentence in the great day. But then it is also to be remembred, that they made prayers, and of­fered for those, who by the confession of all sides, never were in Purgatory; euen for the Patriarchs and Prophets, for the Apostles and Evangelists, for Martyrs and Con­fessors, [Page 28] and especially for the blessed Virgin Mary: So we finde it in Haeres. 75. Epiphanius, Cateches. mys [...]aeg. 5. S. Cyril, and in the Canon of the Greeks, and so it is acknowledged by their own De ritibus lib. 2. c. 35. Durantus; and in their own Mass-book anciently they prayed for the soul of S. Leo: Of which because by their latter doctrines they grew asham'd, they have chang'd the prayer for him, into a prayer to God by the intercession of S. Leo, in behalf of themselves; so by their new doctrine, making him an Intercessor for us, Innocent. P. de Celebrat. Mis­sar. cap. cum Martha. who by their old do­ctrine was suppos'd to need our prayers to intercede for him; of which Pope Innocent being asked a reason, makes a most pitiful excuse.

Upon what accounts the Fathers did pray for the Saints departed, and indeed generally for all, it is not now seasonable to discourse; but to say this onely, that such general prayers for the dead as those above reckon'd, the Church of England did never con­demn by any express Article,Apologia confessionis August­nae expressò approbat clausulam il­laem [...], Deus det ei pacatam quietem, & beatam aed vitam resur­rectionem. but left it in the middle, and by her practice de­clares her faith of the Resurrection of the dead, and her interest in the commu­nion of Saints, and that the Saints de­parted are a portion of the Catholick Church, parts and members of the Body of Christ; but expresly condemns the Doctrine of Purgatory, and consequently all prayers for the dead relating to it: And how vainly the Church of Rome from prayer for the dead, infers the belief of Pur­gatory, every man may satisfie himself, by seeing the Wri­tings of the Fathers, where they cannot meet with one Collect or Clause praying for the delivery of souls out of that imaginary place. Which thing is so certain, that in the very Roman Offices, we mean, the Vigils said for the dead, in which are Psalms and Lessons taken from the [Page 29] Scripture, speaking of the miseries of this World, Repen­tance and Reconciliation with God, the bliss after this life of them that dye in Christ, and the resurrection of the Dead; and in the Anthemes, Versicles, and Responses, there are prayers made, recommending to God the soul of the newly defunct, praying, he may be freed from Hell, and eternal death, that in the day of Iudgement he be not judg­ed and condemned according to his sins, but that he may ap­pear among the Elect in the glory of the Resurrection; but not one word of Purgatory, or its pains.

The other cause of their mistake is, That the Fathers often speak of a fire of Purgation after this life; but such a one that is not to be kindled until the day of judgement, and it is such a fire that destroyes the Doctrine of the in­termedial Purgatory. We suppose that Origen was the first that spoke plainly of it; and S. Ambrose follows him in the opinion (for it was no more;) so does S. Basil, S. Hilary, S. Hierome, and Lacta [...]tius, as their words plain­ly prove, as they are cited by Sixtus Senensis, affirming, that all men, Christ onely excepted, shall be burned with the fire of the worlds conflagration at the day of Iudgement:Biblloth. S. l. 5. Annot. clxxi. Vide etiam Bel­lar. l 2. de Pur­gat. c. 1. sect. Ambros. even the B. Virgin her self is to pass thorow this fire. There was also another Doctrine very generally receiv'd by the Fathers, which greatly destroyes the Roman Purgatory: Sixtus Senensis sayes, and he sayes very true, that Iustin Martyr, Tertullian, Victorinus Martyr, Pruden­tius, S. Chrysostom, Arethas, Euthymius, and Lib 6. Bibl. Sanct. annot. 345. Bernardum excusandum ar­bitrer ob ingen­tem numerum illustrium Ecclesiae Patrum, qui ante ipsum huic dogmati Authoritatem suo testimonio visi sunt prae­buisse praeter citatos; enumerat, S. Iacobum Apostolum, Irenaeum, Clementem Romanum, Augu­stinum, Theodoretum, Oecumenium, Theophylactum, & Iohannem 22. Pontis. Rom. quam sententiam non modo docuit, & declaravit, sed ab omnibus teneri mandavit, ut ait Adrianus P. in 4 lib. sent. in fine quaest. de sacram. confirmationis. S. Bernard, did all affirm, that before the day of Judgement the [Page 30] souls of men are kept in secret receptacles, reserved unto the sentence of the great day, and that before then, no man receives according to his works done in this life. We do not interpose in this opinion to say that it is true or false, probable or improbable; for these Fathers intended it not as a matter of faith, or necessary belief, so far as we finde. But we observe from hence, that if their opinion be true, then the Doctrine of Purgatory is false. If it be not true, yet the Roman Doctrine of Purgatory, which is in­consistent with this so generally receiv'd opinion of the Fathers, is at least new, no Catholick Doctrine, not be­liev'd in the Primitive Church; and therefore the Ro­man Writers are much troubled to excuse the Fathers in this Article, and to reconcile them to some seeming concord with their new Doctrine.

But besides these things, it is certain, that the Do­ctrine of Purgatory, before the day of Judgment in S. Austins time, was not the Doctrine of the Church;Enchirid. c. 69. lib. 21. de civit. Dei cap. 26. it was not the Catholick Doctrine; for himself did doubt of it: [Whether it be so or not, it may be enquir'd, and possibly it may be found so, and possibly it may never:] so S. Austin. In his time therefore it was no Doctrine of the Church, and it continued much longer in uncertain­ty; for in the time of Otho Frisingensis, Lib. 8. Chron. [...]ap. 26. who liv'd in the year 1146. it was gotten no further than to to a Quidam asserunt: [some do affirm, that there is a place of Purga­tory after death.] And although it is not to be denied, but that many of the ancient Doctors, had strange opi­nions concerning Purgations, and Fires, and Interme­dial states, and common receptacles, and liberations of Souls and Spirits after this life; yet we can truly affirm it, and can never be convinced to erre in this affirmation, that there is not any one of the Ancients within five hun­dred [Page 31] years, whose opinion in this Article throughout, the Church of Rome at this day follows.

But the people of the Roman Communion have been principally led into a belief of Purgatory by their fear; and by their credulity; they have been softned and en­ticed into this belief by perpetual tales and legends, by which they love to be abus'd. To this purpose, their Priests and Friers have made great use of the apparition of S. Hierom after death to Eusebius, commanding him to lay his sack upon the corps of three dead men, that they arising from death, might confess Purgatory, which formerly they had denied. The story is written in an Epistle imputed to S. Cyril; but the ill luck of it was, that S. Hierom out-liv'd S. Cyril, and wrote his life, and so confuted that story; but all is one for that, they be­lieve it never the less: But there are enough to help it out; and if they be not firmly true, Haec descripsi­mus, ut tamen in iis nulla ve­luti Canonica constituatur au­thoritas. l. de 8. qu [...]st. yet if they be firmly believ'd, all is well enough. In the Speculum ex­emplorum it is said, That a certain Priest in an extasie saw the soul of Constantinus Turritanus in the eves of his house tormented with frosts and cold rains, and after­wards climbing up to heaven upon a shining pillar.Dulcitii c. l. Dist. 3. exem. 3. Exempl. 60. And a certain Monk saw some souls roasted upon spits like Pigs, and some Devils basting them with sealding lard; but a while after they were carried to a cool place, and so prov'd Purgatory.Histor. Lomb. But Bishop Theobald standing up­on a piece of ice to cool his feet, was nearer Purgatory than he was aware, and was convinc'd of it, when he heard a poor soul telling him, that under that ice he was tormented: and that he should be delivered, if for thir­ty days continual, he would say for him thirty Masses: and some such thing was seen by Conrade and Vdalrie in a Pool of water:Legend 185. For the place of Purgatory was not [Page 32] yet resolv'd on, till S. Patrick had the key of it delivered to him; which when one Nicholas borrowed of him, he saw as strange and true things there, as ever Virgil dream'd of in his Purgatory, or Cicero in his dream of Scipio, or Plato in his Gorgias, or Phoedo, who indeed are the surest Authors to prove Purgatory. But be­cause to preach false stories was forbidden by the Coun­cil of Trent, there are yet remaining more certain argu­ments, even revelations made by Angels, and the testi­mony of S. Odilio himself, who heard the Devil com­plain (and he had great reason surely) that the souls of dead men were daily snatch'd out of his hands, by the Alms and Prayers of the living; and the sister of S. Da­mianus being too much pleas'd with hearing of a Piper, told her brother, that she was to be tormented for fifteen days in Purgatory.

We do not think that the Wise men in the Church of Rome believe these Narratives; for if they did, they were not wise: But this we know, that by such stories, the people were brought into a belief of it; and having served their turn of them, the Master-builders used them as false archies and centries, taking them away when the parts of the building were made firm and stable by Authority. But even the better sort of them do believe, or else they do worse, for they urge and cite the Dialogues of S. Gregory, the Oration of S. Iohn Damascen de Defunctis, the Sermons of S. Austin upon the feast of the Commemoration of All-souls (which nevertheless was instituted after S. Austins death) and divers other citations, which the Greeks in their Apo­logy call [...], The Holds and the Castles, the corruptions and insinuations of Heretical persons. But in this they are the less to be blam'd, [Page 33] because, better arguments then they have, no men are tied to make use of.

But against this way of proceeding, we think fit to admonish the people of our charges,Deut. 18.11. &c. Isa. 8. 19. that, besides that the Scriptures expresly forbid us to enquire of the dead for truth; the Holy Doctors of the Church, particu­larly, Tertullian, S. Athanasius, S. Chrysostome, Isidore, Vide Maldona [...]. in 16 ca. S. Luc. and Theophylact, deny that the souls of the dead ever do appear; and bring many reasons to prove, that it is un­fitting they should; saying, if they did, it would be the cause of many errors, and the Devils under that pre­tence, might easily abuse the world with notices and re­velations of their own: And because Christ would have us content with Moses and the Prophets, and especially to hear that Prophet, whom the Lord our God hath raised up amongst us, our blessed Jesus, who never taught any such Doctrine to his Church.

But because we are now representing the Novelty of this Doctrine, and proving, that anciently it was not the Doctrine of the Church, nor at all esteemed a matter of Faith, whether there was or was not any such place or state, we adde this, That the Greek Church did alwaies dissent from the Latines in this particular, since they had forg'd this new Doctrine in the Laboratories of Rome, and in the Council of Basil, publish'd an Apologie di­rectly disapproving the Roman Doctrine of Purgatory. How afterwards they were press'd in the Councel of Flo­rence by Pope Eugenius, and by their necessity; how unwil­lingly they consented, how ambiguously they answered, how they protested against having that half consent put into the Instrument of Union; how they were yet con­strain'd to it by their Chiefs, being obnoxious to the Pope; how a while after they dissolv'd that Union, and to this [Page 34] day refuse to own this Doctrine, are things so notoriously known, that they need no further declaration.

Ad Demetrian. sect. 16.We adde this onely, to make the conviction more manifest: We have thought fit to annex some few, but very clear testimonies of Antiquity, expresly destroying the new Doctrine of Purgatory. S. Cyprian saith, Quando istinc excessum fuerit, nullus jam locus poenitentiae est, nul­lus satisfactionis effectus: [When we are gone from hence, there is no place left for repentance, and no effect of satis­faction.] S Dionysius calls the extremity of death,Eccles. hier. c. 7. [...], The end of all our agonies, and affirms, That the Holy men of God rest in joy, and in never failing hopes, and are come to the end of their holy combates. S. Iustin Martyr affirms,Quaest. & re­spons. ad orthed. qu. 75 Iustino imputa [...]. That when the soul is departed from the body [...], presently there is a separation made of the just and unjust: The unjust are by Angels born into places which they have deserved; but the souls of the just into Paradice, where they have the conversation of Angels and Archangels. S. Ambrose De bono mor­tis. cap. 4. saith, That Death is a haven of rest, and makes not our condition worse, but according as it findes every man, so it reserves him to the judgement that is to come. The same is affirm'd by In Psal. 2. S. Hilary, Homil. 22. S. Macarius, and divers others; they speak but of two states after death, of the just and the unjust: These are plac'd in horrible Regions reserv'd to the judgement of the great day; the other have their souls carried by Quires of Angels into places of rest. S. Gregory Nazian­zen Orat. 5 in Plagam gran li­nis & Orat. 42 in Pascha. de Eccles. dogma [...] c. 79. expresly affirms, that after this life there is no pur­gation: For after Christs ascension into heaven, the souls of all Saints are with Christ, saith Gennadius, and going from the body, they go to Christ, expecting the resurrection of their body, with it to pass into the perfection of perpe­tual bliss; and this he delivers as the Doctrine of the [Page 35] Catholick Church: [In what place soever a man is taken at his death, of light or darkness, of wickedness or ver­tue, In Eccless. c. 11. [...], in the same Order, and in the same degree; either in light with the just, and with Christ the great King; or in darkness with the unjust, and with the Prince of darkness,] said Olimpiodorus. And lastly, we recite the words of S. Leo, one of the Popes of Rome, Epist. 59. speaking of the Penitents who had not perform'd all their penances [But if any one of them for whom we pray unto the Lord, being interrupted by any obstacles, falls from the gift of the present Indulgence (viz. of Ecclesiastical Ab­solution) and before he arrive at the appointed remedies (that is, before he hath perform'd his penances or satisfa­ctions) ends his temporal life, that which remaining in the body he hath not receiv'd, when he is devested of his body, he cannot obtain.] He knew not of the new devices of paying in Purgatory, what they paid not here; and of being clean­sed there, who were not clean here: And how these words, or of any the precedent, are reconcileable with the Roman Doctrines of Purgatory, hath not yet entred into our ima­gination.

To conclude this particular, We complain greatly, that this Doctrine which in all the parts of it is uncertain, and in the late additions to it in Rome is certainly false, is yet with all the faults of it pass'd into an Article of Faith by the Council of Trent. But besides what hath been said, it will be more than sufficient to oppose against it these clearest words of Scripture,Rev. 14.13. Blessed are the dead which dye in the Lord, from henceforth, even so saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours. If all the dead that dye in Christ be at rest, and are in no more af­fliction or labours, then the Doctrine of the horrible pains of Purgatory, is as false as it is uncomfortable: [Page 36] To these words we adde the saying of Christ,Iohn 5. 24. and we relie upon it [He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath eternal life, and cometh not into judgement, but passeth from death unto life] If so, then not into the judgement of Purgatory: If the servant of Christ passeth from death to life, then not from death to the ter­minable pains of a part of Hell. They that have eternal life, suffer no intermedial punishment, judgement or con­demnation after death; for death and life are the whole progression, according to the Doctrine of Christ, and Him we chuse to follow.

Sect. V.

THe Doctrine of Transubstantiation is so far from be­ing Primitive and Apostolick, that we know the ve­ry time it began to be own'd publiquely for an opi­nion, and the very Council in which it was said to be pass'd into a publick Doctrine, and by what arts it was promoted, and by what persons it was introduc'd.

For all the world knows, that by their own parties, by In 4 lib. sent. d. 11. 4. 3. Scotus, Ibid. q. 6. Ocham, Lect. 40. in can. missae. Biel, Fisher Bishop of Cap. 1. contr. captiv. Babyl. Rochester, and divers others, whom De Euchar. l. 3. cap. 23. sect. secundo dicit. Bellarmine calls most learned and most acute men, it was declared, that the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is not express'd in the Canon of the Bible; that in the Scriptures there is no place so express (as without the Churches declaration) to compel us to admit of Transubstantiation, and therefore at least, it is to be suspected of novelty. But further, we know it was but a disputable question in the ninth and tenth ages after Christ; that it was not pretended to be an Article of Faith, till the Lateran Council in the time of Pope [Page 37] Innocent the Third, MCC years and more after Christ; that since that pretended Venere tum quidem muliae in consultatio­nem, nec decerni tamem quicquam apertè potuit, Platina in vitae Innocen. III. determination, divers of the chiefest Teachers of their own side have been no more sa­tisfied of the ground of it, than they were before, but still have publickly affirm'd, that the Article is not ex­press'd in Scripture, particularly, Iohannes de Basselis, Cardinal Apud Suaer. Tom. 3. disp. 46. sect. 3. Cajetan, and Melchior Loc. com. l. 3. c. 3. sund. 2. Canus, besides those above reckon'd: And therefore, if it was not express'd in Scripture, it will be too clear, that they made their Articles of their own heads, for they could not declare it to be there, if it was not; and if it was there but obscurely, then it ought to be taught accordingly; and at most, it could be but a probable doctrine, and not cer­tain as an Article of Faith. But that we may put it past argument and probability, it is certain, that as the Do­ctrine was not taught in Scripture expresly: so it was not at all taught as a Catholick Doctrine, or an Article of the Faith by the primitive ages of the Church.

Now for this, we need no proof but the confession and acknowledgement of the greatest Doctors of the Church of Rome. Scotus says, that before the Lateran Council, Transubstantiation was not an Article of faith, L. 3. de E [...] cap. 23. sect. [...]num tamen. Sam. [...] c [...]0. as Bellarmine confesses; and Henriquez affirms, that Sco­tus says, it was not ancient, insomuch that Bellarmine accuses him of ignorance, saying, he talk'd at that rate, because he had not read the Roman Council under Pope Gregory VII, nor that consent of Fathers which (to so little purpose) he had heap'd together.Discars. modest. p. 13. Rem transubstan­tiationis Patres ne attigisse quidem, said some of the Eng­lish Jesuits in Prison: The Fathers have not so much as touch'd or medled with the matter of Transubstantiati­on; and in Peter Lombard's time it was so far from being an Article of Faith, or a Catholick Doctrine, that they did [Page 38] not know whether it were true or no: And after he had col­lected the sentences of the Fathers in that Article, he con­fess'd, He could not tell whether there was any substantial change or no. Lib. 4.sent. dist. [...]1. lit. a. His words are these, [If it be inquir'd what kinde of conversion it is, whether it be formal or substan­tial, or of another kinde? I am not able to define it: Onely I know that it is not formal, because the same acci­dents remain, the same colour and taste. To some it seems to be substantial, saying that so the substance is chang'd into the substance, that it is done essentially. To which the former authorities seem to consent. But to this sentence others oppose these things, If the substance of bread and wine be substantially converted into the body and blood of Christ, then every day some substance is made the body or blood of Christ, which before was not the body; and to day some­thing is Christs body, which yesterday was not; and every day Christs body is increased, and is made of such matter of which it was not made in the conception:] These are his words, which we have remark'd, not onely for the arguments sake (though it be unanswerable) but to give a plain demonstration that in his time this Doctrine was new, not the Doctrine of the Church: And this was writ­ten but about fifty A.D. MCLX. years before it was said to be de­creed in the Lateran A. D. MCCXV. Council, and therefore it made haste, in so short time to pass from a disputable opinion, to an Article of faith. But even after the Council, A. D. MCCLXX. secund. Buth [...]l. sed secundum Volaterranum MCCCxxxv. In 4 lib. sent. dist. 11. q. 1. sect. propter tertium. Durandus, as good a Catholick, and as famous a Do­ctor as any was in the Church of Rome publickly main­tain'd, that even after consecration, the very matter of bread remain'd; and although he says, that by reason of the Authority of the Church, it is not to be held, yet it is not onely possible it should be so, but it implies no contradiction that it should be Christs body, and yet the [Page 39] matter of bread remain; and if this might be admitted, it would salve many difficulties, which arise fom say­ing that the substance of bread does not remain. But here his Reason was overcome by Authority, and he durst not affirm that of which alone he was able to give (as he thought) a reasonable account. But by this it appears, that the opinion was but then in the forge, and by all their understanding they could never accord it, but still the questions were uncertain, according to that old Distich,

And the opinion was not determin'd in the Lateran, as it is now held at Rome; but it is also plain, that it is a stranger to Antiquity. De haeres lib. 8. verb. Indul­gentia. De Transubstantiatione panis in cor­pus Christi rara est in antiquis scriptoribus mentio, said Alphonsus à Castro. There is seldome mention made in the ancient Writers of transubstantiating the Bread into Christs Body. We know the modesty and interest of the man; he would not have said it had been seldom, if he could have found it in any reasonable degree war­ranted; he might have said and justified it, There was no mention at all of this Article in the primitive Church: and that it was a meer stranger to Antiquity, will not be deny'd by any sober person, who considers, That it was with so much uneasiness entertained, even in the corruptest and most degenerous times, and argued and unsettled almost 1300 years after Christ.

And that it was so,Cap. Ego Be­rengarius de Consecrat, dist. 2. will but too evidently appear by that stating and resolution of this question which we finde in the Canon Law. For Berengarius was by P. Nico­laus [Page 40] commanded to recant his error in these words, and to affirm, Verum corpus & sanguinem Domini nostri Iesu Christi sensualiter, non solùm in sacramento, sed in ve­ritate manibus sacerdotum tractari, frangi, & fidelium dentibus atteri. That the true body and bloud of our Lord Jesus Christ sensually, not onely in sacrament, but in truth is handled by the Priests hands, and broken and grinded by the teeth of the faithful. Now although this was publickly read at Rome before an hundred and fourteen Bishops, and by the Pope sent up and down the Churches of Italy, France, and Germany, yet at this day it is renounc'd by the Church of Rome, and unless it be well expounded (says the Gloss) will lead into a heresie, greater than what Berengarius was commanded to re­nounce; and no interpretation can make it tolerable, but such an one, as is in another place of the Canon Law, statuimus, i.e. abrogamus; nothing but a plain denying it in the sense of Pope Nicolas. But however this may be, it is plain they understood it not, as it is now decreed. But as it happened to the Pelagians in the beginning of their heresie, they spake rudely, ignorantly, and easily to be reprov'd; but being asham'd and disputed into a more sober understanding of their hypothesis, spake more warily, but yet differently from what they said at first: so it was and is in this question; at first they understood it not; it was too unreasonable in any tolerable sense, to make any thing of it; but experience and necessity hath brought it to what it is.

But that this Doctrine was not the Doctrine of the first and best ages of the Church, these following testimonies do make evident. The words of Tertullian are these.Advers. Marci­ [...]n. l. 4. c. 40. The bread being taken and distributed to his Disciples, Christ made it his body, saying, This is my body, that is, the figure of my body.

[Page 41]The same is affirmed by Iustin Martyr. Contr. Tryph. Judae. The bread of the Eucharist was a figure which Christ the Lord com­manded to do in remembrance of his passion. In dialog. con. Marcion. col­lectis ex Max­imo, tempore Commodi & Severi Impp. In Matth. 13. Origen calls the bread and the chalice, the images of the body and blood of Christ: and again, That bread which is sancti­fied by the word of God, so far as belongs to the matter (or substance) of it goes into the belly, and is cast away in the secession or separation; which to affirm of the natural or glorified body of Christ, were greatly blasphemous: and therefore the body of Christ which the Communi­cants receive, is not the body in a natural sense, but in a spiritual, which is not capable of any such accident, as the elements are.

Eusebius says, that Christ gave to his Disciples the Symbols of Divine Oeconomy, commanding the image and type of his own body to be made: Demonst. E­vangel. lib. 1. cap. 1. * & cap. ult. and that the Apostle received a command according to the constitution of the new Testa­ment, to make a memory of this sacrifice upon the Table by the symbols of his body and healthful blood.

8. Macarius says,Homil. 27. that in the Church is offered bread and wine, the antitype of his flesh and of his blood, and they that partake of the bread that appears, do spiritually eat the flesh of Christ. By which words the sense of the a­bove cited Fathers is explicated. For when they affirm, that in this Sacrament is offered the figure, the image, the antitype of Christs body and blood, although they speak perfectly against Transubstantiation, yet they do not deny the real and spiritual presence of Christs body and blood; which we all believe as certainly, as that it is not transubstantiated or present in a natural and carnal manner.

The same thing is also fully explicated by the good S. Ephrem, De sacris An­tioch. legibus apud Ph [...]tium, l. 1. c. [...]29. The body of Christ received by the faithful, de­parts [Page 42] parts not from his sensible substance, and is undivided from a spiritual grace. For even baptism being wholly made spiritual, and being that which is the same, and proper, of the sensible substance, I mean, of water, saves, and that which is born, doth not perish.

Orat. 2. in Pasc.S. Gregory Nazianzen spake so expresly in this Que­stion, as if he had undertaken on purpose to confute the Article of Trent. Now we shall be partakers of the Paschal supper, but still in figure, though more clear than in the old Law. For the legal Passover (I will not be afraid to speak it) was a more obscure figure of a figure.

Epist. ad Caes. cont. haeres. Apollinarii cir. por Dama­scen. & per collect. senten. Pp. contra Se­verianos. edit. per Turtia­num.S. Chrysostom affirms dogmatically, that before the bread is sanctified, we name it bread, but the Divine grace sanctifying it by the means of the Priest, it is freed from the name of bread, but it is esteemed worthy to be called the Lords body, although the nature of bread remains in it. And again: As thou eatest the body of the Lord: so they (the faithful in the old Testament) did eat Manna;Homil. 23. in 1. Cor. as thou drinkest blood, so they the water of the rock. For though the things which are made be sensible, yet they are given spiritually, not according to the consequence of Na­ture, but according to the Grace of a gift, and with the bo­dy they also nourish the soul, leading unto faith.

To these very many more might be added; but in­stead of them, the words of S. Austin may suffice, as be­ing an evident conviction what was the doctrine of the primitive Church in this question. [...] Psalm 98. This great Doctor brings in Christ thus speaking as to his Disciples [You are not to eat this body which you see, or to drink that blood which my crucifiers shall pour forth. I have com­mended to you a sacrament, which being spiritually un­derstood shall quicken you: Cont. Adiman­tium cap. 12. And again; Christ] brought them to a Banquet, in which he commended to his Disciples [Page 43] the figure of his body and blood.] For he did not doubt to say, This is my body, when he gave the sign of his body] and,Lib. 10. cont. Faust. Ma [...]ch. That which by all men is called a sacrifice, is the sign of the true sacrifice, in which the flesh of Christ after his assum­ption is celebrated by the sacrament of remembrances.

But in this particular the Canon law it self,De consecrat. dist. 2. cap; Qui mandu­cant, & cap. primae quidem, & cap. Non hoc corpus. & cap. V [...] quid parat. and the Master of the Sentences are the best witnesses; in both which collections there are divers testimonies brought, especially from S. Ambrose and S. Austin, which whosoe­ver can reconcile with the Doctrine of Transubstantia­tion, may easily put the Hyaena and a Dog, a Pigeon and a Kite into couples,Sente [...]s. lib. 4. dist. 11. and make Fire and Water enter into Natural and Eternal Friendships.

Theodoret and P. Gelasius speak more emphatically,Dialog. 1. c. [...]. even to the nature of things, and the very Philosophy of this Question. [Christ honour'd the symbols and the signs (saith Theodoret) which are seen with the title of his body and bloud, not changing the nature, but to nature adding grace. Dialog. 2. c. 24. For neither do the mystical signs recede from their na­ture; for they abide in their proper substance, figure and form, and may be seen and touch'd, &c. And for a te­stimony that shall be esteem'd infallible, we alledge the words of Pope Gelasius, De duabus na­turis contra [...]utych. & Nestor. [Truly the Sacraments of the body and bloud of Christ, which we receive, are a Divine thing; for that by them we are made partakers of the Di­vine nature; and yet it ceases not to be the substance or nature of bread and wine. And truly an image and simi­litude of the body and bloud of Christ are celebrated in the action of the mysteries. Videatur Pi­cherellutin dissert. de Mis­sa & expositio­ne verborum institutionis coena Domini

Now from these premises we are not desirous to in­fer any odious consequences in reproof of the Roman Church, but we think it our duty to give our own peo­ple caution and admonition; 1. That they be not ab­us'd [Page 44] by the rhetorical words and high expressions alledged out of the Fathers, calling the Sacrament, The body or the flesh of Christ. For we all believe it is so, and re­joyce in it. But the question is, after what manner it is so? whether after the manner of the flesh, or after the manner of spiritual grace, and sacramental consequence? We with the H. Scriptures and the primitive Fathers, affirm the later. The Church of Rome against the words of Scripture, and the explication of Christ Iohn 6 63., and the Doctrine of the primitive Church affirm the former. 2. That they be careful not to admit such Doctrines un­der a pretence of being Antient; since, although the Ro­man error hath been too long admitted, and is antient in respect of our days, yet it is an innovation in Christianity, and brought in by ignorance, power and superstition, very many ages after Christ. 3. We exhort them that they remember the words of Christ, when he explicates the Doctrine of giving us his flesh for meat, and his blood for drink, Vbi supra. that he tells us, The flesh profiteth nothing; but the words which he speaks are spirit and they are life.

4. That if those antient and primitive Doctors above cited, say true, and that the symbols still remain the same in their natural substance and properties, even after they are blessed, and when they are receiv'd, and that Christs body and blood are onely present to faith and to the spirit, that then whoever tempts them to give Divine honour to these symbols or elements (as the Church of Rome does) tempts them to give to a creature the due and incommunicable propriety of God; and that then, this evil passes further than an error in the understand­ing, for it carries them to a dangerous practise, which cannot reasonably be excus'd from the crime of Idolatry. To conclude,

[Page 45]This matter of it self is an errour so prodigiously great and dangerous, that we need not tell of the horrid and blasphemous questions which are sometimes handled by them concerning this Divine Mystery. As, if a Priest going by a Bakers Shop, and saying with intention, Hoc est corpus meum, whether all the Bakers bread be turned into the body of Christ? Whether a Church Mouse does eat her Maker? Whether a man by eating the conse­crated symbols does break his fast? For if it be not bread and wine, he does not: and if it be Christs body and blood naturally and properly, it is not bread and wine. Whether it may be said, the Priest is in some sense the Creator of God himself? Whether his power be greater than the power of Angels and Archangels? For that it is so, is expresly affirmed by Cassenaeus. Gloria mundi. 4. num. 6. Whe­ther (as a Bohemian Priest said) that a Priest before he say his first Mass, be the Son of God, but afterward he is the Father of God and the Creator of his body? But against this blasphemy a book was written by Iohn Huss, about the time of the Council of Constance. But these things are too bad, and therefore we love not to rake in so filthy Chanells, but give onely a generall warning to all our Charges, to take heed of such persons, who from the proper consequences of their Articles, grow too bold and extravagant; and, of such doctrines, from whence these and many other evil Propositions [...] frequently do issue. As the Tree is, such must be the Fruit. But we hope it may be sufficient, * to say, That 1 what the Church of Rome teaches of Transubstantiation, is absolutely impossible, and implies contradictions very many, to the belief of which no faith can oblige us, and no reason can endure. For Christs body being in heaven, glorious, spiritual and impassible, cannot be broken. And since [Page 46] by the Roman doctrine nothing is broken, but that which cannot be broken, that is, the colour, the taste, and other accidents of the elements; yet if they could be broken, since the accidents of bread and wine are not the substance of Christs body and blood, it is certain that on the Altar Christs body, naturally and properly cannot be broken. * And since they say that every 2 consecrated Wafer is Christs whole body, and yet this Wafer is not that Wafer, therefore either this or that is not Christs body, or else Christ hath two bodies; for 3 there are two Wafers. * But when Christ instituted the Sacrament, and said, This is my body which is broken: because at that time Christs body was not broken natu­rally and properly, the very words of institution do force us to understand the Sacrament in a sense not natural but 4 spiritual, that is, truly sacramental. * And all this is be­sides the plain demonstrations of sense, which tells us it is bread and it is wine naturally as much after, as before 5 consecration. * And after all, the natural sense is such as our blessed Saviour reprov'd in the men of Capernaum, and called them to a spiritual understanding; the na­tural sense being not onely unreasonable and impossible, but also to no purpose of the spirit, or any ways perfe­ctive of the soul; as hath been clearly demonstrated by many learned men against the fond hypothesis of the Church of Rome in this Article.

Sect. VI.

OUr next instance of the novelty of the Roman Religi­on in their Articles of division from us, is that of the half Communion. For they deprive the people of the chalice, and dismember the institution of Christ, and praevaricate his express law in this particular, and recede from the practise of the Apostles; and though they confess it was the practise of the primitive Church, yet they lay it aside, and curse all them that say they do amiss in it; that is, they curse them who follow Christ, and his Apostles, and his Church, while themselves deny to follow them.

Now for this we need no other testimony but their own words in the Council of Constance. Concil. Con­stant. Sess. 13. [Whereas in certain parts of the World some temerariously presume to affirm, that the Christian people ought to receive the Sa­crament of the Eucharist under both kinds of bread and wine, and do every where communicate the Laity not onely in bread but in wine also; — Hence it is, that the Council decrees and defines against this error, that al­though Christ instituted after supper, and administred this venerable Sacrament under both kinds of bread and wine, yet this notwithstanding — And although in the pri­mitive Church this Sacrament was receiv'd of the faithful under both kinds] Here is the acknowledgement, both of Christs institution in both kinds, and Christs ministring it in both kinds, and the practise of the Primitive Church to give it in both kinds; yet the conclusion from these premises is [We command under the pain of Excommuni­cation, that no Priest communicate the people under both [Page 48] kinds of bread and wine.] The opposition is plain: Christs Testament ordains it: The Church of Rome forbids it: It was the primitive custom to obey Christ in this: a later custom is by the Church of Rome introduc'd to the con­trary. To say that the first practise and institution is necessary to be followed, is called Heretical: to refuse the later subintroduc'd custom incurres the sentence of Excommunication: and this they have pass'd not onely into a Law, but into an Article of Faith; and if this be not teaching for doctrines the commandments of men, and worshipping God in vain with mens traditions; then there is, and there never was, and there can be no such thing in the World.

So that now the question is not, whether this doctrine and practise be an INNOVATION, but whether it be not better it should it so? Whether it be not better to drink new wine than old? Whether it be not better to obey man than Christ, who is God blessed for ever? Whe­ther a late custom be not to be preferr'd before the an­tient? a custom dissonant from the institution of Christ, before that which is wholly consonant to what Christ did and taught? This is such a bold affirmative of the Church of Rome, that nothing can suffice to rescue us from an amazement in the consideration of it: espe­cially since, although the Institution it self, being the onely warranty and authority for what we do, is of it self our rule and precept; (according to that of the Lawyer,Accursius prae­s [...]t. superin­stitut. Iustin. Matth. 26.27. Institutiones sunt praeceptiones quibus instituun­tur & docentur homines) yet besides this, Christ added preceptive words, Drink ye all of this: he spake it to all that receiv'd, who then also represented all them, who for ever after were to remember Christs death.

But concerning the doctrine of Antiquity in this point, [Page 49] although the Council of Constance confess the Question, yet since that time they have taken on them a new confi­dence, and affirm, that the half Communion was always more or less the practice of the most Ancient times. We therefore think it fit to produce testimonies concurrent with the saying of the Council of Constance, such as are irrefragable, and of persons beyond exception. Cas­sander affirms,Consult sec. 22. That in the Latine Church for above a thou­sand years, the body of Christ, and the blood of Christ were separately given, the body apart, and the blood apart after the consecration of the mysteries. Comment. in 6 [...] Ioh. lect. 7. So Aquinas also affirms, [According to the ancient custom of the Church, all men as they communicated in the body, so they commu­nicated in the blood; which also to this day is kept in some Churches.] And therefore Paschasius Ratbertus resolves it dogmatically,De Corp. & fang. Domini, cap. 19. That neither the flesh without the blood, nor the blood without the flesh is rightly communicated, be­cause the Apostles all of them did drink of the chalice. And Salmeron being forc'd by the evidence of the thing, ingenuously and openly confesses,Tract. 35. That it was a general custom to communicate the Laity under both kindes.

It was so, and it was more: There was anciently a Law for it,Apud Gratian. de c [...]nsecr. dist. 2. cap. Compe­rimus. Aut integra Sacramenta percipiant, aut ab in­tegris arceantur, said Pope Gelasius. Either all or none, let them receive in both kindes, or in neither; and he gives this reason, Quia divisio unius & ejusdem mysterii sinc grandi sacrilegio non potest pervenire. The mystery is but one and the same, and therefore it cannot be di­vided without great Sacriledge. The reason concludes as much of the Receiver as the Consecrator, and speaks of all indefinitely.

Thus it is acknowledged to have been in the Latine Church, and thus we see it ought to have been: And [Page 50] for the Greek Church there is no question;Vide Ochagau. de Sacram. tract. 2. de Eu­char. qu. 18. De consecrat. dist. 2. cap. si non sunt. & cap. quia pas­sus. & cap. prima quidem. & cap. Tunc [...]is & cap. ac­cesserunt. for even to this day they communicate the people in the chalice. But this case is so plain, and there are such clear testi­monies out of the Fathers recorded in their own Canon Law, that nothing can obscure it; but to use too many words about it. We therefore do exhort our people to take care that they suffer not themselves to be robb'd of their portion of Christ, as he is pleas'd sacramental­ly and graciously to communicate himself unto us.

SECT. VII.

AS the Church of Rome does great injury to Chri­stendom in taking from the people what Christ gave them in the matter of the Sacrament; so she also deprives them of very much of the benefit which they might receive by their holy Prayers, if they were suffer­ed to pray in publick in a Language they understand. But that's denied to the common people, to their very great prejudice and injury.

Concerning which, although it is as possible to re­concile Adultery with the seventh Commandment, as Service in a Language not understood to the fourteenth Chapter of the first Epistle to the Corinthians; and that therefore if we can suppose that the Apostolical age did follow the Apostolical rule, it must be concluded, that the practise of the Church of Rome is contrary to the practise of the Primitive Church: Yet besides this, we have thought fit to declare the plain sense and practise of the succeeding ages in a few testimonies, but so preg­nant, as not to be avoided.

Lib. 8. contr. C [...]lsum. Origen affirms, that the Graecians in their prayers use [Page 51] Greek, and the Romans, the Roman language, and so every one according to his Tongue, prayeth unto God, and prais­eth him as he is able. S. Chrysostome urging the Precept of the Apostle for prayers in a Language understood by the hearer, affirms that which is but reasonable, saying, If a man speaks in the Persian Tongue, and understands not what himself sayes, to himself he is a Barbarian, and therefore so he is to him that understands no more than he does. And what profit can he receive, who hears a sound, and discerns it not? It were as good he were absent as pre­sent: For if he be the better to be there, because he sees what is done, and guesses at some­thing in general, Affectus consequitur intellectum: ubi autem nullus earum rerum quae petuntur vel dicuntur habetur in­tellectus, aut generaliter [...]tantum, ibi exiguus assurgit affectus. Azor. inst. moral. to. 1. lib. 9. c. 34. q. 8. and consents to him that Ministers: It is true, this may be, but this therefore is so, because he un­derstands something; but he is onely so far benefited as he understands, and there­fore all that which is not understood, does him no more benefit that is present, than to him that is absent, and consents to the prayers in general, and to what is done for all faithful people. But [If indeed ye meet for the edification of the Church, those things ought to be spoken which the hearers understand,] said S. Ambrose: And so it was in the primitive Church; blessings and all other things in the Church were done in the vulgar tongue, saith In 1 Cor. 14. Lyra; Nay, not onely the publick Prayers, but the whole Bible was anciently by many Translations, made fit for the peoples use. S. Hierom Epist. ad. So­phron. affirms, that him­self translated the Bible into the Dalmatian Tongue; and Sozom lib. 6. hist. cap. 37. Vlphilas a Bishop among the Goths, translated it into the Gothick Tongue; and that it was translated in­to all Languages, we are told by Hom. 1. in 8. Iohan. S. Chysostome, De Doctr. Christ. cap. 5.S. Austin, and Serm. 5. de G [...]aeca [...]. affect. cu [...]a [...]. Theodoret.

[Page 52]But although what twenty Fathers say, can make a thing no more certain than if S. Paul had alone said it, yet both S. Paul and the Fathers are frequent to tell us, That a Service or Prayers in an unknown Tongue do not edifie: So Lib. Qu. ex. var. Script. locis. q. 278. S. Basil, in 1 Cor. hom. 35. S. Chryso­stome, Super 1 Cor. 14. S. Ambrose, and Super Psal. 18. com. 2. S. Austin, and this is consented to by In 1 Cor. 14. Aquinas, Ibid. Lyra, and Liturg. cap. 28. Cassander: And besides that, these Doctors affirm, that in the primitive Church the Priests and People joyn'd in their Prayers, and understood each other, and prayed in their Mother Tongue: We find a story (how true it is, let them look to it, but it is) told by Histor. Bo­hem. c. 13. AEneas Sylvius , who was afterward Pope Pius the II. that when Cyrillus Bishop of the Moravians and Methodius had converted the Slavonians, Cyril being at Rome, desir'd leave to use the language of that Nati­on in their Divine Offices. Concerning which when they were disputing, a voice was heard, as if from Heaven, Let every Spirit praise the Lord, and every Tongue confess unto him: Upon which it was granted according to the Bishops desire. But now they are not so kind at Rome; and although the Fathers at Trent confess'd in their de­cree, that the Mass contains in it great matter of eru­dition and edification of the people; yet they did not think it fit, that it should be said in the vulgar tongue: So that it is very good food, but it must be lock'd up; it is an excellent candle, but it must be put under a bushel: And now the Question is, Whether it be fit that the people pray so as to be edisied by it; or is it better that they be at the prayers when they shall not be edified? Whether it be not as good to have a dumb Priest to do Mass, as one that hath a tongue to say it? [Page 53] For he that hath no tongue, and he that hath none to be understood, is alike insignificant to me. Quid prodest locutionum integritas quam non sequitur intellectus audi­entis, cum loquendi nulla sit causa, si quod loquimur non intelligunt propter quos ut intelligant loquimur, De Doctr: Christ. lib. 4. cap. 10. said S. Austin. What does it avail that man speak all, if the hear­ers understand none; and there is no cause why a man should speak at all, if they, for whose understanding you do speak, understand it not. God understands the Priests thoughts when he speaks not, as well as when he speaks; he hears the prayer of the heart, and sees the word of the mind, and a dumb Priest can do all the ceremonies, and make the signs; and he that speaks aloud to them that un­derstand him not, does no more. Now since there is no use of vocal prayer in publick, but that all together may signifie their desires, and stirre up one another, and joyne in the expression of them to God; by this de­vice, a man who understands not what is said, can one­ly pray with his lips; for the heart cannot pray but by desiring, and it cannot desire what it understands not. So that in this case, prayer cannot be an act of the Soul: There is neither affection nor understanding, notice or desire: The heart sayes nothing and asks for nothing, and therefore receives nothing. Solo­mon calls that the Sacrifice of fools, when men consider not; and they who understand not what is said, can­not take it into consideration. But there needs no more to be said in so plain a case. We end this with the words of the Civil and Canon Law. Iustinian the Emperor made a Law in these words [We will and command, That all Bishops and Priests celebrate the Sa­cred Oblation, and the Prayers thereunto added in holy Baptism, not in a low voice, but with a loud and clear [Page 54] voice, which may be heard by the faithful people;Novel. 123. that is, be understood, for so it follows, that thereby the mindes of the hearers may be raised up with greater de­votion, to set forth the praises of the Lord God; for so the Apostle teacheth in the first to the Corinthians. It is true, that this Law was rased out of the Latine Versi­ons of Iustinian. The fraud and design was too palpa­ble, but it prevail'd nothing; for it is acknowledged by Cassander and Bellarmine, De Missa, lib. 2. c. 13. sect. ad Novellam. and is in the Greek Copies of Holoander.

The Canon Law is also most express from an Au­thority of no less than a Pope and a General Council, as themselves esteem; Innocent III. in the great Coun­cil of Lateran, above MCC years after Christ, in these words,Cap. 9. [Because in most parts within the same City and Diocess, the people of divers Tongues are mixt together, having under one and the same faith divers Ceremonies and Rites, we straitly charge and command, That the Bi­shops of such Cities and Diocesses provide men fit, who may celebrate Divine Service according to the diversity of ceremonies and languages, and administer the Sacra­ments of the Church, instructing them both by word and example.]

Now if the words of the Apostle, and the practise of the primitive Church, the sayings of the Fathers, and the Confessions of wise men amongst themselves; if the consent of Nations, and the piety of our fore-fathers; if right reason, and the necessity of the thing; if the needs of the ignorant, and the very inseparable condi­tions of holy prayers; if the Laws of Princes, and the Laws of the Church, which do require all our prayers to be said by them that understand what they say; if all these cannot prevail with the Church of Rome to [Page 55] do so much good to the peoples souls, as to consent they should understand what in particular they are to ask of God, certainly there is a great pertinacy of opi­nion, and but a little charity to those precious souls, for whom Christ dyed, and for whom they must give account.

Indeed the old Toscan Rites, and the Sooth-sayings of the Salian Priests,Quintil. lib. 1. Vix Sacerdotibus suis intellecta, sed quae mutari vetat Religio: were scarce understood by their Priests themselves, but their Religion forbad to change them. Thus anciently did the Osseni Here­ticks of whom Epiphanius tells,Verb. Osseni. Cap. 6. ad Quod vult Deum. and the Heracleonitae of whom S. Austin gives account; they taught to pray with obscure words; and some others in Clemens Alex­andrinus, suppos'd, that words spoken in a barbarous or unknown Tongue, [...], are more powerful. The Jewes also in their Synagogues at this day, read Hebrew, which the people but rarely understand; and the Turks in their Mosques read Arabick, of which the people know nothing. But Christians ne­ver did so, till they of Rome resolved to refuse to do benefit to the souls of the people in this instance, or to bring them from intollerable ignorance.

SECT. VIII.

THe Church of Rome hath to very bad purposes introduc'd and impos'd upon Christendom the worship and veneration of Images, kissing them, pulling off their hats, kneeling, falling down and praying be­fore them, which they call, giving them due honor and veneration. What external honor and veneration that is, which they call due, is express'd by the instances now reckon'd, which the Council of Trent in their Decree enumerate and establish. What the inward honor and worship is, which they intend to them, is intimated in the same Decree. By the Images they worship Christ and his Saints; and therefore by these Images they pass that honor to Christ and his Saints which is their due: that is, as their Doctors explain it. Latria or Divine wor­ship to God and Christ. Hyperdulia or more than ser­vice to the blessed Virgin Mary; and service or doulia to other canoniz'd persons. So that upon the whole, the case is this: What ever worship they give to God, and Christ and his Saints, they give it first to the Image, and from the Image they pass it unto Christ and Christs servants. And therefore we need not to enquire what actions they suppose to be fit or due. For whatsoever is due to God, to Christ or his Saints, that worship they give to their respective Images: all the same in external semblance and ministry; as appears in all their great Churches, and publick actions, and processions, and Temples and Festivals, and endowments, and censings, [Page 57] and pilgrimages, and prayers, and vows made to them.

Now besides that these things are so like Idolatry, that they can no way be reasonably excused (of which we shall in the next Chapter give some account) besides that they are too like the Religion of the Heathens,Chap. 2. Sect. 12. and so plainly and frequently forbidden in the Old Testa­ment, and are so infinitely unlike the simple and wise, the natural and holy, the pure and the spiritual Religion of the Gospel; besides, that they are so infinite a scan­dal to the Jews and Turks, and reproach Christianity it self amongst all strangers that live in their communion, and observe their rites: besides that they cannot pre­tend to be lawful, but with the laborious artifices of many Metaphysical notions and distinctions, which the people who most need them, do least understand; and that therefore the people worship them without these distinctions, and directly put confidence in them; and that it is impossible that ignorant persons, who in all Christian countries make up the biggest number, should do otherwise, when otherwise they cannot understand it; and besides that, the thing it self, with or without distinctions, is a superstititious and forbidden, an un­lawful and unnatural worship of God, who will not be worshipped by an Image: we say that besides all this, This whole Doctrine and practice is an innovation in the Christian Church, not practis'd, not indured in the pri­mitive ages; but expresly condemned by them, and this is our present undertaking to evince.

The first notice we find of Images brought into Chri­stian Religion, was by Simon Magus: indeed that was very Antient, but very heretical and abominable; but that he brought some in to be worshipped, we find in [Page 58] Lib. 1. haeret. fabul. Theodoret, and De haeres. S. Austin, Lib. 1. cap. 23. vide eti­am Epiphan. to 2. lib. 1. hae­ [...]s. 27. & S. August. de heares. S. Irenaeus tells. That the Gnosticks of Carpocrations did make Images, and said, that the form of Christ as he was in the flesh, was made by Pilate; and these Images they worshipped, as did the Gentiles: These things they did, but against these things the Christians did zealously and piously declare: We have no Image in the world, said S. Clemens ofLib. 6. strom. & in paraene­tico. Alex­andria: It is apparently forbidden to us to exercise that deceitful art: For it is written, Thou shalt not make any similitude of any thing in Heaven above, &c. And Origen wrote a just Treatise against Celsus;Lib. 7. & 8. contr. Cels. in which he not onely affirms, That Christians did not make or use Images in Religion, but that they ought not, and were by God forbidden to do so. To the same purpose also Lactantius discourses to the Emperor, and confutes the pretences and little answers of the Heathen in that man­ner, that he leaves no pretence for Christians under an­other cover, to introduce the like abomination.

We are not ignorant, that those who were converted from Gentilisme, and those who lov'd to imitate the customs of the Roman Princes and people, did soon in­troduce the Historical use of Images, and according to the manner of the world, did think it honorable to de­pict or make Images of those whom they had in great esteem; and that this being done by an esteem, relying on Religion, did by the weakness of men, and the im­portunity of the Tempter, quickly pass into inconve­nience and superstition; yet even in the time of Iulian the Emperor, S. Cyril denies, that the Christians did give veneration and worship to the Image, even of the Cross it self, which was one of the earliest temptations; and S. Epiphanius (it is a known story) tells,Epist. ad Io [...]. Hieros. that when in the village of Bethel he saw a cloth picture, as it were [Page 59] of Christ, or some Saint in the Church, against the Au­thority of Scripture; He cut it in pieces, and advis'd that some poor man should be buried in it; affirmed, that such Pictures are against Religion, and unworthy of the Church of Christ. The Epistle was translated into La­tine by S. Hierome; by which we may guess at his opini­on in the question.

The Council of Eliberis is very ancient, and of great fame; in which it is expresly forbidden, that what is worshipped,Can. 36. Placuit picturas in Ec­clesia esse non debere, ne quod colitur aut adoratur in parietibus depingatur. should be de­picted on the walls; and that therefore Pictures ought not to be in Churches. S. Austin complaining,De Morib. Eccles. l. 1. c. 34. Idem de fide & Symbolo. c. 7. & contr. Adimant. cap. 13. that he knew of many in the Church who were Wor­shippers of Pictures, calls them Supersti­tious; and adds, that the Church condems such cu­stoms, and strives to correct them: and S. Gregory wri­ting to Serenus Bishop of Massilia, sayes, he would not have had him to break the Pictures and Images, which were there set for an historical use; but commends him for prohibiting to any one to worship them, and enjoyns him still to forbid it. But Superstition by degrees creep­ing in, the Worship of Images was decreed in the seventh Synod, or the second Nicene. But the decrees of this Synod being by Pope Adrian sent to Charls the Great, he convocated a Synod of German and French Bishops at Francfurt, Anno Dom. DCCLXIV. who discussed the Acts pass'd at Nice, and condemn'd them. And the Acts of this Synod, although they were diligently suppressed by the Popes arts, yet Eginardus, Hin [...]marus, Aventinus, Blondus, Adon, Amoni­us & Regino, famous Historians, tell us, That the Bishops of Francfurt condemn'd the Synod of Nice, and com­manded it should not be called a General Council; and [Page 60] published a Book under the name of the Emperor, con­futing that unchristian Assembly; and not long since, this Book, and the Acts of Francfurt were published by Bishop Tillius; by which, not only the infinite fraud of of the Roman Doctors is discover'd, but the worship of Images is declar'd against and condemned.

A while after this, Ludovicus the Son of Charlemain, sent Claudius a famous Preacher to Taurinum in Italy; where the Preached against the worshipping of Images, and wrote an excellent Book to that purpose. Against this Book Ionas Bishop of Orleans, after the death of Lu­dovicus and Claudius, did write: In which he yet durst not assert the worship of them, but confuted it out of Origen; whose words he thus cites [Images are neither to be esteemed by inward affection, nor worshipped with out­ward shew;] and out of Lactantius these, [Nothing is to be worshipped, that is seen with mortal eyes: Let us adore, let us worship nothing, but the Name alone of our only Pa­rent, who is to be sought for in the Regions above, not here below:] And to the same purpose, he also alleges excellent words out of Fulgentius and S. Hierom; and though he would have Images ratain'd, and therefore was angry at Claudius who caus'd them to be taken down, yet he himself expresly affirms that they ought not to be worshipped; and withal addes, that though they kept the Images in their Churches for History and Or­nament, yet that in France the worshipping of them was had in great detestation. And though it is not to be denied, but that in the sequel of Ionas his Book, he does something praevaricate in this question; yet it is evident,Lib. 2. in vita Isaaici Angeli. A.D. 1160. that in France this Doctrine was not accounted Catholick for almost nine hundred years after Christ; and in Germany it was condemned for almost MCC years, as we find in Nicetas.

[Page 61]We are not unskill'd in the devices of the Roman Writers, and with how much artifice they would excuse this whole matter, and palliate the crime imputed to them, and elude the Scriptures expresly condemning this Superstition: But we know also, that the arts of Sophistry are not the wayes of Salvation. And there­fore we exhort our people to follow the plain words of Scripture, and the express Law of God in the second Commandment; and add also the Exhortation of S. Iohn, 1 John 5 21. Little children keep your selves from Idols. To conclude, it is impossible but that it must be confessed, that the worship of Images, was a thing unknown to the Pri­mitive Church; in the purest times of which, they would not allow the making of them; as (amongst di­vers others) appears in the Writings of Clemens, Stromat. l. 6. & in Protrep. Alex­andrinus, Lib. 2. c. 22. advers. Mar­cion. & de Idololatr. c. 3. Tertullian, and Lib. 4. contr. Celsum. Origen.

SECT. IX.

AS an Appendage to this, we greatly reprove the custom of the Church of Rome, in picturing God the Father, and the most Holy and Undivided Trinity; which, besides that it ministers infinite scandal to all sober minded men, and gives the new Arrians in Polonia and Antitrinitarians, great and ridiculous entertain­ment, exposing that Sacred Mystery to derision and scan­dalous contempt: It is also (which at present we have undertaken particularly to remark) against the Doctrine and practise of the Primitive Catholick Church.

S. Clemens of Alexandria sayes, that in the Discipline [Page 62] of Moses, God was not to be represented in the shape of a man, or of any other thing:Stromat. l. 1. and that Christians un­derstood themselves to be bound by the same law, we find it expresly taught by Origen Lib. 7. contr. Celsum., Tertullian De Coron. milit., Euse­bius Lib. 1. c. 5. praep. Evang., Athanasius Orat. contr. gen [...]es., S. Hierom In c. 40. Isa., S. Austin De fide & Symbol. c. 7., Theodoret In Deut. q. 1. Damascen Lib. 4. de Orthod. fide, c. 17., and the Synod of Constantinople, as it is re­ported in the sixt Action of the second Nicene Council. And certainly if there were not a strange spirit of con­tradiction or superstition or deflection from the Christian Rule, greatly prevailing in the Church of Rome, it were impossible that this practise should be so countenanc'd by them, and defended so to no purpose, with so much scandal, and against the natural reason of mankind, and the very Law of Nature it self: For the Heathens were sufficiently by the light of nature, taught to abominate all Pictures or Images of God.

They in their earliest ages had no Pictures, no Images of their gods: Their Temples were filled with Maje­stie, and a sacred fear; and the reason is given by Ma­crobius, Antiquity made no Image (viz. of God) because the Supreme God, and the mind that is born of him (that is, his Son, the eternal Word) as it is beyond the Soul, so it is above nature, and therefore it is not lawful that sig­ments should come thither. Lib. 1. in somn. Scip. cap. 2.

Lib. 18. cap. 53. Nicephorus Callistus relating the Heresie of the Arme­nians and Iacobites sayes, they made Images of the Fa­ther, Son, and Holy Ghost, quod perquam absurdum est. Nothing is more absurd, then to make Pictures or Images of the Persons of the Holy and Adorable Trinity. And [Page 63] yet they do this in the Church of Rome. For in the windows of their Churches, even in Country Villages, where the danger cannot be denied to be great, and the scandal insupportable; nay, in their books of devotion, in their very Mass-books and Breviaries, in their Por­tuises and Manuals they picture the Holy Trinity, with three noses and four eyes, and three faces in a knot, to the great dishonour of God and scandal of Christianity it self. We add no more (for the case is too evidently bad) but reprove the errour with the words of their own Polydore Virgil: Since the world began, never was any thing more foolish than to picture God, who is present every where. Lib. 2. de in­vent. c. 23.

SECT. X.

THe last instance of Innovations introduc'd in Do­ctrine and practice by the Church of Rome, that we shall represent, is that of the Popes universal Bishoprick. That is, not only that he is Bishop of Bishops, superior to all and every one; but that his Bishoprick is a ple­nitude of power; and as for other Bishops, of his fulness they all receive, a part of the ministry and sollicitude; and not onely so, but that he only is a Bishop by im­mediate Divine dispensation, and others receive from him whatsoever they have. For to this height many of them are come at last. Which Doctrine, although as it is in sins, where the carnal are most full of reproach, but the spiritual are of greatest malignity: so it happens in this Article. For though it be not so scandalous as [Page 64] their Idolatry, so ridiculous as their superstitions, so un­reasonable as their doctrine of Transubstantiation, so easi­ly reprov'd as their half Communion, and Service in an unknown tongue; yet it is of as dangerous and evil ef­fect, and as false, and as certainly an Innovation, as any thing in their whole conjugation of errors.

When Christ founded his Church, he left it in the hands of his Apostles, without any prerogative given to one, or eminency above the rest, save onely of prio­rity and orderly precedency, which of it self was natu­ral, necessary and incident. The Apostles govern'd all; their authority was the sanction, and their Decrees and writings were the Laws of the Church. They exercis'd a common jurisdiction, and divided it according to the needs and emergencies, and circumstances of the Church. In the Council of Ierusalem, S. Peter gave not the de­cisive Sentence; but S. Iames, who was the Bishop of that See. Christ sent all his Apostles as his Father sent him; and therefore he gave to every one of them the whole power which he left behind; and to the Bishops Congregated at Miletum, Acts 20. 28. S. Paul gave them caution to take care of the whole stock of God, and affirms to them all, that the Holy Ghost had made them Bishops: and in the whole New Testament, there is no act or sign of superiority, or that one Apostle exercised power over another: but to them whom Christ sent, he in common intrusted the Church of God: according to that excel­lent saying of S. Cyprian, Epist. de unit. Ecclesiae ad Novatian & habetur caus. 24. qu. 1. [The other Apostles are the same that S. Peter was, endowest with an equal fellowship of honour and power: and they are all Shepheards, and the flock is one] and therefore it ought to be fed by all the Apostles with unanimous consent.

This unity and identity of power without question [Page 65] and interruption did continue and descend to Bishops in the primitive Church, in which it was a known doctrine that the Bishops were successors of the Apostles: and what was not in the beginning, could not be in the de­scent, unless it were innovated and introduc'd by a new authority. Christ gave ordinary power to none but the Apostles, and the power being to continue for ever in the Church, it was to be succeeded to, and by the same authority, even of Christ, it descended to them who were their successors, that is, to the Bishops, as all antiquity Irenae. lib. 4. c. 43, 44. S. Cyprian. lib. 1. ep. 6. & lib. 2. ep. 10. & lib: 4. ep. 9. S. Ambros. de dignit. sacerd. c. 1. S. Aug. de baptism. contra D [...]nar l. 7. c. 43. & ibid. Clarus a Muscula. Id [...]m de verb. Dom. Ser. 24. Con. R [...]m. sub Sylvest. Const. Apost. l. 8. c. [...] Anac: P. ep. 2. Clemens P. ep. 1. S. Hieron. ep. 13. & ep. 54. Euihym. in Ps. 44. S. Gregor. in Evang. Hom. 26. ad Helio­dor. ep. 1. S. Chrysost. s [...]m. D [...]na­scen. de imaginibus: Orat. 2. S. Greg. Naz. Orat. 21. de laud. Basilii. does consent and teach: Not S. Peter alone, but every Apostle, and therefore every one who succeeds them in their ordinary power, may and must remember the words of S. Paul; We are Embassadors or Legates for Christ: Christs Vicars, not the Popes Delegates: and so all the A­postles are called in the Preface of the Mass; quos operis tui Vicarios eidem con [...]ulisti praeesse Pastores; they are Pastors of the Flock and Vicars of Christ; and so also they are in express terms called by S. Ambrose, In epist. 1. ad Corin. cap. 3. & in epist. ad Roman. c 1. and therefore it is a strange usurpation, that the Pope arrogates that to himself by Impropriation, which is common to him with all the Bi­shops of Christendom.

The consequent of this is, that by the law of Christ, one Bishop is not superior to another: Christ gave the power to all alike; he made no Head of the Bishops; he gave to none a supremacy of power or universality of jurisdiction. But this the Pope hath long challenged, and to bring his purposes to pass, hath for these six hun­dered years by-gone invaded the rights of Bishops, and [Page 66] delegated matters of order and jurisdiction to Monks and Friers; insomuch that the power of Bishops was greatly diminished at the erecting of the Cluniac and Cistercian Monks about the year ML: but about the year MCC, it was almost swallowed up by privileges granted to the begging Friers, and there kept by the power of the Pope: which power got one great step more above the Bishops, when they got it declared that the Pope is above a Council of Bishops: and at last it was turn'd into a new doctrine by Cajetane (who for his prosperous invention was made a Cardinal) that all the whole Apostolick or Episcopal power is radical and in­herent in the Pope, in whom is the fulness of the Eccle­siastical authority; and that Bishops receive their por­tion of it from him: and this was first boldly maintain'd in the Council of Trent by the Jesuits; and it is now the opinion of their Order: but it is also that which the Pope challenges in practice, when he pretends to a pow­er over all Bishops, and that this power is derived to him from Christ; when he calls himself the Universal Bishop, and the Vicarial head of the Church, the Church­es Monarch, he from whom all Ecclesiastical authority is deriv'd, to whose sentence in things Divine every Christian under pain of damnation is bound to be sub­ject.Extrav. Com. lib. 1. ti [...]. 9. de Major. & obed. cap. V­nam Sanctam.

Now this is it which as it is productive of infinite mischiefs: so it is an Innovation and an absolute de­flection from the primitive catholick doctrine, and yet is the great ground-work and foundation of their Church. This we shall represent in these following Te­stimonies. Pope. Eleutherius Referente Archiepis. Granatensi in Council. Trid. in an Epistle to the Bi­shops of France, says, that Christ committed the univer­sal Church to the Bishops; and S. Ambrose saith that [Page 67] the Bishop holdeth the place of Christ, and is his substi­tute.Vbi supra. But famous are the words of S. Cyprian, Lib. 4. Ep. 2. [The Church of Christ is one thorough the whole world, divided by him into many members, and the Bishoprick is but one, diffused in the agreeing plurality of many Bishops.] And again: [To every Pastor a portion of the flock is given, which let every one of them rule and govern.] By which words it is evident that the primitive Church understood no praelation of one and subordination of another, com­manded by Christ, or by vertue of their ordination; but onely what was for order sake introduc'd by Princes and consent of Prelates. And it was to this purpose very full which was said by Pope Symmachus: Apud. Baren. Tom. 6. A. D. 499. n. 36. As it is in the Holy Trinity whose power is one and undivided (or to use the expression in the Athanasian Creed, none is before or after other, none is greater or less than another) so there is one Bishoprick amongst divers Bishops, and therefore why should the Canons of the ancient Bishops be violated by their Successors? Now these words being spoken against the invasion of the rights of the Church of Arles by Ana­stasius, and the question being in the exercise of Jurisdi­ction, and about the Institution of Bishops, does fully declare that the Bishops of Rome had no Superiority by the Laws of Christ over any Bishop in the Catholick Church, and that his Bishoprick gave no more power to him, than Christ gave to the Bishop of the smallest Diocese.

And therefore all the Church of God, when ever they reckon'd the several orders and degrees of Ministery in the Catholick Church, reckon the Bishop as the last and supreme, beyond whom there is no spiritual power but in Christ. For as the whole Hierachy ends in Iesus: so does every particular one in its one Bishop. Dionys. A [...]eop. de Eccles. hie­rarc. de sacer. perfect. Beyond the [Page 68] Bishop there is no step, till you rest in the great Shep­herd and Bishop of Souls. Under him every Bishop is supreme in Spirituals, and in all power which to any Bishop is given by Christ.Epist. ad Symr­nens. & ad Philadelph. S. Ignatius therefore ex­horts that all should obey their Bishop, and the Bishop obey. Christ, as Christ obeyed his Father. There are no other intermedial degrees of Divine Institution. But (as Ori­gen teaches) The Apostles and they who after them are or­dain'd by God, that is, the Bishops have the supreme place in the Church, and the Prophets have the second place. The same also is taught by P. Gelasius Dist. 97. cap. duc sunt., by S. Hierom In Ierem. h [...]m. 7. & ad­vers. Lucifer., and Fulgentius I [...] Concil. Paris: l. 1. c. 3., and indeed by all the Fathers who spake any thing in this matter: Insomuch that when Bellarmine is in this question press'd out of the book of Nilus by the authority of the Fathers standing against him, he answers, Papam Patres non habere in Ecclesiâ, sed filios omnes. The Pope acknowledges no Fathers in the Church, for they are all his sons.

Now although we suppose this to be greatly suffici­ent to declare the Doctrine of the primitive Catholick Church, concerning the equality of power in all Bishops by Divine right: yet the Fathers have also expresly de­clar'd themselves, that one Bishop is not Superior to an­other, and ought not to judge another, or force another to obedience. They are the words of S. Cyprian to a Council of Bishops:In Concil, Ca [...] ­tha. [None of us makes himself a Bishop of Bishops, or by tyranical power drives his collegues to a ne­cessity of obedience, since every Bishop according to the li­cence of his own liberty and power, hath his own choice and cannot be judged by another, nor yet himself judge a­nother; but let us all expect the judgment of our L. Iesus Christ, who only and alone hath the power of setting us in the government of his Church, and judging of what we do] [Page 69] This was spoken and intended against P. Stephen, who did then begin dominari in clero, to lord it over Gods he­ritage, and to excommunicate his brethren, as Demetrius did in the time of the Apostles themselves: but they both found their reprovers. Demetrius was chastised by S. John for this usurpation,De Bapt. cont. Dorat [...]. lib. 3. cap. 3. and Stephen by S. Cyprian, and this also was approv'd by S. Austin. We conclude this parti­cular with the words of S. Gregory Bishop of Rome, who because the Patriarch of Constantinople called himself Universal Bishop,Lib. 4 ep 76, 78, 31, 34,38, 39. & lib. 6. ep. 24. said, It was a proud title, prophane, sa­crilegious and Antichristian: and therefore he little thought that his Successors in the same See should so fiercely challenge that Antichristian title; much less did the then Bishop of Rome in those ages challenge it as their own peculiar; for they had no mind to be, or to be e­steemed Antichristian. Romano Pontisici oblatum est, sed nullus unquam eorum hoc singularitatis nomen assum­psit. Lib. 4. ep. 32. Quis est iste qui contra sta [...]uta Eva [...]gelica, contra Canonum d [...]creta n [...]vum sibi usu [...] pa [...]e n [...]men praesu­mit? Videatur Epist la S. Hieron. ad Evang [...]ium. Concil. Chalced action. 16. Concil. [...]v [...]n. c. 6. &c. 7. & Con­cil. C. P. ca [...]. 3. & Nov. l. Iustin. 131. His Predecessors (it seems) had been tempted with an offer of that title, but none of them ever as­sum'd that name of singularity, as being against the law of the Gospel and the Canons of the Church.

Now this being a matter of which Christ spake not one word to S. Peter, if it be a matter of faith and sal­vation, as it is now pretended, it is not imaginable he would have been so perfectly silent. But though he was silent of any intention to do this, yet S. Paul was not silent that Christ did otherwise; for he hath set in his Church primùm Apostolos; first of all, Apostles; not first S. Peter and secondarily Apostles; but all the A­postles were first. It is also evident that S. Peter did [Page 70] not carry himself so as to give the least overture or um­brage to make any one suspect he had any such prehe­minence;In acta Apost. hom. 3. but he was (as S. Chrysostom truly sayes) [...], he did all things with the common consent, [...], nothing by special autho­rity or principality: and if he had any such, it is more than probable that the Apostles who survived him, had succeeded him in it, rather than the Bishop of Rome: and it being certain (as the Bishop of Canaries confesses) That there is in Scripture no revelation that the Bishop of Rome should succeed Peter in it,Canus loc. lib. 6. c. 8. p. 235. Ed. S. [...]mant. 1563. and we being there told that S. Peter was at Antioch, but never that he was at Rome; it being confessed by some of their own parties, by Cardinal Cusanus, Soto, Driedo, Canus and Segovius, Concord. Cath. l. 2. c. 34. S [...]nt. lib. 4. dist. 24. qu [...] 2. art. 5. De Eccl. dogm. that this succession was not addicted to any particular Church, nor that Christs institution of this does any o­ther way appear; that it cannot be proved that the Bishop of Rome is Prince of the Church: it being also certain that there was no such thing known in the pri­mitive Church, but that the Holy Fathers both of A­frica and the East did oppose Pope Victor and Pope Stephen, when they began to interpose with a presum­ptive authority in the affairs of other Churches; and that the Bishops of the Church did treat with the Ro­man Bishop as with a brother, not as their superior: and that the General Council held at Chalcedon did give to the Bishops of C. P. equal rights and preheminence with the Bishops of Rome: and that the Greek Churches are at this day and have been a long time great opponents of this pretension of the Bishops of Rome: and after all this, since it is certain that Christ who foreknowes all things, did also know that there would be great dis­putes and challenges of this preheminence, did indeed [Page 71] suppress it in his Apostles, and said not it should beLuke 22. 25. Matth. 20. 26. 27. otherwise in succession, and did not give any command to his Church to obey the Bishops of Rome as his Vi­cars, more than what he commanded concerning all Bi­shops; it must be certain that it cannot be necessary to salvation to do so, but that it is more than probable that he never intended any such thing, and that the Bishops of Rome have to the great prejudice of Christendom made a great Schism, and usurp'd a title which is not their due, and challeng'd an authority to which they have no right, and have set themselves above others who are their equals, and impose an Article of Faith of their own contriving, and have made great preparation for Antichrist, if he ever get into that Seat, or be in al­ready, and made it necessary for all of the Roman Com­munion to believe and obey him in all things.

SECT. XI.

THere are very many more things in which the Church of Rome hath greatly turn'd aside from the Doctrines of Scripture, and the practise of the Catho­lick Apostolick and primitive Church.

Such are these: The Invocation of Saints: The In­sufficiency of Scriptures without Traditions of Faith unto Salvation: their absolving sinners before they have by canonical penences and the fruits of a good life testi­fied their repentance: their giving leave to simple Pres­byters by Papal dispensation, to give confirmation or chrism: selling Masses for Ninepences: Circumgesta­tion [Page 72] of the Eucharist to be ador'd: The dangerous Do­ctrine of the necessity of the Priests intention in colla­ting Sacraments; by which device they have put it into the power of the Priest to damn whom he please of his own parish: their affirming that the Mass is a pro­per and propitiatory sacrifice for the quick and the dead: Private Masses, or the Lords Supper without Communi­on; which is against the doctrine and practise of the anci­ent Church of Rome it self, and contrary to the tradition of the Apostles, if we may believe Pope Calixtus, and is also forbiden under pain of Excommunication.De conscerat. dist. 2. cap. Peracta. Vide etiam ibid. cap. In c [...]ena, & cap. Si quis. Peract à consecratione omnes communicent, qui noluerint ecclesia­sticis carere liminibus; sic autem etiam Apostoli statue­runt, & sancta Romana tenet Ecclesia. When the con­secration is finish'd, let all communicate that will not be thrust from the bounds of the Church; for so the Apostles appointed, and so the H. Church of Rome does hold. The same also was decreed by P. Soter and P. Martin in a Council of Bishops, and most severely enjoyn'd by the Canons of the Apostles as they are cited in the Ca­non Law.De consecrat. dist. 1. c. Omnes fidel. Omnes fideles qui conveniunt in solennitatibus sacris ad Ecclesiam & Scripturas Apostolorum & Evangeliae aeudiant. Qui autem non perseverant in oratione usque dum Missa peragatur, nec Sanctam Communionem percipiunt, velut inquietudines Ecclesiae commoventes convenit communione privari.

There are divers others; but we suppose that those Innovations which we have already noted, may be suffi­cient to verifie this charge of Novelty. But we have done this the rather, because the Roman Emissaries en­deavour to prevail amongst the ignorant and prejudicate by boasting of Antiquity; and calling their Religion, the Old Religion and the Catholick: so insnaring others by ignorant words in which is no truth; their Religion [Page 73] as it distinguishes from the Religion of the Church of England and Ireland, being neither the Old nor the Ca­tholick Religion; but New and superinduc'd by arts known to all who with sincerity and diligence have look'd into their pretences.

But they have taught every Priest that can scarce un­derstand his Breviary, (of which in Ireland there are but too many) and very many of the people, to ask where our Religion was before Luther? Whereas it appears by the premises, that it is much more easie for us to shew our Religion before Luther, than for them to shew theirs before Trent. And although they can shew too much practise of their Religion in the degenerate ages of the Church, yet we can and do clearly shew ours in the pu­rest and first ages; and can and do draw lines pointing to the times and places where the several rooms and stories of their Babel was builded, and where polished, and where furnished.

But when the keepers of the field slept, and the Enemy had sown tares, and they had choak'd the wheat, and al­most destroyed it: when the world complain'd of the in­finite errors in the Church, and being oppressed by a vio­lent power, durst not complain so much as they had cause: and when they who had cause to complain, were yet them­selves very much abused, and did not complain in all they might; when divers excellent persons, S. Bernard, Cle­mangis, Grosthead, Marsilius, Ocham, Alvarus, Abbat Ioachim, Petrarch, Savanarola, Valla, Erasmus, Mantuan, Gerson, Ferus, Cassander, Andreas Frisius, Modrevius, Her­mannus Coloniensis, Wasseburgius Archdeacon of Verdun, Paulus Langius In Chronic. Zilizensi., Staphilus, Telesphorus de Cusentiâ, Doctor Talheymius, Francis Zabarel the Cardinal, and Pope Adri­an himself, with many others; not to reckon Wicklef, Hus, [Page 74] Hierome of Prague, the Bohemians, and the poor men of Lions, whom they call'd Hereticks, and confuted with fire and sword; when almost all Christian Princes did com­plain heavily of the corrupt state of the Church, and of Religion, and no remedy could be had, but the very in­tended remedy made things much worse; then it was that divers Christian Kingdoms, and particularly the Church of England,

Being asham'd of the errors, superstitions, heresies and impieties which had deturpated the face of the Church; look'd into the glass of Scripture and pure Antiquity, and wash'd away those stains with which time, and inadver­tency, and tyranny had besmear'd her; and being thus cleans'd and wash'd, is accus'd by the Roman parties of Novelty, and condemn'd, because she refuses to run into the same excess of riot and deordination. But we cannot deserve blame, who return to our ancient and first health, by preferring a New Cure before an Old sore.

Sect. I.

OUr first instance is in their Doctrines of Repen­tance. For the Roman Doctors teach, that un­less it be by accident, or in respect of some o­ther obligation, a sinner is not bound presently to re­pent of his sin as soon as he hath committed it. Some time or other he must do it, and if he take care so to order his affairs that it be not wholly omitted, but so that it be done one time or other, he is not by the pre­cept or grace of Repentance bound to do more. Scotus and his Scholars say that a sinner is bound, viz. by the precept of the Church, to repent on Holy dayes, espe­cially the great ones. But this is thought too severe by Soto and Medina, who teach that a sinner is bound [Page 76] to repent but once a year, that is, against Easter. These Doctors indeed do differ concerning the Churches sense; which according to the best of them is bad enough; full as bad as it is stated in the charge: but they agree in the worst part of it, viz. That though the Church calls upon sinners to repent on Holy days, or at Easter; yet that by the Law of God they are not tyed to so much, but on­ly to repent in the danger or article of death. This is the express Doctrine taught in the Church of Rome by their famous Navar;Enchir. cap. 1. n. 31. and for this he quotes Pope Adrian and Cardinal Cajetan, and finally affirms it to be the sense of all men. The same also is taught by Reginaldus; say­ing,Praxis sori poe­nit. l. 5. c. 2. sect. 4. n. 23. It is true, and the opinion of all men, that the time in which a sinner is bound by the commandment of God to be contrite for his sins, is the imminent article of natural or violent death.

We shall not need to aggravate this sad story by the addition of other words to the same purpose in a worse degree; such as those words are of the same Reginaldus, There is no precept that a sinner should not persevere in enmity against God. There is no negative precept for­bidding such a perseverance. These are the words of this man; but the proper and necessary consequent of that which they all teach, and to which they must consent. For since it is certain, that he who hath sinn'd against God and his Conscience, is in a state of enmity, we say he therefore ought to repent presently, because until he hath repented, he is an enemy to God. This they confess, but they suppose it concludes nothing; for though they consider and confess th [...] yet they still saying, a man is no bound by Gods Law to repent till the article of death, do consequently say the same thing that Regi­naldus does, and that a man is not bound to come out [Page 77] of that state of enmity till he be in those circumstan­ces that it is very probable if he does not then come out, he must stay in it for ever. It is somthing worse than this yet that Sotus Dom. a Soto in quart. sent. dist. 17. qu. 2. art. 6. concl. se­cunda. sayes: [even to resolve to defer our repentance, and to refuse to repent for a certain time, is but a venial sin] but Medina Non est dubium quin id lic [...]tum sit. Cod. de poe­niten. tract. 1. qu. 6. p. 18. edit. Salmantie. A. D. 1553. sayes, it is none at all.

If it be replyed to this, that though God hath left it to a sinners liberty to repent when he please, yet the Church hath been more severe than God hath been, and tyes a sinner to repent, by collateral positive Laws; for having bound every one to confess at Easter, conse­quently she hath tyed every one to repent at Easter; and so, by her Laws, can lye in the sin without inter­ruption but twelve moneths or thereabouts; yet there is a secret in this, which nevertheless themselves have been pleased to discover for the ease of tender conscien­ces; viz. That the Church ordains but the means, the exteriour solemnity of it, and is satisfied if you obey her Laws by a Ritual repentance, but the holiness, and the inward repentance, which in charity we should have suppos'd to have been design'd by the Law of Festivals, non est id quod per praeceptum de observatione Festorum injungitur, Reginald, lib. de contrit. c. 2. cap. 4. is not that which is enjoyn'd by the Church in her Law of Holy dayes. So that still, sinners are left to the liberty which they say God gave; even to satisfie our selves with all the remaining pleasures of that sin for a little while, even during our short mortal life: onely we must be sure to repent at last.

We shall not trouble our [...]lves or our charges with confuting this impious Doctrine. For it is evident that this gives countenance and too much warranty to a wicked life; and that of it self is confutation enough, [Page 78] and is that which we intended to represent.

If it be answered that this is not the doctrine of their Church, but of some private Doctors; we must tell you, that, if by the Doctrine of their Church they mean such things only as are decreed in their Councils; it is to be considered, that but few things are deter­min'd in their Councils; nothing but Articles of Belief, and the practise of Sacraments relating to publick Or­der: and if they will not be reprov'd for any thing but what we prove to be false in the Articles of their simple Belief, they take a liberty to say and to do what they list, and to corrupt all the World by their Rules of Conscience. But, that this is also the Doctrine of their Church, their own men tell us. Communis omni­um. It is the Doctrine of all their men; so they affirm, as we have cited their own words above: who also undertake to tell us in what sense their Church intends to tye sinners to actual repentance; not as soon as the sin is committed, but at certain seasons, and then also to no more of it, than the external and ritual part. So that if their Church be injuriously charged, themselves have done it, not we. And besides all this: it is hard to suppose or expect that the innumerable cases of Con­science which a whole Trade of Lawyers and Divines amongst them have made, can be entred into the re­cords of Councils and publick Decrees. In these cases we are to consider, who teaches them? Their Gravest Doctors, in the face of the Sun, under the intuition of Authority in the publick conduct of souls, in their allowed Sermons, in their books licens'd by a curious and inquisitive Authority, not passing from them but by warranty from several hands intrusted to examine them, ne fides Ecclesiae aliquid detrimenti patiatur; that [Page 79] nothing be publish'd but what is consonant to the Ca­tholick Faith. And therefore these things cannot be esteem'd private Opinions: Non ilico ut homo se reum senti [...] culpae poenitentiae lege poenitere constringi­tur. Haec profecto conclusio more & usu Ecclesia satis videtur constabilita. Dom. ae Soto in quart. sent. dist. 17. qu. 2. art. 6. especi­ally, since if they be, yet they are the private opinions of them all, and that we understand to be publick enough: and are so their Doctrine, as what the Scribes and Pharisees taught their Disciples, though the whole Church of the Jewes had not pass'd it into a Law. So this is the Roman Doctrine, though not the Roman Law. Which difference we desire may be observ'd in many of the fol­lowing instances, that this objection may no more inter­pose for an escape, or an excuse. But we shall have occasi­on again to speak to it, upon new particulars.

But this, though it be infinitely intolerable, yet it is but the beginning of sorrows: for the guides of souls in the Roman Church, have prevaricated in all the parts of Re­pentance, most sadly and dangerously.

The next things therefore that we shall remark, are their Doctrines concerning Contrition: which when it is genuine and true, that is, a true cordial sorrow for ha­ving sinn'd against God; a sorrow proceeding from the love of God, and conversion to him, and ending in a dereliction of all our sins, and a walking in all righte­ousness, both the Psalms and the Prophets, the Old Testament and the New, the Greek Fathers and the Latine have allowed as sufficient for the pardon of our sins through faith in Jesus Christ (as our Writers have often prov'd in their Sermons, and books of Conscience) yet first; the Church of Rome does not allow it to be of any value, unless it be joyn'd with a desire to confess their sins to a Priest; saying that a man, by contrition [Page 80] is not reconcil'd to God, without their Sacramental or Ritual penance, actual or votive; and this is decreed by the Council of Trent, Session 4. c. 4. which thing besides that it is against Scripture, and the promises of the Gospel, and not onely teaches for Doctrine the Commandments of Men; but evacuates the goodness of God by their Traditions, and weakens and discourages the best repentance, and prefers repentance towards men, before that which the Scripture calls, Repentance towards God, and Faith in our Lord Iesus Christ.

But the malignity of this Doctrine, and its influence it hath on an evil life, appears in the other corresponding part of this Doctrine. For as contrition without their ritu­al and sacramental confession will not reconcile us to God: so attrition (as they call it) or contrition imperfect, pro­ceeding from fear of damnation, together with their Sa­crament will reconcile the sinner. Contrition without it will not: attrition with it will reconcile us: and therefore by this doctrine, which is expresly decreed at Trent, there is no necessity of Contrition at all; and attrition is as good to all intents and purposes of pardon: and a little re­pentance will prevail as well as the greatest, the imper­fect as well as the perfect. So Guilielmus de Rubeo ex­plains this Doctrine.In 4. sent. dist. 18. q. 1. He that confesses his sins, grieving but a little, obtains remission of his sins by the Sacrament of Penance ministred to him by the Priest absolving him. So that although God working Contrition in a penitent, hath not done his work for him without the Priests abso­lution, in desire at least; yet if the Priest do his part, he hath done the work for the penitent, though God had not wrought that excellent grace of Contrition in the Pe­nitent.

But for the Contrition it self; it is a good word, but [Page 81] of no severity or affrightment by the Roman Doctrine.Lib. 3. Instruct. sacerdot. cap. 9 n 4. One contrition, one act of it, though but little and remiss, can blot out any, even the greatest sin (always understand­ing it in the sense of the Church,Sum. qu. 16. art. 1. that is in the Sacrament of Penance) saith Cardinal Tolet. A certain little inward grief of minde is requir'd to the perfection of Repentance, De Contrit. num. 107. said Maldonat. And to Contrition, a grief in general for all our sins is sufficient; but it is not necessary to grieve for any one sin more than another, said Franciscus de Victoriâ. Quaecunque in­tensio contrae peccatum, in quocunque in­stanti sufficie [...] ad consequen­dam misericor­diam & re­mistionem, ibid. n. 106. The greatest sin and the smallest, as to this, are all alike; and as for the Contrition it self, any intension or degree whatsoever, in any instant whatsoever, is sufficient to ob­tain mercy and remission, said the same Author.

Now let this be added to the former, and the se­quel is this, That if a man live a wicked life for Three­score or Fourscore years together, yet if in the Article of his death, sooner than which, God hath not command­ed him to repent, he be a little sorrowfull for his sins, then resolving for the present, that he will do so no more; and though this sorrow hath in it no love of God, but onely a fear of Hell, and a hope that God will pardon him; this, if the Priest absolves him, does instantly pass him into a state of salvation. The Priest with two fingers and a thumb can do his work for him; onely he must be greatly dispos'd and prepar'd to receive it: Greatly, we say, according to the sense of the Roman Church; for he must be attrite, or it were bet­ter if he were contrite; one act of grief, a little one, and that not for one sin more than another, and this at the end of a long wicked life, at the time of our death, will make all sure.

Upon these terms, it is a wonder that all wicked men in the world are not Papists; where they may [Page 82] live so merrily, and dye so securely, and are out of all danger, unless peradventure they dye very sudden­ly, which because so very few do, the venture is esteem'd nothing, and it is a thousand to one on the sinners side.

Sect. II.

WEe know it will be said, That the Roman Church enjoyns Confession, and imposes Pe­nances, and these are a great restraint to sinners, and gather up what was scattered before. The reply is easie, but is it very sad. For

1. For Confession: It is true, to them who are not us'd to it, as it is at the first time, and for that once it is as troublesome as for a bashfull man to speak Orations in Publick: But where it is so perpetu­al and universal, and done by Companies and crouds, at a solemn, set time, and when it may be done to any one besides the Parish-Priest, to a Frier that begs, or to a Monk in his Dorter, done in the ear, it may be, to a Person that hath done worse, and therefore hath no awe upon me, but what his Order imprints, and his vitiousness takes off; when we see Women and Boys, Princes and Prelates do the same every day: And as often times they are never the better, so they are not at all asham'd; but men look upon it as a certain cure, like pulling off a mans cloathes to go and wash in a river, and make it by use and habit, by confidence and custom, to be no certain pain, and the women blush or smile, [Page 83] weep or are unmov'd, as it happens, under their vail, and the men under the boldness of their Sex: When we see that men and women confess to day, and sin to morrow, and are not affrighted from their sin the more for it; because they know the worst of it, and have felt it often, and believe to be eas'd by it, cer­tain it is, that a little reason, and a little of observati­on will suffice to conclude, that this practice of Con­fession hath in it no affrightment, not so much as the horror of the sin it self hath to the Conscience, For they who commit sins confidently, will with less regret (it may be) confess it in this manner, where it is the fashion for every one to do it. And when all the World observes, how loosely the Italians, Spaniards and French do live in their Carnivals, giving to themselves all liberty and licence to do the vilest things at that time, not only because they are for a while to take their leave of them, but because they are (as they suppose) to be so soon eas'd of their crimes by Confession, and the circular and never­failing hand of the Priest; they will have no reason to admire the severity of Confession, which as it was most certainly intended as a deletory of sin, and might do its first intention, if it were equally ma­nag'd; so now certainly it gives confidence to many men to sin, and to most men to neglect the greater and more effective parts of essential repentance.

We shall not need to observe, how Confession is made a Minister of State, a Picklock of Secrets, a Spy upon Families, a Searcher of Inclinations, a Be­traying to Temptations, for this is wholly by the fault of the men, and not of the Doctrine; but even the Doctrine it self, as it is handled in the Church of [Page 84] Rome, is so far from bringing peace to troubled Con­sciences, that it intromits more scruples and cases than it can resolve.

For besides, that it self is a question, and they have made it dangerous, by pretending that it is by Divine Right and Institution (for so some of the Schoolmen Vide Biel. l. 4. dist. 17. 4.1. & Scotum ibidem. & Bonavent. ib. n. 72. teach, and the Canonists say the con­trary, Nelius dicitur [...]am institutam [...]uisse à quadam universali Eccle­siae traditione quam ex Novi vel Veteris Testamenti, [...]thoritate; & [...]men negatur haec Traditio esse universalis. and that it is onely of humane and positive Constitution) and by this difference in so great a point, have made the whole Oeconomy of their repen­tance, which relies upon the supposed necessity of Confession,Confessio non est necessaria apud [...]raecos: quia non emanavit ad illos traditionaliter, de poeuit. dist. 5. in principio Gloss. Ibid. Vide etiam Panormitan. super Decre [...]al. 5. cap. Quod autem, c. Omnis utriusque sexus sect. 18. extrav. Gloss. to fail, or to shake vehemently, and at the best, to be a foundation too uncertain, to build the hopes of salvation on it; besides all this, we say, Their Rules and Doctrines of Confession, enjoyn some things that are of themselves dangerous,Maldonatus sa [...]tur omnes Cano­nistas in ha [...]e sententiam consen­sisse, disp. de Sacram. [...]m. 2. c. [...]. De consess. Orig. Sess. 4. Can. 2. and lead into temptation. An instance of this is in that which is decreed in the Ca­nons of Trent, That the Penitent must not onely confess every mortal sin which after dili­gent inquiry he remembers, but even his very sinfull thoughts in particular, and his secret desires, and eve­ry circumstance which changes the kind of the sin, or (as some add) does notably increase it: and how this can be safely done, and who is sufficient for these things, and who can tell his circumstances without tempting his Confessor, or betraying, and defaming another person, (which is forbidden) and in what cases it may be done, or in what cases omitted; and whether the Confession be valid upon infinite other considerations, and whether [Page 85] it be to be repeated in whole or in part, and how often, and how much? these things are so uncertain, casual and contintingent, and so many cases are multiplied upon every one of these, and these so disputed and argued by their greatest Doctors, by Thomas and Scotus, and all the Schoolmen, and by the Casuists, that as Beatus Rhe­nanus complains, it was truly observed by the famous Iohn Geilerius, that according to their cases, inquiries and conclusions, it is impossible for any man to make a right Confession. So that although the shame of pri­vate Confession be very tolerable and easie, yet the ca­ses and scruples which they have introduc'd, are nei­ther easie nor tolerable, and though (as it is now used) there be but little in it, to restrain sin, yet there is very much danger of increasing it, and of receiving no be­nefit by it.

Sect. III.

BUt then for penances and satisfactions of which they boast so much, as being so great restraints to sin, these as they are publickly handled, are nothing but words and ineffective sounds. For first, if we consi­der what the penances themselves are which are en­joyn'd; they are reduc'd from the Antient Canonical penances to private and arbitrary; from years to hours; from great severity to gentleness and flattery; from fast­ing and publick shame to the saying over their beads; from cordial to ritual, from smart to money, from hearti­ness and earnest to pageantry and theatrical images of pe­nance; and if some Confessors happen to be se­vere, there are ways enough to be eased. For the Pe­nitent may have leave to go to a gentler, or he may get commutations, or he may get some body else Eman. Sa, V. Satisfact. n. 10. T [...]let. l. 3. instr. sacerd. cap. 11. n. 6. to do them for him: and if his penances be never so great, or never so little, yet may be all supplied by In­dulgencies; of which there are such store in the Lateran at Rome, that as Pope Boniface said, No man is able to number them; yet he confirm'd them all.

In the Church of Sancta Maria de Popolo there are for every day in the year, two thousand and eight hundred years of pardon, besides fourteen thousand and fourteen Carentanes; which in one year amount to more than a Million; all which are confirm'd by Pope Paschal the First, Boniface the VIII, and Gregory the IX. In the Church of S. Vitus and Modestus there are for every day [Page 87] in the year seven thousand years and seven thousand Carentanes of pardon, and a pardon of a third part of all our sins besides; and the price of all this, is but pray­ing before an altar in that Church. At the Sepulchre of Christ in Venice there is hung up a prayer of S. Au­stin, with an Indulgence of fourscore and two thousand years granted by Boniface the VIII. (who was of all the Popes the most bountiful of the Churches treasure) and Benedict the XI. to him that shall say it, and that for e­very day toties quoties. The Divine pardon of Sica gave a plenary indulgence to every one that being confessed and communicated, should pray there in the Franciscan Church of Sancta Maria de gli Angeli, and this pardon is ab omni poend & culp [...]. The English of that we easily un­derstand; but the meaning of it we do not, because they will not own that these Indulgences do profit any one whose guilt is not taken away by the Sacrament of pe­nance. But this is not the onely snare in which they have inextricably intangled themselves; but be it as they please for this, whatever it was, it was since en­larged by Sixtus IV. and Sixtus V. to all that shall wear S. Francis Chord. The saying a few Pater nosters and Ave's before a priviledged altar can in innumerable pla­ces procure vast portions of this Treasure; and to deliver a soul out of Purgatory, whom they list, is promised to many upon easie terms, even to the saying of their Beads over with an appendant Medal of the Popes Be­nediction. Every Priest at his third or fourth Masse is as sure (as may be) to deliver the souls of his parents; and a thousand more such stories as these are to be seen every where and every day.

Once for all: There was a Book printed at Paris by Francis Reg [...]ault, A. D. 1536, May 25. called The hours [Page 88] of the most blessed Virgin Mary according to the use of Sa­rum, in which for the saying three short prayers written in Rome in a place called, The Chappel of the Holy Cross of seven Romans, are promised fourscore and ten thousand years of pardon of deadly sin. Now the meaning of these things is very plain. By these devices they serve themselves, and they do not serve God. They serve themselves by this Doctrine:Tolet. instr. sa­cerd. lib. 3. cap. 11. n. 6. For they teach that what penance is ordinarily imposed, does not take away all the punishment that is due; for they do not impose what was antiently enjoyn'd by the penitential Canons, but some little thing instead of it: and it may be, that what was anciently enjoyn'd by the penitential Canons, is not so much as God will exact, (for they suppose that he will forgive nothing but the guilt and the eternity; but he will exact all that can be demanded on this side hell, even to the last farthing he must be paid some way or other, even when the guilt is taken away, but there­fore to prevent any falling that way, they have given indulgences enough to take off what was due by the Old Canons, and what may be due by the severity of God; and if these fail, they may have recourse to the Priests, and they by their Masses can make supply: so that their Disciples are well, and the want of ancient Discipline shall do them no hurt.

But then how little they serve Gods end by treating the sinner so gently, will be very evident. For by this means they have found out a way, that though, it may be, God will be more severe than the old penitential Canons, and although these Canons were much more severe than men are now willing to suffer, yet neither for the one or the other shall they need to be troubled: they have found out an easier way to go to heaven than [Page 89] so. An indulgence will be no great charge, but that will take off all the supernumerary penances which ought to have been imposed by the ancient Discipline of the Church, and may be requir'd by God. A little alms to a Priest, a small oblation to a Church, a pilgri­mage to the image or reliques of a Saint, wearing Saint Francis Chord, saying over the beads with an hallowed appendant, entering into a Fraternity, praying at a pri­viledged altar, leaving a legacy for a soul Mass, visiting a priviledged Caemetery, and twenty other devices will secure the sinner from suffering punishment here or hereafter, more then his friendly Priest is pleased gently to impose.

To them that ask, what should any one need to get so many hundred thousand years of pardon, as are ready to be had upon very easie terms? They answer as before; that whereas it may be for perjury the antient Canons enjoyned penance all their life Vide Concil. Tribur. c. 54. Burchard. lib. 19.; that will be supposed to be twenty or forty years, or suppose an hundred: if the man have been perjur'd a thousand times, and com­mitted adultery so often,Tertul. lib. de Poenitentia. and done innumerable other sins, for every one of which he deserves to suffer forty years penance, and how much more in the account of God he deserves, he knows not; if he be attrite and confess'd so that the guilt is taken away, yet as much temporal punishment remains due as is not paid here: but the indulgences of the Church will take off so much as it comes to; even of all that would be suffered in Purgatory. Now it is true, that Purgatory (at least as is believ'd) cannot last a hundred thousand years: but yet God may by the acerbity of the flames in twenty years, equal the Canonical penances of twenty thousand years: to prevent which, these indulgences of so many [Page 90] thousand years are devised. A wise and thrifty in­vention, sure and well contriv'd, and rightly applotted according to every mans need, and according as they suspect his bill shall amount to.

This strange invention, as strange as it is, will be own'd,De indulgent. l. 1. c. 9. Sect. Existit autem. for this is the account of it which we find in Bel­larmine: and although Gerson and Dominicus à Soto are asham'd of these prodigious indulgences, and suppose that the Popes Quaestuaries onely did procure them, yet it must not be so disown'd; truth is truth, and it is notoriously so; and therefore a reason must be found out for it, and this is it which we have accounted. But the use we make of it is this. That since they have de­clar'd that when sinnes are pardoned so easily, yet the punishment remains so very great, and that so much must be suffered here or in Purgatory; it is strange that they should not onely in effect pretend to shew more mercy than God does, or the primitive Church did; but that they should directly lay aside the primi­tive Discipline, and while they declaim against their adversaries for saying they are not necessary, yet at the same time they should devise tricks to take them quite away, so that neither penances shall much smart here, nor Purgatory (which is a device to make men to be Mulata's, as the Spaniard calls, half Christians, a device to make a man go to heaven and to hell too) shall not torment them hereafter. However it be, yet things are so ordered, that the noise of penances need not trouble the greatest criminal, unless he be so unfortunate as to live in no countrey and near no Church, and with­out Priest, or Friend, or Money, or notice of any thing that is so loudly talk'd of in Christendom. If he be, he hath no help but one; he must live a holy and a severe [Page 91] life, which is the onely great calamity which they are commanded to suffer in the Church of England: but if he be not; the case is plain, he may by these doctrines take his ease.

SECT. IV.

WE doubt not but they who understand the pro­per sequele of these things, will not wonder that the Church of Rome should have a numerous company of Proselytes, made up of such as the beginnings of Davids Army were. But that we may undeceive them also, for to their souls we intend charity and relief by this address; we have thought fit to add one conside­ration more; and that is, that it is not fit that they should trust to this, or any thing of this; not onely because there is no foundation of truth in these new devices, but because even the Roman Doctors them­selves, when they are pinch'd with an objection, let their hold go, and to escape, do in remarkable measures de­stroy their own new building.

The case is this. To them who say, that if there were truth in these pretensions, then all these, and the many millions of indulgences more, and the many other wayes of releasing souls out of Purgatory, the innume­rable Masses said every day, the power of the Keys so largely imployed, would in a short time have emptied Purgatory of all her sad inhabitants, or it may be, very few would go thither, and they that unfortunately do, cannot stay long; and consequently, besides that this [Page 92] great softness and easiness of procedure would give con­fidence to the greatest sinners, and the hopes of Purga­tory would destroy the fears of Hell, and the certainty of doing well enough in an imperfect life, would make men carelesse of the more excellent: besides these things, there will need no continuation of pensions to pray for persons dead many years ago: To them, I say who talk to them at this rate; they have enough to answer.

Deceive not your selves, there are more things to be reckon'd for than so. For when you have deserved great punishments for great sins, and the guilt is taken off by absolution, and (you suppose) the punishment by indulgences or the satisfaction of others; it may be so, and it may be not so.

For 1. It is according as your Indulgence is. Sup­pose it for fourty years, or it may be a hundred, or a thousand (and that is a great matter;) yet peradventure according to the old penitential rate you have deserved the penance of fourty thousand years; or at least you may have done so; by the more severe account of God. If the penance of fourty years be taken off by your in­dulgence, it does as much of the work as was promised or intended; but you can feel little ease, if still there remains due the penance of threescore thousand years. No man can tell the difference when what remains shall be so great as to surmount all the evils of this life; and the abatement may be accounted by pen and ink, but will signifie little in the perception; it is like the cast­ing out of a Devil out of a miserable Demoniack, when there still remains fifty more as bad as he that went away; the man will hardly find how much he is advanced in his [...]ure.

[Page 93]But 2. You have with much labour, and some charge, purchased to your self so many Quadragenes or Lents of pardon; that is, you have bought off the penances of so many times forty dayes. It is well; but were you well advised, it may be your Quadragenes are not Ca­renes; that is, are not a quitting the severest penances of fasting so long in bread and water; for there is great difference in the manner of keeping a penitential Lent, and it may be you have purchased but some lighter thing; and then if your demerit arise to so many Ca­renes, and you purchased but mere Quadragenes, with­out a minute and table of particulars, you may stay long­er in Purgatory than you expected.

3. But therefore your best way is to get a plenary Indulgence; and that may be had on reasonable terms; but take heed you do not think your self secure; For a plenary Indulgence does not do all that, it may be, you require: for there is an Indulgence more full, and ano­ther most full, and it is not agreed upon among the Doctors, whether a plenary Indulgence is to be extended beyond the taking off those penances which were actual­ly enjoyn'd by the confessor, or how far they go further.Vide Iohan. de Turrecre­mata in com­ment. dist. 1. de poenitentia. And they that read Turrecremata, Navar, Cordubensis, Fabius Incarnatus, Petrus de Soto, Armilla aurea, Aqui­nas, Tolet, Cajetan, in their several accounts of Indul­gences, will soon perceive that all this is but a handful of smoke, when you hold it, you hold it not.

4. But further yet; all Indulgencies are granted upon some inducement, and are not ex mero motu, or acts of mere grace without cause; and if the cause be not rea­sonable, they are invalid; and whether the cause be sufficient will be very hard to judge. And if there be for the Indulgence, yet if there be not a reasonable cause for [Page 94] the quantity of the indulgence, you cannot tell how much you get: and the Preachers of indulgences ought not to declare how valid they are assertive, that is, by any confidence, but opinative, or recitative, they can onely tell what is said, or what is their own opinion.

5. When this difficulty is passed over, yet it may be the person is not capable of them; for if he be not in the state of grace, all is nothing: and if he be, yet if he does not perform the condition of the Indulgence actually, his mere endeavour or good desire is nothing. And when the conditions are actually done, it must be enquired whether in the time of doing them you were in charity; whether you be so at least in the last day of finishing them; it is good to be certain in this, least all evaporate and come to nothing: But yet suppose this too, though the work you are to do as the condi­tion of the indulgence, be done so well that you lose not all the indulgence, yet for every degree of imper­fection in that work, you will lose apart of the indul­gence; and then it will be hard to tell whether you get half so much as you propounded to your self. But here Pope Adrian troubles the whole affair again:Hist. Concil. Trident. lib. 1. pag. 20. Lon­din. edit. for if the indulgence be onely given according to the wor­thiness of the work done, then that will avail of it self without any grant from the Church; and then it is hugely questionable whether the Popes authority be of any use in this whole matter.

6. But there is yet a greater heap of dangers and uncertainties; for you must be sure of the Authority of him that gives the Indulgence, and in this there are many doubtful questions; but when they are over, yet it is worth inquiry (for some Doctors are fearful in this point) Whether the intromission of Venial sinnes, [Page 95] without which no man lives, does hinder the fruit of the Indulgence, for if it does, all the cost is lost.

7. When an Indulgence is given, put case, to abide forty dayes on certain conditions; whether these forty dayes are to be taken collectively or distributively; for, because it is confessed, that the matter of Indulgences is res odibilis, a hateful and an odious matter,Fab. Incar­natus scrutin. Sacerd. de in­dulgent. it is not to be understood in the sense of favour, but of great­est severity, and therefore it is good to know before hand what to trust to, to enquire how the Bull is pen'd, and what sense of Law every word does bear; for it may be any good mans case: If an Indulgence be grant­ed to a place for so many dayes in every year, it were fit you enquire for how many years that will last; for some Doctors say, That if a definite number of years be not set down, it is intended to last but twenty years. And therefore it is good to be wise early.

8. But it is yet of greater consideration: If you take out a Bull of Indulgence, relating to the Article of Death, in case you recover that sickness in which you thought you should use it, you must consider, whether you must not take out a new one for the next fit of sickness; or will the first, which stood for nothing, keep cold, and without any sensible error serve when you shall indeed dye?

9. You must also inquire and be rightly informed whe­ther an Indulgence granted upon a certain Festival will be valid, if the day be chang'd (as they were all at once, by the Gregorian Calendar) or if you go into another Countrey, where the Feast is not kept the same day, as it happens in moveable Feasts, and on S. Bartho­lomews day, and some others.

10. When your Lawyers have told you their opinion [Page 96] of all these questions, and given it under their hand, it will concern you to inquire yet further, whether a suc­ceeding Pope have not, or cannot revoke an Indul­gence granted by his Predecessor; for this is often done in matters of favour and priviledges; and the German Princes complained sadly of it;Cention gra­vam. Germ. and it was complain'd in the Council of Lions, that Martin the Le­gate of Pope Innocent VIII. revok'd and dissipated all former grants;Idem facere voluit Paulus quintus in venetorum causa. and it is an old rule, Papa nunquam sibi ligat manus: The Pope never binds his own hands. But here some caution would do well.

11. It is worth inquiry, Whether in the year of Ju­bilee, all other Indulgences be suspended; for though some think they are not, yet Navar and Emanuel S à af­firm, that they are; and if they chance to say true (for no man knowes whether they do or no) you may be at a loss that way. And when all this is done, yet,

12. Your Indulgences will be of no avail to you in reserved cases, which are very many. A great many more very fine scruples might be mov'd, and are so; and therefore when you have gotten all the security you can by these, you are not safe at all. But there­fore be sure still to get Masses to be said.

So that now the great Objection is answered; you need not fear that saying Masses will ever be made un­necessary, by the multitude of Indulgences: The Priest must still be imployed and entertain'd in subsidium, since there are so many ways of making the Indulgence good for nothing: And as for the fear of emptying Purgatory by the free and liberal use of the Keyes, it is very needless; because the Pope cannot evacuate Fabius in­carnatus Scrutin. Sa­cerdot. de in­dulgen. sect. antepen. edit. Barcinon: 1628. Purgatory, or give so many Indulgences, as to take out all Souls from thence: And therefore if the Popes, [Page 97] and the Bishops, and the Legates, have been already too free, it may be there is so much in arrear, that the Trea­sure of the Church is spent, or the Church is in debt for souls; or else, though the Treasure be inexhaustible, yet so much of her Treasure ought not to be made use of, and therefore it may be that your souls shall be post­pon'd, and must stay and take its turn, God knows when. And therefore we cannot but commend the prudence of Cardinal Albernotius, who by his last will took order for fifty thousand Masses to be said for his soul; for he was a wise man, and lov'd to make all as sure as he could.

But then to apply this to the Consciences of the poor people of the Roman Communion.Apud Genes. Sepulvedam in vita Egidii Albernotii Cardinalis. Here is a great deal of Treasure of the Church pretended, and a great many favours granted, and much ease promised, and the wealth of the Church boasted of, and the peoples money gotten; and that this may be a perpetual spring, it is clear amongst their own Writers, that you are not sure of any good by all that is past, but you must get more security, or this may be nothing. But how easie were it for you now to conclude, that all this is but a meer cozenage, an art to get money? but that's but the least of the evil, it is a certain way to deceive souls. For since there are so many thousands that trust to these things, and yet in the confession of your own Writers, there are so many fallibilities in the whole, and in every part, why will you suffer your selves so weakly and vainly to be cozen'd out of your souls, with promises that signifie nothing, and words without vertue, and treasures that make no man rich, and indulgences that give confidence to sin, but no ease to the pains which follow?

[Page 98]Besides all this, it is very considerable, that this whole affair is a state of temptation; for they that have so many ways to escape, will not be so careful of the main stake, as the interest of it requires. He that hopes to be relieved by many others, will be tempted to neglect himself: There is a [...], an Vnum necessarium, even that we work out our own salvation with fear and trembling. A little wisdom, and an easie observation were enough to make all men that love themselves, wisely to abstain from such diet which does not nourish, but fills the stomack with wind and imagination. But to return to the main Inquiry.

We desire that it be considered, how dangerously good life is undermined, by the Propositions colla­terally taught by their great Doctors, in this matter of Indulgences; besides the main and direct danger and deception.

1. Venial sins preceding or following the work enjoyn'd for getting Indulgences, hinder not their fruit: But if they intervene in the time of doing them, then they hin­der. Fab. Incarn. ubi supra. By this Proposition there is infinite uncertainty concerning the value of any Indulgence; for if venial sins be daily incursions, who can say that he is one day clean from them? And if he be not, he hath paid his price for that which profits not, and he is made to re­lie upon that which will not support him. But though this being taught, doth evacuate the Indulgence, yet it is not taught to prevent the sin; for before and after, if you commit venial sinnes, there is no great matter in it: The inconvenience is not great, and the remedy is easie; you are told of your security as to this point before hand.

[Page 99]2. Pope Adrian taught a worse matter.Apud Petr [...]n de Soto lect. a instit. Sacerd. de necessariis ad effectum in­dulg. He that will obtain indulgence for another, if he does perform the work enjoyn'd, though himself be in deadly sin, yet for the other he prevails: as if a man could do more for another than he can do for himself; or as if God would regard the prayers of a vile and a wicked person when he inter­cedes for another, and at the same time, if he prays for himself, his prayer is an abomination. God first is in­treated for our selves, and when we are more excellent persons, admits us to intercede, and we shall prevail for others; but that a wicked person who is under actual guilt, and oblig'd himself to suffer all punishment, can ease and take off the punishment due to others by any external good work done ungraciously, is a piece of new Divinity without colour of reason or religion. O­thers in this are something less scandalous; and affirm that though it be not necessary that when the indul­gence is granted the man should be in the state of grace, yet it is necessary that at some time or other he should be; at any time (it seems) it will serve. For thus they turn Divinity and the care of souls into Mathematicks and Clockwork, and dispute minutes and periods with God, and are careful to tell their people how much li­berty they may take, and how far they may venture, least they should lose any thing of their sins pleasure, which they can possibly enjoy, and yet have hopes of being sav'd at last.

3. But there is worse yet. If a man willingly com­mits a sin in hope and expectation of a Iubilee, and of the Indulgences afterwards to be granted, he does not lose the Indulgence, but shall receive it: which is ex­presly affirm'd by Navar In tract. de jubileo. not ab. 34. n. 4. & 6., and Antonius Cordubensis Qu. 37. de indulg prop. 3., and Bellarmine Lib. 1. de in­dulg. c. 10. Sect. Altera dubitatio. though he asks the question, denies it [Page 100] not. By which it is evident that the Roman Doctrines and Divinity, teach contrary to Gods way; who is most of all angry with them that turn his grace into wanton­ness, and sin, that grace may abound.

Scrutin. Sa­cerd. ubi su­pra.4. If any man by reason of povertie, cannot give the prescrib'd Almes, he cannot receive the Indulgence. Now since it is sufficiently known, that in all or most of the Indulgences, a clause is sure to be included, that something be offered to the Church, to the Altar, to a Religious House, &c. the consequent of this will be soon seen, that Indulgences are made for the rich, and the Treasures of the Church are to be dispensed to them that have Treasures of their own, for habenti dabitur. But then, God help the poor; for them Purgatory is prepar'd, and they must burn: For the Rich it is pretended, but the smell of fire will not pass upon them.

From these premises we suppose it but too evident, that the Roman Doctors prevaricate in the whole Do­ctrine of Repentance, which indeed in Christ Jesus is the whole Oeconomy of Justification and Salvation; it is the hopes and staff of all the world, the remedy of all evils past, present, and to come. And if our physick be poyson'd, if our staff be broken, if our hopes make us asham'd, how shall we appear before Christ at his coming? But we say, that in all the parts of it their Doctrine is infinitely dangerous.

1. Contrition is sufficient if it be but one little act, and that in the very Article of death; and before that time it is not necessary by the Law of God, nay, it is indeed sufficient; but it is also insufficient, for without confes­sion in act or desire it suffices not. And though it be thus insufficiently sufficient, yet it is not necessary: For [Page 101] attrition is also sufficient, if a Priest can be had, and then any little grief proceeding out of the fear of Hell will do it, if the Priest do but absolve.

2. Confession might be made of excellent use, and is so among the pious children of the Church of Eng­land; but by the Doctrines and Practises in the Church of Rome, it is made, not the remedy of sins by proper enargy, but the excuse, the alleviation, the confidence, the ritual, external and sacramental remedy, and serves instead of the labours of a holy and a regular life; and yet is so intangled with innumerable and inextricable cases of Conscience, Orders, humane Prescripts, and great and little Artifices, that scruples are more increas­ed, than sins are lessened.

3. For Satisfaction and Penances, which if they were rightly order'd, and made instrumental to kill the desi­res of sin, or to punish the Criminal, or were properly the fruits of repentance, that is, parts of a holy life, good works done in charity, and the habitual permanent grace of God, were so prevailing, as they do the work of God; yet when they are taken away, not only by the declension of primitive Discipline, but by new Doctrines and Indulgences, regular and offer'd commutations for mony, and superstitious practises, which are sins them­selves, and increase the numbers and weights of the ac­count, there is a great way made for the destruction of souls, and the discountenancing the necessity of holy life; but nothing for the advantage of holiness, or the becoming like to God.

And now at last for a cover to this dish, we have thought fit to mind the world, and to give caution to all that mean to live godly in Christ Iesus, to what an infinite scandal and impiety this affair hath risen in [Page 102] the Church of Rome; we mean, in the instance of their Taxa Camerae, seu Cancellariae Apostolicae, the tax of the Apostolical Chamber or Chancery: A Book publikely printed and expos'd to common sale; of which their own Espencaeus gives this account,Digress. 2. ad Cap. 1. Epist. ad T [...]n. that it is a Book in which a man may learn more wickedness, than in all the Summa­ries of vices published in the world; and yet to them that will pay for it, there is to many given a License, to all an Absolution for the greatest and most horrid sins. There is is a price set down for his Absolution that hath kill'd his Father, or his Mother, Brother, Sister, or Wife, or that hath lyen with his Sister, or his Mother. We desire all good Christians to excuse us for naming such horrid things.

But the Licences are printed at Paris in the Year 1500. by Tossan Denis: Pope Innocent the VIII. either was Author or inlarger of these Rules of this Chancery Tax, and there are glosses upon them, in which the Scholiast himself who made them, affirms, that he must for that time conceal some things, to avoid Scandal. But how far this impiety proceeded, and how little regard there is in it to piety, or the good of souls, is visible by that which Augustinus de Anconâ teaches, [That the Pope ought not to give Indulgences to them who have a desire of giving mony, but cannot, as to them who actually give:De potest. Papae. qu. 3. ad 3. And whereas it may be objected, that then poor mens souls are in a worse condition than the rich; he answers, That as to the remission of the punishment acquir'd by the Indul­gence, in such a case it is not inconvenient that the rich should be in a better condition than the poor:] For in that [Page 103] manner do they imitate God, who is no respecter of persons.

SECT. VI.

THese Observations we conceive to be sufficient to de­ter every well-meaning person from running into, or abiding in such temptations. Every false Proposition that leads to impiety, is a stock and fountain of temptations; and these which we have reckon'd in the matter of Re­pentance, having influence upon the whole life, are yet much greater, by corrupting the whole mass of Wisdom and Spiritual Propositions.

There are indeed many others. We shall name some of them, but shall not need much to insist on them. Such as are,

• 1. That one man may satisfie for another.
  Sa aphor. verb. satisfact. num. 10. Scrutin. Sa­cerd. tract. de Indulg. sect. penult. Su [...]rrez. part. 4. in 3. disp. 38. sect. 9.
  It is the general Doctrine of their Church: The Divines and Lawyers consent in it, and publikely own it: The effect of which is this, that some are made rich by it, and some are careless; But qui non solvit in aere, luat in­corpore, is a Canonical rule; and though it was spoken in the matter of publick penances, and so relates to the exteriour Court, yet it is also practis'd and avowed in satisfactions or penances relating to the inward Court. of Conscience, and penance Sacramental; and the rich man is made negligent in his duty, and is whip'd upon another mans back, and his purse onely is the Penitent; and which is worst of all, here is a pretence of doing that, which is too neer blasphemy but to say. For by [Page 104] this Doctrine, it is not to be said of Christ alone, that he was wounded for our transgressions, that he only sa­tisfied for our sins; for in the Church of Rome it is done frequently, and pretended daily, that by another mans stripes we are healed.
• 2. They teach, That a habit of sinne, is not a sinne, distinct from those former actions by which the habit was contracted. The secret intention of which propo­sition, and the malignity of it, consists in this, that it is not necessary for a man to repent speedily; and a man is not bound by repentance to interrupt the procedure of his impiety, or to repent of his habit, but of the single acts that went before it. For as for those that come after, they are excus'd, if they be produc'd by a strong habit; and the greater the habit, the less is the sin: But then as the repentance need not for that rea­son, be hasty and presently; so because it is onely to be of single acts, the repentance it self need not be ha­bitual, but it may be done in an instant; whereas to mortifie a habit of sinne (which is the true and proper repentance (there is requir'd a longer time, and a pro­cedure in the methods of a holy life. By this, and such like Propositions, and careless Sentences, they have brought it to that pass, that they reckon a single act of Contrition, at any time to be sufficient to take away the wickedness of a long life. Now that this is the avowed Doctrine of the Roman Guides of Souls,
  Gra [...]at. in materia de peccatis, tract. 8 desp. 1. sect. 1 F. Knot. a­gainst Chil­ling worth in his Infidelity unmask'd, p. 105, 106, 107, &c.
  will sufficiently appear in the Writings of their chiefest, of which no learned man can be ignorant. The thing was of late openly and professedly disputed against us, and will not be denied. And that this Doctrine is infinite­ly destructive of the necessity of a good life, cannot be doubted of, when themselves do own the proper [Page 105] consequents of it, even the unnecessariness of present repentance, or before the danger of death; of which we have already given accounts. But the reason why we remark it here, is that which we now mentioned, because that by the Doctrine of vitious habits, having in them no malignity or sin but what is in the single prece­ding acts, there is an excuse made for millions of sins: For if by an evil habit the sinner is not made worse, and more hated by God, and his sinful acts made not onely more, but more criminal; it will follow, that the sins are very much lessened: For they being not so voluntary in their exercise and distinct emanation, are not in present so malicious; and therefore he that hath gotten a habit of drunkenness or swearing, sins less in every act of drunk­enness or prophane oath, than he that acts them seldom; because by his habit he is more inclin'd, and his sins are almost natural, and less consider'd, less chosen, and not disputed against; but pass by inadvertency, and an untroubled consent, easily and promptly, and almost naturally from that principle: So that by this means, and in such cases when things are come to this pass, they have gotten an imperfect Warrant to sin a great deal, and a great while, without any new great inconvenience: Which evil state of things ought to be infinitely avoid­ed by all Christians that would be saved, by all means; and therefore all such Teachers, and all such Doctrines, are carefully to be declin'd, who give so much easiness, not only to the remedies, but to the sins themselves. But of this, we hope it may be sufficient to have given this short warning.
• 3. The distinction of Mortal and Venial sins, as it is taught in the Church of Rome, is a great cause of wickedness, and careless conversation. For although [Page 106] we do with all the ancient Doctors admit of the distincti­on of sins Mortal and Venial; yet we also teach, That in their own nature, and in the rigor of the Divine Justice, every sin is damnable, and deserves Gods anger, and that in the unregenerate they are so accounted, and that in hell the damned suffer for small and great in a common mass of torment; yet by the Divine mercy and compassion, the smaller sins which come by surprize, or by invincible igno­rance, or inadvertency, or unavoidable infirmity, shall not be imputed to those who love God, and delight not in the smallest sin, but use caution and prayers, watchfulness and remedies against them. But if any man delights in small sins, and heaps them into numbers, and by deliberation or licentiousness they grow numerous, or are in any sense chosen or taken in by contempt of the Divine Law, they do put us from the favour of God, and will pass into se­vere accounts. And though sins are greater or less by comparison to each other, yet the smallest is a burthen too great for us, without the allowances of the Divine mercy.

But the Church of Rome teaches, that there is a whole kinde of sins, which are venial in their own nature; such, which if they were altogether, all in the world conjoyn'd, could not equal one mortal sin, Bellarm. l. 1. de amiss gratiae, cap. 13. sect. alterum est. Et de Sacram Eu­char. l. 4. c. 19. sect. respondeo. nor destroy charity, nor put us from the favour of God; such, for which no man can perish, Cap. 14. sect. adde postrenso. De Purgator. lib. 1. cap. 11. sect. probatur ultimo. etiamsi nullum pactum esset de remissione, though Gods merciful Covenant of Pardon did not intervene. And whereas, Christ said, of every idle word a man shall speak, he shall give account at the day of judgement; and, By your words ye shall be justified; and, By your words ye shall be condemned: Bellarmine expresly affirms, It is not intelligible, how an idle word should in its own nature be worthy of the eternal wrath of God, and eternal flame [...]. [Page 107] Many other desperate words are spoken by the Roman Doctors in this Question, which we love not to aggra­vate, because the main thing is acknowledged by them all.

But now we appeal to the reason and Consciences of all men, Whether this Doctrine of sins Venial in their own nature, be not greatly destructive to a holy life? When it is plain, that they give rest to mens Consciences for one whole kinde of sins; for such, which because they occur every day, in a very short time (if they be not interrup­ted by the grace of Repentance) will swell to a prodigi­ous heap. But concerning these we are bidden to be quiet; for we are told, that all the heaps of these in the world cannot put us out of Gods favour. Adde to this, that it being in thousands of cases, impossible to tell which are, and which are not Venial in their own nature, and in their appendant circumstances, either the people are co­zen'd by this Doctrine into an useless confidence; and for all this talking in their Schools, they must nevertheless do to Venial sins as they do to Mortal, that is, mortifie them, fight against them, repent speedily of them, and keep them from running into mischief; and then all their kinde Doctrines in this Article, signifie no comfort or ease but all danger and difficulty, and useless dispute 3 or else, if really they mean, that this easiness of opinion be made use of, then the danger is imminent, and carelesness is in­troduc'd, and licentiousness in all little things is easily in­dulg'd; and mens souls are daylie lessen'd without repair, and kept from growing towards Christian perfection, and from destroying the whole body of sin; and in short, despising little things, they perish by little and little.

This Doctrine also is worse yet in the handling. For it hath infinite influence to the disparagement of holy life, not onely by the uncertain, but as it must frequently hap­pen, [Page 108] by the false determination of innumerable cases of Conscience. For it is a great matter both in the doing and the thing done, both in the caution and the repentance, whether such an action be a venial or a mortal sin. If it chance to be mortal, and pour Confessor says it is venial, your soul is betrayed. And it is but a chance what they say in most cases; for they call what they please venial; and they have no certain rule to answer by; which ap­pears too sadly in their innumerable differences which is amongst all their Casuists, in saying what is, and what is not mortal; and of this there needs no greater proof than the reading the little Summaries made by their most leading guides of Consciences, Navar, Cajetane, Tolet, Emanuel Sà, and others; where one sayes such a thing is mortal, and two say it is venial.

And lest any man should say or think, this is no great matter, we desire that it be considered, that in venial sins there may be very much fantastick pleasure, and they that retain them do believe so; for they suppose the pleasure is great enough to outweigh the intolerable pains of Purga­tory; and that it is more eligible to be in Hell a while, than to cross their appetites in such small things. And howeve [...] it happen in this particular, yet because the Do­ctor [...] differ so infinitely and irreconcileably, in saying what is, and what is not Venial, whoever shall trust to their Do­ctrine, saying that such a sin is Venial; and to their Do­ctrine, that says it does not exclude from Gods favour, may by these two Propositions be damned before he is aware.

We omit to insist upon their express contradicting the words of our Blessed Saviour, who taught his Church expresly, That we must work in the day time; for the night cometh, and no man worketh: Let this be as true as it can [Page 109] in the matter of Repentance and Mortification, and work­ing out our pardon for mortal sins; yet it is not true in Venial sins, if we may believe their great In 4 S [...]u [...]. dist. 21. q. 1. art. 2. S. Thomas, whom also Bellarmine Lib. 1. cap. 14. de Purgator. sect. est ergo o­pini [...] ver a. [...] follows in it; for he affirms, That by the acts of Love and Patience in Purgatory, Venial sins are remitted; and that the acceptation of those punish­ments, proceeding out of Charity, is a virtual kinde of penance. But in this particular we follow not S. Thomas nor Bellarmine in the Church of England and Ireland; for we believe in Jesus Christ, and follow him: If men give themselves liberty as long as they are alive to commit one whole kinde of sins, and hope to work it out after death by acts of Charity and Repentance, which they would not do in their life time; either they must take a course to sentence the words of Christ, as savouring of heresie, or else they will find themselves to have been at first deceiv'd in their Proposition, and at last in their expectation. Their faith hath fail'd them here, and hereafter they will be asham'd of their hope.

Sect. VII.

THere is a Proposition, which indeed is new, but is now the general Doctrine of the Leading Men in the Church of Rome; and it is the foundation on which their Doctors of Conscience rely, in their decision of all cases in which there is a doubt or question made by themselves; and that is, That if an Opinion or Speculation be probable, it may in practise be safely followed: And if it be inquir'd, What is sufficient to make an Opinion probable; the answer is easie, Sufficit opinio alicujus gravis Doctoris aut Bonorum exemplum: Emanuel [Sa aphor. verb. [...]ubium. Escobar. Theol. moral. Exam. 3. c. 3. de Cen­sc [...]la probabi­ [...], &c. The opinion of any one grave Doctor is sufficient to make a matter proba­ble; nay, the example and practise of good men, that is, men who are so reputed; if they have done it, you may do so too, and be safe. This is the great Rule of their Cases of Conscience.

And now we ought not to be press'd with any ones saying, that such an opinion is but the private opinion of one or more of their Doctors. For although in mat­ters of Faith this be not sufficient, to impute a Doctrine to a whole Church, which is but the private opinion of one or more; yet because we are now speaking of the infinite danger of souls in that communion, and the horrid Propositions by which their Disciples are con­ducted, to the disparagement of good life, it is suffi­cient to alledge the publick and allowed sayings of their Doctors; because these sayings are their Rule of living: and because the particular Rules of Conscience, use [Page 111] not to be Decreed in Councils, we must derive them from the places where they grow, and where they are to be found.

But besides, you will say, That this is but the private opinion of some Doctors; and what then? Therefore it is not to be called the Doctrine of the Roman Church. True, we do not say, It is an Article of their Faith, but, a rule of manners: This is not indeed in any pub­lick Decree; but we say, that although it be not, yet neither is the contrary. And if it be but a private opi­nion, yet, is it safe to follow it, or is it not safe? For that's the question, and therein is the danger. If it be safe, then this is their Rule, A private opinion of any one grave Doctor, may be safely followed in the questions of Vertue and Vice. But if it be not safe to follow it, and that this does not make an opinion probable, or the pra­ctise safe; Who sayes so? Does the Church? No; Does Dr. Cajus, or Dr. Sempronius say so? Yes: But these are not safe to follow; for they are but private Doctors: Or if it be safe to follow them, though they be no more, and the opinion no more but probable, then I may take the other side, and choose which I will, and do what I list in most cases, and yet be safe by the Do­ctrine of the Roman Casuists; which is the great line, and general measure of most mens lives; and that is it which we complain of. And we have reason; for they suffer their Casuists to determine all cases, severely and gently, strictly and loosly; that so they may entertain all spirits, and please all dispositions, and govern them by their own inclinations, and as they list to be governed; by what may please them, not by that which profits them; that none may go away scandaliz'd or griev'd from their peni­tential chairs.

[Page 112]But upon this account, it is a sad reckoning which can be made concerning souls in the Church of Rome. Suppose one great Doctor amongst them (as many of them do) shall say, it is lawful to kill a King whom the Pope declares Heretick. By the Doctrine of proba­bility here is his Warranty. And though the Church do not declare that Doctrine; that is, the Church doth not make it certain in Speculation, yet it may be safely done in practise: Here is enough to give peace of con­science to him that does it. Nay, if the contrary be more safe, yet if the other be but probable by reason or Authority, you may do the less safe, and refuse what is more. For that also is the opinion of some grave Doctors: Eman. Sa, Aphor. verb. Dubium Esco­bar. de conscien­t [...] probabili. If one Doctor says, it is safe to swear a thing as of our knowledge, which we do not know, but believe it is so, it is therefore probable that it is lawful to swear it, because a grave Doctor says it, and then it is safe enough to do so.

Apud Na [...]le­r [...] generat. 22.26.And upon this account, who could finde fault with Pope Constantine the IV. who when he was accus'd in the Lateran Council for holding the See Apostolick when he was not in Orders, justified himself by the example of Sergius Bishop of Ravenna, and Stephen Bishop of Na­ples. Here was exemplum bonorum, honest men had done so before him,Dist. 82. Can. Presbyter in­glossa. and therefore he was innocent. When it is observed by Cardinal Campegius, and Alber­tus Pighius did teach, That a Priest lives more holily and chaftly that keeps a Concubine, than he that hath a married wife; and then shall finde in the Popes Law, That a Priest is not to be remov'd for fornication;3 Qu. [...]. Latae [...]utravag. de [...]igamis. Quja [...]irca, Communi­ter dicitur quod Clericus pr [...] simpliti fornitatione deponi non debet, dist. 81. Maximin. Glossa in Gratian. who will not, or may not practically conclude, that since by the Law of God, marriage is holy, and yet to some [Page 113] men, fornication is more lawful, and does not make a Priest irregular, that therefore to keep a Concubine is very lawfull; especially since abstracting from the consideration of a mans being in Orders or not, forni­cation it self is probably no sin at all. Sent. l. 4. dist. 33 For so saies Du­randus, Simple fornication it self is not a deadly sin according to the Natural Law, and excluding all posi­tive Law;Lib. de Temp. qu. 2 de luxuria. and Martinus de Magistris saies, To believe simp le fornication to be no deadly sin, is not heretical, because the testimonies of Scripture are not expresse. These are grave Doctors, and therefore the opinion is probable, and the practise safe. Vide Dan. Tiles. de l'erbo non scripto, l. 4. c. 8. When the good people of the Church of Rome hear it read, That P. Clement the VIII. in the Index of prohibited Books saies, That the Bible published in vulgar Tongues, ought not to be read and retain'd, no not so much as a compend of the History of the bible; and Bellarmine saies, That it is not necessary to salvation, to believe that there are any Scriptures at all written; and that Cardinal Hosius saith, Perhaps it had been better for the Church, if no Scriptures had been written: They cannot but say, That this Doctrine is probable, and think themselves safe, when they walk without the Light of Gods Word, and relie wholly upon the Pope, or their Priest, in what he is pleas'd to tell them; and that they are no way ob­lig'd to keep that Commandment of Christ, Search the Scriptures. Instruct. Sace [...]d l. 5. c. 6. n. 15. Cardinal Tolet saies, That if a Nobleman be set upon, and may escape by going away, he is not tied to it, but may kill him that intends to strike him with a stick: Lib. 4. c. 13. n. 4. That if a man be in a great passion, and so trans­ported, that he considers not what he saies, if in that case he does blaspheme, he does not always sin: Lib. 5. c. 10. n. 3. That if a man be beastly drunk, and then commit fornication, that for­nication [Page 114] is no sin: Lib. 5. c. 13. n. 10. That if a man desires carnal polluti­on, that he may be eas'd of his carnal temptations, or for his health, it were no sin: Lib. 5. c. 11. n. 5. That it is lawful for a man to expose his Bastards to the Hospital to conceal his own shame. He saies it out of Soto, and he from Thomas Aquinas: That if the times be hard, or the Iudge unequal, a man that cannot sell his Wine at a due price, may lawfully make his measures less than is appointed; or mingle Water with his Wine, Lib. 8. c. 39. n. 4. and sell it for pure, so he do not lie; and yet if he does, it is no mortal sin, nor obliges him to restitution. Emanuel Sà, Aphor. tit. Debitum Conju­gale. 6. affirms, That if a man lie with his intend­ed Wife, before Marriage, it is no sin, or light one; nay, quin etiam expedit si multum illa defferatur, it is good to do so, if the benediction or publication of marriage be much deferr'd: That Infants in their Cradles may be made Priests, is the common opinion of Divines and Canonists, Lib. 1. cap. 61. saith Tolet; and that in their Cradles they can be made Bishops,Ibid. said the Archdeacon and the Provost; and though some say the contrary, yet the other is the more true, saith the Cardinal. Vasques saith, That not onely an Image of God, but any Creature in the World, De Adorat l. 3. Disp. 1. c. 2. reasonable or un­reasonable, may without danger be worshipped together with God, as his Images That we ought to adore the re­liques of Saints, Ib. c. 5. sect. 33. though under the form of Worms; and that it is no sin to worship a ray of light in which the De­vil is invested, if a man supposes him to be Christ: And in the same manner, if he supposes it to be a piece of a Saint, which is not, he shall not want the merit of his de­votion. And to conclude, Pope Celestine the III. (as Al­phonsus à Castro reports himself to have seen a Decretal of his to that purpose) affirmed; That if one of the mar­ried couple fell into Heresie, the marriage is dissolv'd, and that the other may marry another; and the marri­age [Page 115] is nefarious, and they are irritae nuptiae, Concil C.P. 6. can. 76. the Espou­sals are void, if a Catholick and a Heretick marry to­gether, said the Fathers of the Synod in Trullo: And though all of this be not own'd generally; yet if a Ro­man Catholick marries a wife that is, or shall turn He­retick, he may leave her, and part bed and board, ac­cording to the Doctrine taught by the Cap. fin. de conver. conjug. c. 2. de divor­tiis. Canon Law it self; by the Lawyers and Divines, as appears in De Matrim. p. 2. c. 7. sect. 5. n. 4. Co­varuvias, In Sent. 4. d. 39. art. 1. Concl. ul [...]. Mathias Aquarius, and Lib. 1. de Matrim c. 14. sect. secundo, sine consensu. Bellarmine.

These opinions are indeed very strange to us of the Church of England and Ireland, but no strangers in the Church of Rome, and because they are taught by great Doctors, by Popes themselves, by Cardinals, and the Canon Law respectively, do at least become very pro­bable, and therefore they may be believ'd and practis'd without danger; according to the Doctrine of Probabi­lity. And thus the most desperate things that ever were said by any, though before the declaration of the Church they cannot become Articles of Faith, yet besides that they are Doctrines publickly allowed, they can also be­come rules of practise, and securities to the conscience of their Disciples.

To this we may adde, that which is usual in the Church of Rome, the praxis Ecclesiae; the practise of the Church. Thus if an Indulgence be granted upon con­dition to visit such an Altar in a distant Church; the Nuns that are shut up, and Prisoners that cannot go abroad, if they address themselves to an Altar of their own with that intention, they shall obtain the Indul­gence.Serutin. Sacer­dot. de Indul. Id enim confirmat Ecclesiae praxis, says Fabius. [Page 116] The practise of the Church in this case, gives first a probability in Speculation, and then a certainty in pra­ctise. This instance, though it be of no concern, yet we use it as a particular, to shew the principle upon which they go. But it is practicable in many things of greatest danger and concern. If the question be, Whe­ther it be lawfull to worship the Image of the Cross, or of Christ with Divine Worship? first, there is a Do­ctrine of S. Thomas for it, and Vasquez, and many others; therefore it is probable, and therefore is safe in practise; & sic est Ecclesiae praxis, the Church also practises so;3. Part. qu. 25. art. 4. Vide etiam Pontif. cap. de benedictione no­vae crucis, fol. 163. as appears in their own Offices, and S. Tho­mas makes this use of it. Illi exhibemus cultum Latriae in quo ponimus spem salutis: sed in cruce Christi ponimus spem salutis. Cantat enim Ecclesia, O Crux ave spes unica, Hoc passionis tempore, Auge piis justitiam, Reis (que) dona veniam. Ergo Crux Christi est adoranda adoratione La­triae. We give Divine Worship (says he) to that in which we put our hopes of salvation; but in the Cross we put our hopes of salvation; for so the Church sings (it is the practise of the Church) Hail, O Cross, our onely hope in this time of suffering; encrease righteousness to the godly, and give pardon to the guilty; therefore the Cross of Christ is to be ador'd with Divine Ado­ration.

By this Principle you may embrace any opinion of their Doctors safely, especially if the practise of the Church do intervene, and you need not trouble your self with any further inquiry: And if an evil custom get amongst men, that very custom shall legi­timate the action, if any of their grave Doctors allow it, or good men use it; and Christ is not your Rule, but the examples of them that live with you, or are in [Page 117] your eye and observation, that's your rule. We hope we shall not need to say any more in this affair: The pointing out this rock may be warning enough to them that would not suffer shipwrack, to decline the danger that looks so formidably.

Sect. VIII.

AS these evil Doctrines have general influence into evil life; so there are some others, which if they be pursued to their proper and natural issues; that is, if. they believ'd and practis'd, are enemies to the particular and specifick parts of Piety and Religion. Thus the very prayers of the Faithful are, or may be spoil'd by Doctrines publickly allowed, and prevailing in the Ro­man Church.

For 1. They teach, That prayers themselves ex opere operato, or by the natural work it self, do prevail: For it is not essential to prayer for a man to think particularly of what he sayes; it is not necessary to think of the things sig­nified by the words: De Orat. l. 3. c. 4. So Suarez teaches. Nay, it is not necessary to the essence of prayer, that he who prays should think de ipsa locutione, of the speaking it self. And indeed it is necessary that they should all teach so, or they cannot tolerably pretend to justifie their prayers in an unknown Tongue. But this is indeed their publick Doctrine: For prayers in the mouth of the man that says them, are like the words of a Charmer, they prevail even when they are not understood, sayes Salmeron: or as Antoninus, They are like a precious stone, Su [...]. part. 3. tit. 23. of as much value in the hand of [Page 118] an unskilful man, as of a Ieweller: Vide etiam Ia­cobum de Graf­fus de orat. lib. 2. Instruct. Sa­cerd. c. 13. n. 5. & 6. And therefore, atten­tion to, or devotion in our prayers, is not necessary: For the understanding of which, saith Cardinal Tolet, when it is said, that you must say your prayers or offices attently, reverently and devoutly, you must know that attention or advertency to your prayers is manifold: 1. That you attend to the words, so that you speak them not to fast, or to begin the next verse of a Psalm, be­fore he that recites with you hath done the former verse; and this attention is necessary. But 2. There is an atten­tion, which is by understanding the sense; and that is not necessary: For if it were, very extremely few would do their duty, when so very few do at all understand what they say. 3. There is an attention relating to the end of prayer, that is, that he that prays, considers that he is present before God, and speaks to him; and this indeed is very profitable, but it is not necessary: No, not so much. So that by this Doctrine no attention is necessary, but to attend that the words be all said, and said right. But even this attention is not necessary, that it should be actu­al, but it suffices to be virtual, that is, that he who says his office, intends to do so, and do not change his minde, although he does not attend: And he who does not change his minde, that is, unless observing himself not to attend, he still turn his minde to other things, he attends; meaning, he attends sufficiently, and as much as is necessary; though indeed speaking naturally and truly, he does not attend. If any man in the Church of England and Ireland, had published such Doctrine as this, he should quickly and deservedly have felt the severity of the Ecclesiastical Rod. But in Rome it goes for good Catholick Do­ctrine.

Now although upon this account, Devotion is (it may [Page 119] be) good; and it is good to attend to the words of our prayer, and the sense of them; yet that it is not necessary, is evidently consequent to this. But it is also expresly affirm'd by the same hand;Ibid. n. [...]. There ought to be devotion, that our mind be inflam'd with the love of God, though if this be wanting, without contempt, it is no deadly sin. Ecclesiae satisfit per opus externum, nec aliud jubet, saith Reginaldus: Vbi [...] If ye do the outward work, the Church is satisfied, neither does she command any thing else. Good Doctrine this! And it is an excel­lent Church, that commands nothing to him that prays, but to say so many words.

Well! But after all this, if Devotion be necessary or not, if it be present or not, if the minde wander, or wander not, if you minde what you pray, or minde it not, there is an easie cure for all this: for Pope Leo granted remission of all negligences in their saying their offices and prayers to them, who after they have done, shall say this prayer, [To the Holy and Vndivided Trinity; To the Humanity of our Lord Iesus Christ cruci­fied; To the fruitfulness of the most Blessed, and most Glorius Virgin Mary, and to the Vniversity of all Saints, be Eternal praise, honour, vertue and glory, from every Creature; and to us remission of sins for ever and ever. Amen. Blessed are the Bowels of the Virgin Mary, which bore the Son of the Eternal God; and blessed are the Paps which suckled Christ our Lord: Pater noster. Ave Maria.] This prayer, to this purpose, is set down by Navar, and Cardinal Tolet. Vbi supra, cap. 13.

This is the sum of the Doctrine, concerning the man­ner of saying the Divine offices in the Church of Rome, in which greater care is taken to obey the Precept of the Church, than the Commandments of God: [For [Page 120] the Precept of hearing Mass is not, to intend the words, but to be present at the Sacrifice, though the words be not so much as heard, and they that think the contrary, think so without any probable reason,] saith Tolet. Ibid. n 6. It seems there was not so much as the Authority of one grave Doctor to the contrary; for if there had, the contrary opinion might have been probable; but all agree upon this Do­ctrine, all that are considerable.

So that between the Church of England, and the Church of Rome, the difference in this Article is plainly this, They pray with their lips, we with the heart; we pray with the understanding, they with the voice; we pray, and they say prayers. We suppose that we do not please God, if our hearts be absent; they say, it is enough if their bodies be present at their greatest so­lemnity of prayer, though they hear nothing that is spoken, and understand as little. And which of these be the better way of serving God, may soon be de­termin'd, if we remember the complaint which God made of the Jews, This people draweth near me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me: But we know, that we are commanded to ask in faith, which is seated in the understanding, and requires the concurrence of the will, and holy desires; which cannot be at all, but in the same degree in which we have a knowledge of what we ask. The effectual, fervent prayer of a righte­ous man prevails: But what our prayers want of this, they must needs want of blessing and prosperity. And if we lose the benefit of our prayers, we lose that great instrumentality by which Christians are receptive of par­don, and strengthned in faith, and confirm'd in hope, and increase in charity, and are protected by Provi­dence, and are comforted in their sorrows, and derive [Page 121] help from God: Ye ask, and have not, because ye ask amiss; that is S. Iames his rule. They that pray not as they ought, shall never obtain what they fain would.

Hither is to be reduc'd, their fond manner of prayer, consisting in vain repetitions of Names, and little forms of words. The Psalter of our Lady, is an hundred and fifty Ave Maries, and at the end of every tenth, they drop in the Lords Prayer, and this with the Creed at the end of the fifty, makes a perfect Rosary. This indeed is the main entertainment of the peoples Devotion; for which cause Mantuan call'd their Re­ligion,

A Religion that numbers their murmurs by berries fil'd upon a string: This makes up so great a part of their Religion, that it may well be taken for one half of its definition. But because so few do understand what they say, but all repeat, and stick to their numbers, it is evident they think to be heard for that. For that or nothing; for besides that, they neither do nor understand: And all that we shall now say to it is, That our Blessed Saviour reprov'd this way of Devotion, in the Practise and Doctrines of the Hea­thens: Very like to which is that which they call the Psalter of Iesus; in which are fifteen short Ejaculati­ons, as [Have mercy on me * Strengthen me, * Help me, * Comfort me, &c.] and with every one of these, the name of Iesus is to be said thirty times, that is in all, four hundred and fifty times. Now we are ignorant [Page 122] how to distinguish this from the [...],Ohe jam desme Deos [...]xor gra­tulando obtun­dere, nisi illos tuo ex iugenio judica [...], ut nil credas intellige­re nisi idem di­ctum est centies. Heautontim. act. 5. scen. 1. or vain repe­tition of the Gentiles; for they did just so, and Christ said, they did not do well; and that is all that we pretend to know of it. They thought to be heard the rather for so doing; and if the people of the Roman Church do not think so, there is no reason why they should do so. But without any further arguing about the business, they are not asham'd to own it. For the Author of the Preface to the Iesus Psalter, print­ed by Fouler at Antwerp, promises to the repetition of that sweet Name, Great aid against temptations, and a wonderful increase of grace.

Sect. IX.

Summae Caje­tan, v. oratio.BUt this mischief is gone further yet: For as Caje­tan affirms, Prayers ought to be well done; Saltem non malè, at least not ill. But besides, that what we have now remark'd is so, not well, that it is very ill; that which follows is directly bad, and most intolera­ble. For the Church of Rome in her publike and al­lowed offices, prays to dead men and women, who are, or whom they suppose to be beatified; and these they invocate as Preservers, Helpers, Guardians, Deliverers in their necessity; and they expresly call them, their Refuge, their Guard and Defence, their Life, and thei [...] Health: Which is so formidable a Devotion, that we for them, and for our selves too, if we should imi­tate them, to dread the words of Scripture,Ierem. 17. 5. Cursed is the man that trusteth in man. We are commanded [Page 123] to call upon God in the time of trouble; and it is promised,Psal. 115.9. & 146.3. & 118. 8. & 50. 15. Heb. 4.16. Matth. 11. 28. Iohn 6. 37. that he will deliver us, and we shall glorifie him. We finde no such command to call upon Saints, neither do we know who are Saints, excepting a very few; and in what present state they are, we cannot know, nor how our prayers can come to their knowledge; and yet if we did know all this, it cannot be endured at all, that Christians, who are commanded to call upon God, and upon none else, and to make all our prayers through Iesus Christ, and never so much as warranted to make our prayers, thorough Saints departed, should yet choose Saints for their particular Patrons, or at all relie upon them, and make prayers to them in such forms of words, which are onely fit to be spoken to God; prayers which have no testimouy, command, or promise in the Word of God, and therefore, which cannot be made in faith, or prudent hope.

Neither will it be enough to say, that they onely de­sire the Saints to pray for them; for though that be of it self a matter indifferent, if we were sure they do hear us when we pray, and that we should not by that means, secretly destroy our confidence in God, or lessen the honour of Christ our Advocate; of which because we cannot be sure, but much rather the contrary, it is not a matter indifferent: Yet besides this, in the publick Offices of the Church of Rome, there are prayers to Saints made with confidence in them, with derogation to Gods glory and prerogative, with diminution to the honour of Christ, with words in sound, and in all appearance the same with the highest that are usually express'd in our prayers to God, and his Christ: And this is it we insist upon, and reprove, as being a direct destruction of our sole confidence in God, and to neer [Page 124] to blasphemy, to be endured in the Devotions of Christians. We make our words good by these Alle­gations;

1. We shall not need here to describe out of their didactical writings, what kinde of prayers, and what causes of confidence they teach towards the Blessed Vir­gin Mary, and all Saints: Onely we shall recite a few words of Antoninus their great Divine, and Archbishop of Florence, Sum. part. 4. tit. 15. It is necessary that they to whom she converts her eyes, being an Advocate for them, shall be justified and saved. And whereas it may be objected out of Iohn, 1 John c. 2.1.2. that the Apostle says, If any man sin, we have an Advo­cate with the Father, Iesus Christ the Righteous. (He an­swers) That Christ is not our Advocate alone, but a Iudge; and since the just is scarce secure, how shall a sinner go to him, as to an Advocate? Therefore God hath provided us of an Advocatess, who is gentle, and sweet, in whom no­thing that is sharp is to be found. And to those words of S. Paul, Come boldly to the Throne of Grace: (He says) That Mary is the Throne of Christ, in whom he rested, to her therefore let us come with boldness, that we may obtain mercy, and finde grace in time of need; and addes, that Mary is called full of grace, because she is the means and cause of Grace, by transfusing grace to mankinde;] and many other such dangerous Propositions: Of which who please to be further satisfied (if he can endure the horror of reading blasphemous sayings) he may finde too great abundance in the Mariale of Bernardine, Bernardin. de bus [...]s. de Con­cept. Mariae. 1. part. serm. 1. part. 2. which is confirm'd by publike Authority, Iacobus Perez de Valentia In Can [...]ic. Mar. Magnifi­cat., and in Ferdinand QQuirinus de Salazar C [...]men [...]. in S. Proverb. in vers. 17., who affirms, That the Virgin Mary by offering up Christ to God the Father, was worthy to have (after a certain manner) that the whole salvation and redemption of man­kinde [Page 125] should be ascrib'd to her; and that this was com­mon to Christ and the blessed Virgin his Mothor, that she did offer and give the price of our Redemption truly and properly; and that she is deservedly call'd the Redeemer. the Repairer, the Mediator, the Author and cause of our salvation. Many more horrid blasphemies are in his notes upon that Chapter; and in his Defence of the Immaculate Conception, published with the Priviledge of Philip the III. of Spain, and by the Authority of his Order. But we insist not upon their Doctrines deli­ver'd by their great Writers; though every wise man knows, that the Doctrines of their Church are deliver'd in large and indefinite terms, and descend not to minute senses, but are left to be explicated by their Writers, and are so practis'd and understood by the people; and at the worst, the former Doctrine o [...] Probability will make it safe enough: But we shall produce the publick practise of their Church.

And first, it cannot be suppos'd, that they intend nothing, but to desire their prayers; for they rely also on their merits, and hope to get their desires, and to prevail by them also: For so it is affirm'd by the Roman Catechisme, Tit. de San­ctis. made by the Decree of the Council of Trent, and published by the Popes command [The Saints are therefore to be invocated, because they continually make prayers for the health of mankinde, and God gives us many benefits by their merit and favour: And it is law­ful to have recourse to the favour or grace of the Saints, and to use their help; for they undertake the Patronage of us.]Sess. 9. And the Council of Trent does not onely say it is good to fly to their prayers, but to their aid, and to their help; and that is indeed the principal, and the very meaning of the other. We pray that the Saints should [Page 126] intercede for us, id est, ut merita eorum nobis suffragentur; that is, that their merits should help us, said the Master of the Sentences. At (que) id confirmat Ecclesiae praxis, to use their own so frequent expression in many cases.

The distich is in the Church of S. Laurence in Rome. This Church contains the pure bodies of Saints, from whom take care to require that help he supplyed to you. But the practise of the Church tell their secret meaning best. For besides what the common people are taught to do, as to pray to S. Gall for the health and faecundi­ty of their Geese, to S. Wendeline for their Sheep, to S. Anthony for their Hogs, to S. Pelagius for their Oxen; and that several Trades have their peculiar Saints; and the Physicians are Patroniz'd by Cosmas and Da­mian, the Painters by S. Luke, the Potters by Goarus, the Huntsmen by Eustachius, the Harlots (for that also is a Trade at Rome) by S. Afra, and S. Mary Magdalene; they do also rely upon peculiar Saints, for the cure of several diseases: S. Sebastian and S. Roch have a special Priviledge to cure the Plage, S. Petronilla the Fever, S. Iohn and S. Bennet the Abbot, to cure all poyson, S. Apollonia the Tooth-ach, S. Otiliae sore Eyes, S. Apolli­naris the French Pox (for it seems he hath lately got that employment, since the discovery of the West Indies) S. Vincentius hath a special faculty in restoring stollen goods, and S. Liberius (if he please) does infallibly cure the Stone, and S. Felicitas, if she be heartily call'd up­on, will give the teeming Mother a fine Boy. It were strange if nothing but intercession by these Saints were [Page 127] intended, that they cannot as well pray for other things as these; or that they have no Commission to ask of these any thing else, or not so confidently; and that if they do ask, that S. Otiliae shall not as much prevail to help a Fe­ver, as a Cataract; or that if S. Sebastian be called upon to pray for the help of a poor female sinner, who by sad diseases payes the price of her lust, he must go to S. Apol­linaris in behalf of his Client.

But if any of the Roman Doctors say, that they are not tyed to defend the Superstitions of the Vulgar, or the abused: They say true, they are not indeed; but rather to reprove them, as we do, and to declare against them; and the Council of Trent very goodly forbids all Superstitions in this Article; but yet tells us not what are Superstitions, and what not; and still the world goes on in the practise of the same intolerable follies; and every Nation hath a particular Guardian-Saint, and eve­ry City, every Family, and almost every House, and every Devouter person almost chuses his own Patron-Saint, whose Altars they more devoutly frequent, whose Image they more religiously worship, to whose Reliques they more readily go in Pilgrimage, to whose honour they say more Pater-nosters, whose Festival they more solemnly observe; spoiling their prayers, by their con­fidences in unknown persons, living in an unknown con­dition, and diminishing that affiance in God, and our Lord Jesus Christ, by importune and frequent addresses to them that cannot help.

But that these are not the faults of their people on­ly, running wilfully into such follies, but the practise of their Church, and warranted and taught by their Guides, appears by the publick Prayers themselves: such as these, O Generous Mary, beauteous above all, [Page 128] obtain pardon for us, apply grace unto us, prepare glory for us. Hail, thou Rose, thou Virgin Mary, &c. Grant to us to use true wisdome, and with the elect to enjoy grace, that we may with melody praise thee;Ex cursu ho­rarum Beatae Mariae. and do thou drive our [...]ins away; O Virgin Mary give us joyes. These and divers others like these, are in the Antheme of our Lady. In the Rosary of our Lady, this Hymne is to be said.

That is, [Thou Repairer and Saviour of the despairing Soul, the due Giver and Bestower of spiritual Grace, heal my wounds, and gives to the minde that prayes to thee, the gifts of grace, that I may be chaste, modest, wise in heart, true in my sayings, hating evil, loving God in holy works;] and much more to the same pur­pose. There also the blessed Virgin Mary, after many glorious appellatives, is prayed to in these words [Joyn me to Christ, govern me alwayes, enlighten my heart, defend me alwayes from the snare of the Enemy, deliver us from all evil, and from the pains of Hell.

[Page 129]So that it is no wonder that Pope Ad Recand [...] tenses: de Lauretana imagine, apud Bembum. l. 8. ep. 17. Leo the X. calls her a Goddess, and Turselin In epist. de­dicat. histor. Lauretan. the Jesuit, Divinae Maje­statis, potestatis (que) sociam. Huic olim coelestium, mortali­um (que) principatum detulit. Ad hujus arbitrium (quoad hominum tutela postulat) terras, maria, coelum, naturam (que) moderatur. Hàc anuente, & per hanc, di­vinos thesauros, & coelestia dona largitur; the com­panion or partner of the Divine Majestie and Power. To her he long since gave the principality of all hea­venly and mortal things. At her will (so far as the Guar­dianship of men requires) he rules the Earth and Seas, Heaven and Nature: And she consenting, he gives Di­vine treasures, & Coelestial gifts. Nay, in the Mass-books pen'd 1538. And us'd in the Polonian Churches, they call the B. Virgin Mary, Viam ad vitam, tolius mundi gu­bernatricem, peccatorum cum Deo reconciliatricem, fon­tem remissionis peccatorum, lumen luminum;Fol. 323, 3 [...]4 325. the way to life, the Governess of all the world; the Reconciler of siners with God, the fountain of Remission of sins, Light of light, and at last salute her with an Ave Vniversae Tri­nitatis Mater; Hail thou Mother of the whole Trinity.Fol. 327.

We do not pick out these onely, as the most singu­lar,Vide epist. Andri Dudi­tibii [...] Quin (que) Eccles. episc. Edit. A. D. 1590 sine lo [...]i & typographi nomine. or the worst forms; for such as these are very nume­rous, as is to be seen in their Breviaries, Missals, Hours of our Lady, Rosary of our Lady, the Letany of our Lady, called Litania Mariae, the Speculum Rosariorum, the Hymns of Saints, Portuises and Manuals. These on­ly are the instances, which amongst many others pre­sently occurr. Two things onely we shall add, instead of many more that might be represented.

The first is, That in a Hymn which they (from what reason or Etymology we know not, neither are we con­cern'd) call a Sequence, the Council of Constance did [Page 130] invocate the B. Virgin in the same manner as Councils did use to invocate the Holy Ghost; They call her the Mother Grace, the remedy to the miserable, the foun­tain of mercy, and the light of the Church; attributes proper to God and incommunicable; they sing her praises, and pray to her for graces, they sing to her with the heart, they call themselves her sons, they declare her to be their health and comfort in all doubts, and call on her for light from Heaven and trust in her for the de­struction of Heresies, and the repression of Schisms, and for the lasting Confederations of peace.

The other thing we tell of, is, That there is a Psalter of our Lady, of great and ancient account in the Church of Rome; it hath been several times printed, at Venice, at Paris, at Leipsich; and the title is, [The Psalter of the Blessed Virgin, compil'd by the Seraphical Doctor S. Bonaventure, Bishop of Alba, and Presbyter Cardinal of the Holy Church of Rome] But of the Book it self, the account is soon made; for it is nothing but the Psalms of David, an hundred and fifty in number are set down; alter'd indeed, to make as much of it as could be sense so reduc'd: In which the name of Lord is left out, and that of Lady put in; so that whatever David said of God and Christ, the same prayers, and the same praises they say of the B. Virgin Mary; and whether all that can be said without intolerable blasphemy, we suppose needs not much disputation.

The same things, but in a less proportion and fre­quency, they say to other Saints.

O Mary Magdalen, hear our prayers, which are full of praises, and most clemently reconcile this company unto Christ: That the Fountain of Supreme Piety, who clensed thee from they sins, giving pardon, may clense us who are his servants and thine. These things are too bad already, we shall not aggravate them by any fur­ther Commentary; but apply the premises.

Now therefore we desire it may be considered, That there are as the effects of Christs death for us, three great products, which are the rule and measure of our prayers, a [...]d our confidence; 1. Christs merits. 2. his Satisfaction. 3. His Intercession. By these three we come boldly to the Throne of Grace, and pray to God through Iesus Christ. But if we pray to God through the Saints too, and rely upon their 1. Merits. 2. Satisfaction. 3. And Intercession; Is it not plain that we make them equal with Christ, in kind, though not in degree? For it is publikely avowed and practis'd in the Church of Rome, to rely upon the Saints Intercession; and this in­tercession to be made valid by the Merits of the Saints:Vide s [...]. Rosario. [...]uentias [...]eviam. [We pray thee, ô S. Iude the Apostle, that by thy Merits thou wouldst draw me from the custom of my [Page 132] sins, and snatch me from the power of the Devil, and advance me to the invisible powers;] and they say as much to others. And for their Satisfactions, the treasure of the Church for Indulgences is made up with them, and the satisfactions of Christ: So that there is nothing remaining of the honour due to Christ our Redeemer, and our Confidence in him, but the same in very kind is by the Church of Rome imputed to the Saints: And therefore the very being and Oeconomy of Christiani­ty, is destroyed by these prayers; and the people are not, cannot be good Christians in these devotions; and what hopes are laid up for them, who repent to no purpose, and pray with derogation to Christs honour, is a matter of deepest consideration. And therefore we desire our charges not to be seduc'd by little tricks and artifices of uselesse and laborious distinctions, and pro­testations against evidence of fact, and with fear and trembling to consider, what God said by the Prophet,Jerem. 2. 13. My people have done two great evils, they have forsaken me, fortem, vivum, the strong and the living God; fontem vivum, so some copies read it, the living fountain, and have digged for themselves cisterns, that is, little phan­tastick helps, that hold no water, that give no refresh­ment; or As S. Paul expresses it; they worship and invo­cate the Creature [...] besides the Creator;Rom. 1.25. so the word properly signifies, and so it is us'd by the Apostle in other 1 Cor. 3.11. [...] 8. places. And at least, let us remember those excellent words of S. Austin, Tulius & jucundius loquar ad meum Iesum, quam ad aliquem sanctorum spirituum Dei: Kings 17. 21. cap 2. visitatione minorum Sept S. Aug. I can speak safer, and more pleasantly, or chear­fully to my Lord Jesus, than to any of the Saints and Spirits of God. For that we have Commandment; For this we have none; for that we have example in [Page 133] Scriptures, for this we have none; there are many pro­mises made to that, but to this there is none at all; and therefore we cannot in faith pray to them, or at all re­ly upon them for helps.

Which consideration is greatly heightned by that pro­stitution of Devotion usual in the Church of Rome, [...] to every Upstart, to every old and new Saint. And although they have a story among themselves, that it is ominous for a Pope to Canonize a Saint, and he ne­ver survives it above a twelve-moneth, as Pierre Mathieu observes in the instances of Clement the IV. and Adrian the VI. yet this hinders not, but that they are tempted to do it too frequently. But concerning the thing it self, the best we can say, is what Christ said of the Samaritans They worship they know not what. John 4. 22 [...] Vide libr. de Sanctis Hi­bernicis nuper Latine edit. per D Picar­dum Parisi­ensem. Such are S. Fingare, S. Anthony of Padua, S. Christopher, Charls Borromaeus, Ig­natius Loyola, Xaverius, and many others; of whom Car­dinal Bessarion Apud Bodin. in method. histor. l 4. complain'd, that many of them were such persons, whose life he could not approve; and such, concerning whom they knew nothing, but from their parties, and by pretended revelations made to particular and hypocondriacal persons. It is a famous saying of S. Gregory, That the bodies of many persons are worship­ed on earth; whose souls are tormented in Hell; and Augustinus Triumphus affirms,Apud Aug, Triumphum de An [...]o [...]a. Q [...]. 14 ad 4. & quaest. 17. ad. verb. Har­mannus. that all who are Canoniz'd by the Pope cannot be said to be in Heaven. And this matter is beyond dispure; for Prateolus tells, that Her­man, the Author of the Heresie of the Fratricelli, was for twenty years together after his death honour'd for a Saint; but afterwards his body was taken up and burnt. But then since (as Ambrosius Catharinus, and Vivaldus Observe) if one Saint be called in question then the rest may; what will become of the devotions which are paid [Page 134] such Saints which have been Canoniz'd within these last five Centuries? Concerning whom, we can have but slender evidence, that they are in Heaven at all. And therefore the Cardinal of Cambray, Petrus de Allia­co wishes,Lib de Reform [...]. that so many new Saints were not Canoniz'd. They are indeed so many, that in the Church of Rome the Holidayes which are called their Greater Doubles, are threescore and four, besides the Feasts of Christ and our Lady; and the Holidayes which they call half double Festivals, together with the Sundays, are above one hundred and thirty. So that besides many Holidays kept in particular places, there are in the whole year, about two hundred Holidays, if we may beleive their own Gavantus;D [...]stis Sancte­rum 7. 10. which besides that it is an intolerable burthen to the poor labourer, who must keep so many of them, that on the rest he can scarce earn his bread, they do also turn Religion into superstition, and habi­tuate the people to idleness, and disorderly Festivities, and impious celebrations of the day with unchrististian merriments and licentiousness. We conclude this with those words of S. Paul, Rom. 10. 14. How shall we call on him, on whom we have not believed? Christ said, Ye believe in God, be­lieve also in me. But he never said, Ye have believed in me, believe also in my Saints. No: For there is but one Mediator between God and Man, the Man Christ Iesus;Tim. 2. 5. And therefore we must come to God, not by Saints, but onely by Jesus Christ our Lord.

SECT. X.

THere is in the Church of Rome a horrible impity taught and practised, which so far as it goes, must needs destroy that part of holy life which consists in the holiness of our prayers; and indeed is a conjugation of evils: Of such evils of which in the whole world, of Society of Christians should be least suspected; we mean, the infinite Superstitions and Incantations, or charms us'd by their Priests in their exercising posses­sed persons, and conjuring of Devils.

There was an Ecclesiastical Book called Ordo bapti­zandi cum modo visitandi, printed at Venice. A. D. 1575. In which there were damnable and diabolical charms in somuch, that the Spanish Inquisitors in their Expurgatory Index, printed at Madrid, A. D. 1612. commanded deleatur tota exorcismus Ne miretur [...]ector e [...]uditur, quod exorcism [...]s apud Inqisiteres sie [...]oemi [...]tu [...] [...]ene ris, so [...]asse dis­pensatum [...]ui [...] cum bon [...]s vl [...]is in hoc. articulo. An potius factum quia bonus A [...]g lus nu [...] ­quam, mali autem Genil saep [...]ssime sub sorma soemininae: ap [...]ar [...]e q [...]o [...] [...]. Luciferina, cu­jus initium est, Adesto Domine tui famuli; that all that Luciferian Exorcism be blotted out. But whoever looks into the Treasure of Exorcisms and horrible Con­jurings (for that is the very title of the Book printed at Colein, A. D. 1608.) shall finde many as horrid things, and not censur'd by any Inquisitors as yet, so far as we have ever read or heard. Nay, that very Luciferina, or Devilish Exorcism, is reprinted at Lyons, A.D. 1614. in the institutio baptizandi, which was restored by the Decree of the Council of Trent: So that though it was forbidden in Spain, it was allowed in France. But as bad as that are allowed every where in the Church of [Page 136] Rome: The most famous, and of most publike use are The Treasure of Excorcisms, of which we but now made mention; the Roman Ritual, The Manual of Ex­orcisms, printed at Antwerp, A.D. 1626. with Appro­bation of the Bishop, and privilege of the Archdukes; the Pastorals of several Churches, especial that of Ru­raemund; and especially the Flagellum Daemonum, The Devils whip, by Father Hierom Mengus a Frier Mino.; which the Clergy of Orleans did use in the Exorcising of Martha [...]rosser, A. D. 1599. the story whereof is in the Epistles of Cardinal D'Ossat, and the History of the Excellent Thuanus. Lib. 133.

Now from these Books, especially this last, we shall represent their manner of casting out Devils; and then speak a word to the thing it self.Flagellum Daemonum de­cum 3.

Their manner and form is this,

First, They are to try the Devil by Holy Water, In­cense, Sulphur, Rue, which from thence, as we sup­pose, came to be called Herb of Grace, and especially S. Iohns wort, which therefore they call Devils flight;vide Raimun. Lullium lib 2. le quint a es­sentia. with wich if they cannot cast the Devil out, yet they may do good to the Patient; for so Pope Alexander the first promis'd and commanded the Priests to use it for the sanctifying and pacifying the people, and driv­ing away the snares of the Devil: And to this, it were well if the Exorcist would rail upon mock and jeer the Devil; for he cannot endure a witty and a sharp taunt, and loves jeering and railing, no more than he loves holy water;hilostrat. de I [...] appalonii, and this was well tried of old against an Empuse that met Apollonius Tyanaeus at Mount Cau­casus, against whom he rail'd and exhorted his com­pany to do so.

Next to this, the Exorcist may ask the Devil some [Page 137] questions? What is his name? How many of them there are? For what cause, and at what time he entred? and, for his own learning, by what persons he can be cast out? and by what Saint adjur'd who are his particu­lar enemies in Heaven? and who in Hell? by what words he can be most afflicted? (for the Devils are such fools that they cannot keep their own counsel, nor choose but tell, and when they do they alwaies tell true:) He may also ask him, by what Covenant, or what Charm he came there, and by what he is to be re­leased? Then he may call Lucifer to help him, and to torment that Spirit (for so they cast out Devils, by Belze­bub the Prince of the Devils;) and certainly Lucifer dares not but obey him. Next to this, the Exorcist is cuningly to get out of the Devil, the confession of some Article of Faith, for the edefication of the standers by (whom he may by this means convince of the truth of Transubstantiation, the reality of purgatory, or the va­lue of Indulgences) and command him to knock his head three times against the ground, in adoration of the Holy Trinity. But let him take heed what Reliques he apply to the Devil; for if the Reliques by counterfeit, the Devil will be to hard for him. However, let the Exorcising Priest be sure to bless his pottage, his meat, his ointment, his herbs; and then also he may use some Schedules, or little rolls of paper, containing in them holy words; but he must be sure to be exercis'd and skilful in all things that belong to the conjuring of the Deuil: These are the preparatory documents, which when he hath observ'd, then let him fall to his prayers.

Now for the prayers, they also are publickly describ'd in their Offices before cited; and are as followeth,

[Page 138] The Priest ties his stole about the neck of the possessed with three knots, and says, O ye abominable Rebels against God, I conjure you Spirits, and adjure you, I call, I con­strain I call out, I contend and contest, where ever you are in this Man, by the Father, Son and Holy Ghost [then he makes three †] by the most powerful name of God, Hel [...]y the strong and admirable, I exorcise you, and adjure you, and command you, by the power I have, that you inconti­nently hear the words of my conjuring, and perceive your selves overcome, and command you not to depart without license, and so I bind you with this stole of jucundity; in the name of the Father †, Son †, and Holy Ghost †, Amen. Then he makes two and thirty crosses more, and calls over one and thirty names of God in false Hebrew, and base Greek, and some Latine, signifying the same names; and the two and thirtieth is by the sign of the Cross, praying God to deliver them from their enemies. Then follow more prayers, and more adjurations, and more conjurations for they are greatly different you must know) and aspersions of holy water, and shewings of the Cross, and signings with it. Then they adjure the Devil (in case the names of God will not do it) by S. Mary, and S. Anne, by S. Michael, and S. Gabriel, by Raphael, and all Angels and Arch­angels, by the Partriachs, and by the Prophets, and by his own infirmity, by the Apostles, and by the Martyrs; [and then after all this, if the Devil will not come out, he must tarry there still, till the next Exorcism; in which] The Exorcist must rail at the Devil, and say over again the names of God, and then ask him questions, and read over the sequences of the Gospels; and after that tell him, that he hath power over him, for he can transubstantiate bread into Christs body; and then conjure him again, and call him damn'd Devil, unclean Spirit, and as bad as he [Page 139] can call him; and so pray to God to cast him out of the mans mouth and nose, lips and teeth, jaws and cheeks, eyes and forehead, eye-brows, and eye-lids, his feet, and his members, his marrow, and his bones, and must reckon every part of his body [to which purpose, we suppose it would be well if the Exorcist were well skill'd in Laurentius, or Bautunus his Anatomy.] And if he will not go out yet, there is no help but he must choose, till the third Exorcism: in which, besides many prayers and conjurations in other words to the same purpose, the Exor­cist must speak louder [especially if it be a deaf Devil, for then indeed it is the more necessary] and tell the De­vil his own, and threaten him terribly, and conjure him again, and say over him about some twenty or thirty names or titles of Christ, and forbid the Devil to go any whither, but to the center of the world, and must damn him eternally to the Sulphurous flames of Hell, and to be tormented worse then Lucifer himself, for his daring to resist so many great Names; and if he will not now obey, let him take fire and brimstone, and make a fume, whether the possessed will or no, untill the Devil tells you all his minde in what you ask him: [the liver of Tobias his fish were a rare thing here, but that's not to be had for love or money:] And after this he conjures him again by some of the names of God, and by the Merits, and all the good things which can be spoken or thought of the Most Blessed Virgin, and by all her names and titles, which he must reckon, one and forty in number, together with her Epithets, making so many Crosses, and by these he must cast him headlong into Hell.

But if the Devil be stubborn (for some of them are very disobedient) there is a fourth, and a fifth, and a sixth Exorcism, and then he conjures the earth, the water, [Page 140] and the fire to make them of his party, and commands them not to harbour such villainous Spirits, and com­mands Hell to hear him, and obey his word, and conjures at the Spirits in Hell to take that Spirit to themselves (for it may be they will understand their duty better than that stubborn Devil, that is broke loose from thence.) But if this chance to fail, there is yet left a remedy that will do it. He must make the picture of the Devil, and write his name over the head of it and conjure the fire to burn it most horribly and hastily; [and if the picture be upon wood or paper, it is ten to one that may be done.] After all this stir, Sprinkle more holy water, and take Sulphur, Galbanum, Assa foetida, Aristolochia, Rue, S. Johns wort; all which being distinctly blessed, the Exorcist must hold the Devils picture over the fire, and adjure the Devil to hear him; and then he must not spare him, but tell him all his faults, and give him all his names, and Anathema­tize him, and curse not onely him, but Lucifer too, and Beelzebub, and Satan, and Astaroth, and Behemot, and Beherit, and all together; [for indeed there is not one good natur'd Devil amongst them all;] and then pray once more, and so throw the Devils picture into the fire, & then insult in a long form of crowing over him, which is there set down.

And now after all, if he will not go out, there is a se­venth Exorcism for him with new Ceremonies. He must shew him the consecrated Host in the pixe, pointing at it with his finger, and then conjure him again, and rail at him once more; to which purpose, there is a very fine form taken out of Prierius, and set down in the Flagellum Daemonum; and then let the Exorcist pronounce sentence against the Devil, and give him his oath, and then a com­mandment to go out of the several parts of his body, al­ways [Page 141] taking care that at no hand he remain in the upper parts; and then is the Devils Qu. to come out, if he have a minde to it (for that must be always suppos'd) and then follows the thanksgivings.

This is the manner of their devotion, describ'd for the use of their Exorcists; in which is such a heap of folly, madness, superstition, blasphemy, and ridiculous guises and playings with the Devil, that if any man amongst us should use such things, he would be in danger of being tried at the next Assizes for a Witch or a Conjurer; how­ever, certain it is, what ever the Devil looses by preten­ding to obey the Exorcist, he gains more by this horri­ble debauchery of Christianity. There needs no confu­tation of it, the impiety is visible and tangible; and it is sufficient to have told the story.

Onely this we say, as to the thing it self.

The casting out of Devils is a miraculous power, and given at first for the confirmation of Christian Faith, as the gifts of Tongues and Healing were, and therefore we have reason to believe, that because it is not an ordinary power, the ordinary Exorcisms cast out no more Devils, than Extreme Unction cures sicknesses. We do not envy to any one, any grace of God, but wish it were more modestly pretended, unless it could be more evidently prov'd [...] Origen condemned [...] this whole procedure of conjuring Devils long since. Quaeret aliquis si convenit vel Daemones adjurare. Qui aspicit Ie­sum imperantem Daemonibus, sed etiam potestatem dan­tem Discipulis super omnia daemonia, & ut infirmitates sanarent, dicet, quoniam non est secundum Potestatem da­tam â salvatore adjurare Daemonia. Iudaicum enim est: If any one askes, Whether it be fit to adjure Devils? He that [Page 142] beholds Jesus commanding over Devils, and also giving power to his Disciples over all unclean spirits, and to heal diseases, will say, that to adjure Devils is not ac­cording to the power given by our B. Saviour; For it is a Jewish trick:In illa verba, (Qui credit in me majora [...]ciet.) and S. Chrysostome spake soberly and truely. We poor Wretches cannot drive away the flies, much less Devils.

But then as to the manner of their Conjurations and Exorcisms; this we say, If these things come from God, let them shew their warranty, and their books of Precedents: If they come not from God, they are so like the Inchantments of Balaam, the old Heathens, and the modern Magicians, that their Original is soon disco­vered.

But yet from what principle it comes, that they have made Exorcists an Ecclesiastical Order, with special words and instruments of collation; and that the words of Ordination giving them power onely over possessed Christians, Catechumens or Baptized, should by them be extended and exercis'd upon all Infants, as if they were all possessed by the Devil; and not onely so, but to bewitched Cattel; to Mice and Locusts, to Milk and Lettice, to Houses and Tempests; as if their Charms were Prophilactick, as well as Therapeutick; and could keep, as well as drive the Devil out, and prevent storms like the old [...] of whom Seneca makes menti­on:Quaest. natur. l. 4. c. 6. of these things we cannot guess at any probable prin­ciple, except they have deriv'd them from the Jewish Cabala, or the Exorcisms, which it is said Solomon us'd, when he had consented to Idolatry.

But these things are so unlike the wisdom and sim­plicity, the purity and spirituality of Christian devoti­on; are so perfectly of their own devising, and wilde [Page 143] imaginations; are so full of dirty Superstitions, and ig­norant fancies, that there are not in the world many things, whose sufferance and practice can more destroy the Beauty of Holiness, or reproach a Church, or Society of Christians.

SECT. XI.

TO put our trust and confidence in God onely, and to use Ministeries of his own appointment and sanctification, is so essential a duty owing by us to God, that whoever trusts in any thing but God, is a breaker of the first commandement; and he that invents instrumen­tal supports of his own head, and puts a subordinate mi­nisterial confidence in them, usurps the rights of God, and does not pursue the interests of true Religion, whose very essence and formality is to glorify God in all his attributes and to do good to man, and to advance the honour and Kingdome of Christ. Now how greatly the Church of Rome prevaricates in this great soul of Religion, appears by too evident and notorious demonstration: For she hath invented Sacramentals of her own, without a Divine warrant, [...], said S. Cyril. Cyril. Hi [...]r [...]s. Catech. 4. Concerning the holy and Divine mysteries of Faith or Religion, we ought to do nothing by chance, or of our own heads, no­thing without the Authority of the Divine Scriptures: But the Church of Rome does otherwise; invents things of her own, and imputes spiritual effects to [Page 144] and men are taught to go in wayes which Superstition hath invented, and Interest does support.

But there is yet one great instance more of this irreligion. Upon the Sacraments themselves they are taught to rely, with so little of Moral and Vertuous Dispositions, that the efficacy of one is made to lessen the necessity of the other; and the Sacra­ments are taught to be so effectual by an inherent vertue, that they are not so much made the instru­ments of Vertue, as the Suppletory; not so much to in­crease, as to make amends for the want of Grace: On which we shall not now insist, because it is suffici­ently remar'kd in our reproof of the Roman Doctrines, in the matter of repentance.

SECT. XII.

AFter all this, if their Doctrines as they are ex­plicated by their practice, and the Commentaries of their greatest Doctors, do make their Disciples guilty of Idolatry, there is not any thing greater to deter men from them, than that danger to their Souls which is imminent over them, upon that ac­count.

Their worshipping of Images we have already re­prov'd upon the account of its novelty and innova­tion in Christian Religion [...] But that it is against good life, a direct breach of the second Command­ment, an Act of Idolatry, as much as the Heathens themselves were guilty of, in relation to the second [Page 145] Commandmant is but too evident by the Doctrines of their own Leaders.

For if to give Divine honour to a Creature be Idola­try, then the Doctors of the Church of Rome teach their people to commit Idolatry: For they affirm, That the same worship which is given to the Prototype or Princi­pal, the same is to be given to the image of it. As we worship the Holy Trinity, and Christ, so we may wor­ship the Images of the Trinity, and of Christ; that is [...] with Latri [...], or Divine honour, This is the constant sentence of the Divines, The Image is to be worshipped with the same honour and worship, with which we worship those whose Image it is, said Azorius, Inflit. m [...]ral. part. 1. l. 9. c. 6. their great Master of Casuistical Theo­logy. And this is the Doctrine of their great S. Thomas of Alexander, of Ales, Bonaventure, Albertus, Richardus; Capreolus, Cajetan, Coster, Valentia, Vasquez, the Jesu­its of Colein, Triers and Meniz, approving Costers opi­nion.

Neither can this be eluded by saying, that though the same Worship be given to the Image of Christ, as to Christ himself, yet it is not done in the same way; for it is terminatively to Christ or God, but relatively to the Image, that is, to the Image for God's or Christ's sake. For this is that we complain of, that they give the same worship to an image, which is due to God; for what cause soever it be done, it matters not, save onely that the excuse makes it in some sense, the worse for the Apology. For to do a thing which God hath forbidden, and to say it is done for God's sake, is to say, that for his sake we displease him; for his sake we give that to a Creature, which is God's own propriety. But besides this, we affirm, and it is of it self evident, that whoever, Christian or Heathen, worships the image [Page 146] of any thing, cannot possibly worship that image termi­natively, for the very being of an image is relative; and therefore if the man understands but common sense, he must suppose and intend that worship to be relative, and a Heathen could not worship an image with any other worship; and the second Commandment, forbidding to worship the likeness of any thing in Heaven and earth, does onely forbid that thing which is in Heaven to be wor­shipped by an image, that is, it forbids onely a relative worship: For it is a contradiction to say, this is the image of God, and yet this is God; and therefore it must be also a contradiction, to worship an image with Divine worship terminatively, for then it must be that the image of a thing, is that thing whose image it is. And there­fore these Doctors teach the same thing which they con­demn in the Heathens.

But they go yet a little further: The Image of the Cross they worship with Divine honour; and therefore although this Divine worship is but relative, yet conse­quently, the Cross it self is worshipped terminatively by Divine adoration. For the Image of the Cross hath it relatively, and for the Crosses sake, therefore the Cross it self is the proper and full object of the Divine adoration. Now that they do and teach this, we charge upon them by undeniable Records: For in the very Pon­tifical published by the Authority of Pope Clement the VIII. these words are found, The Legats Cross must be on the right hand, because Latria, or Divine honour is due to it. Edit. Roman [...] p. 672. And if Divine honour relative be due to the Logates Cross, which is but the Image of Christs Cross, then this Divine worship is terminated on Christs Cross, which is certainly but a meer Creature. To this purpose are the words of Almai [...]. The Images of the [Page 147] Trinity, and of Christ, and of the Cross, are to be adored with the worship of Latria; that is, Divine. Now if the Image of the Cross be the intermedial, then the Cross it self, whose Image that is, must be the last ob­ject of this Divine worship; and if this be not Idolatry, it can never be told, what is the notion of the Word. But this passes also into other real effects: And well may the Cross it self be worshipped by Divine worship, when the Church places her hopes of salvation on the Cross; for so she does, says Aquinas, and makes one the argument of the other, and proves that the Church places her hopes of salvation on the Cross, that is, on the instrument of Christs Passion, by a hymn which she uses in her Offices; but this thing we have remark'd above, upon another occasion. Now although things are brought to a very ill state, when Christians are so probably and apparently charg'd with Idolatry, and that the excuses are too fine to be understood by them that need them; yet no excuse can acquit these things, when the most that is, or can be said is this, that al­though that which is Gods due, is given to a Creature, yet it is given with some difference of intention, and Metaphysical abstraction and separation; especially, since, if there can be Idolatry in the worshipping of an Image, it is certain, that a relative Divine worship is this Idolatry; for no mau that worships an Image (in that consideration or formality) can make the Image the last object: Either therefore the Heathens were not Idolaters, in the worshipping of an Image, or else these m [...]n are. The Heathens did indeed infinitely more viola [...]e the first Commandment; but against the second, precisely and separately from the first, the transgression is alike.

[Page 148]The same also is the case in their worshipping the consecrated Bread and Wine: Of which how far they will be excused before God by their ignorant preten­sions and suppositions, we know not; but they hope to save themselves harmless by saying, that they believe the Bread to be their Saviour, and that if they did not believe so, they would not do so. We believe that they say true; but we are afraid that this will no more ex­cuse them, then it will excuse those who worship the Sun and Moon, and the Queen of Heaven, whom they would not worship, if they did not believe to have Divinity in them: And it may be observed, That they are very fond of that persuasion, by which they are led into this worship. The error might be some ex­cuse, if it were probable, or if there were much tempta­tion to it: But when they choose this persuasion, and have nothing for it but a tropical expression of Scri­pture, which rather than not believe in the natural, useless, and impossible sense, they will defie all their own reason, and four of the five operations of their soul, Seeing, Smelling, Tasting and Feeling, and con­tradict the plain Doctrine of the Ancient Church, be­fore they can consent to believe this error, that Bread is changed into God, and the Priest can make his Maker: We have too much cause to fear, that the error is too gross to admit an excuse; and it is hard to sup­pose it invincible and involuntary, because it is so hard, and so untempting, and so unnatural to admit the error. We do desire that God may finde an excuse for it, and that they would not. But this we are most sure of, that they might, if they pleas'd, finde many ex­cuses, or rather just causes for not giving Divine ho­nour to the Consecrated Elements; because there are [Page 149] so many contingencies in the whole conduct of this af­fair, and we are so uncertain of the Priests intention, and we can never be made certain, that there is not in the whole order of causes any invalidity in the Con­secration;Nemius po [...]est per fidem con­stare se rece­posse vel mi­nimum sacra­mentum. Est (que) hoc ita cer­tum ex fide, ac clarum [...] [...] nos vivere. Nulla est via, qua citra re­velationem. nosse possumus intentionem ministrantis, vel evidenter, vel cert [...] ex fide, Andreas Vega, lib. 9. de justi­fic. c. 17. Non potest quis esse certus certi [...]udine fidei se percipere verum Sacramentum. Cum Sacramen­tum [...]ine intentione Ministri non conficiatur, & intentionem alteriu [...] nemo videre potest. Be [...]ar [...]. lib. 3. de justif. cap. 8. sect. Dicent, and it is so impossible that any man should be sure that H [...]re, and Now, and This Bread is Tran­substantiated, and is really the Natural body of Christ; that it were fit to omit the giving Gods due to that which they do not know to be any thing but a piece of bread; and it cannot consist with holiness, and our duty to God, certainly to give Divine Worship to that thing, which though their Doctrine were true, they cannot know certainly to have a Divine Being.

SECT. XIII.

AND now we shall plainly represent to our charges, how this whole matter stands. The case is this, The Religion of a Christian consists in Faith and Hope, Repentance and Charity, Divine Worship and Celebration of the Sacraments, and fi­nally in keeping the Commandments of God. Now in all these, both in Doctrines and practices, the Church of Rome does dangerously erre, and teaches men so to do:

They do injury to Faith, by creating new Arti­cles, and enjoyning them as of necessity to salvation. * They spoil their hope, by placing it upon Creatures, and devices of their own. * They greatly sin against Charity, by damning all that are not of their opinion, in things false or uncertain, right or wrong. * They break in pieces the salutary Doctrine of Repentance, making it to be consistent with a wicked life, and little or no amendment. * They Worship they know not what, and pray to them that hear them not, and trust on that which helps them not. * And as for the Commandments, they leave one of them out of their Catechisms and Manuals, and while they contend earnestly against some Opponents for the possibility of keeping them all, they do not insist upon the necessity of keeping any in the course of their lives, till the danger or article of their death. * And concerning the Sacraments, they have egregiously prevaricated in two points. For not to mention their reckoning of [Page 151] seven Sacraments, which we only reckon to be an un­necessary, and un-Scholastical Errour; they take the one half of the Principal away from the Laity; and they institute little Sacraments of their own, they in­vent Rites, and annex Spiritual Graces to them, wha [...] they please themselves, of their own heads, without a Divine Warrant or Institution: and, * At last per­swade their people to that which can never be ex­cus'd, at least, from Material Idolatry.

If these things can consist with the duty of Christi­ans, not only to eat what they worship, but to adore those things with Divine Worship, which are not God: To reconcile a wicked life with certain hopes and expectations of Heaven at last, and to place these hopes upon other things than God, and to damn all the world that are not Christians at this rate, then we have lost the true measures of Christianity; and the Doctrine and Discipline of Christ is not a Natural and Rational Religion; not a Religion that makes men holy, but a Confederacy under the conduct of a Sect, and it must rest in Forms and Ceremonies, and Devices of Mans Invention. And although we do not doubt, but that the goodness of God does so prevail over all the follies and malice of mankind, that there are in the Roman Com­munion many very good Christians; yet they are not such as they are Papists, but by some thing that is higher, and before that, something that is of an ab­stract and more sublime consideration. And though the good people amongst them are what they are by the grace and goodness of God, yet by all or any of these Opinions they are not so: But the very best suf­fer diminution and allay by these things, and very ma­ny more are wholly subverted and destroyed.

SECT. I.

THat in the Church of Rome, it is publickly taught by their greatest Doctors, That it is lawful to lye, or deceive the question of the Magistrate, to conceal their name, and to tell a false one, to elude all examinations, and make them insignificant and toothless, cannot be doubted by any man that knows how the English Priests have behav'd themselves in the times of Queen Elizabeth, King Iames, and the Blessed Martyr King Charles I. Emonerius wrote in defence of it; and [Page 153] Father Barnes who wrote a Book against Lying and Equivocating, was suspected for a Heretick, and smart­ed severely under their hands.

To him that askes you again for what you have paid him al­ready, you may safely say, you never had any thing of him, meaning so as to owe it him now. It is the Doctrine of Emanuel Sà, and Sanchez; which we understand to be a great lye, and a great sin, it being at the best a decei­ving of the Law, that you be not deceiv'd by your Cre­ditor; that is, a doing evil to prevent one; a sin, to pre­vent the losing of your money.

If a man askes his Wife if she be an Adulteress, though she be, yet she may say, she is not, Instruct. Sa­cerd. l. 4. c. 2 [...]. c. 22. if in her mind secretly she say [not with a purpose to tell you:] so Cardinal Tolet teaches. And if a man swears he will take such a one to his Wife, being compelled to swear; he may secretly mean, [if hereafter she do please me.] And if a man swears to a Thief, that he will give him Twenty Crown, he may secretly say, [If I please to do so,] and then he is not bound. And of this Doctrine Vasquez brags,In 3 Tom. 4 qu. 93. art. 5. dub. 13. as of a rare, though new invention, saying, it is gathered out of St. Austin, and Thomas Aquinas, who onely found out the way of saying nothing in such cases and questions, ask'd by Judges; but this invention was drawn out by assiduous disputations. * He that promises to say an Ave Mary, and swears he will, or vows to do it, yet sins not mor­tally, though he does not do it, said the great Navar, Manuel. c. 18. n. 7. and others whom he follows. * There is yet a fur­ther degree of this iniquity; not onely in words, but in real actions, it is lawful to deceive or rob your Bro­ther, when to do so is necessary for the preservation of your fame: For no man is bound to restore stollen [Page 154] goods, that 'tis to cease from doing injury with the pe­ril of his Credit. So Navar, and Cardinal Cajetan, and Tolet teaches;Apud. Tolet. Instruct. Sa­cerd. l. 5. c. 27. who adds also, Hoc multi dicunt, quorum sententiam potest quis tutâ conscientiâ sequi. Many say the same thing, whose Doctrine any man may follow with a safe Conscience. Nay, to save a mans credit, an ho­nest man that is asham'd to beg, may steal what is ne­cessary for him, sayes Diana.

In comp [...]nd. p. 335 Lugduni. A. D. 1641Now by these Doctrines, a man is taught to be an honest Thief, and to keep what he is bound to restore; and by these we may not only deceive our Brother, but the Law; and not the Law only, but God also, even with an Oath, if the matter be but small: It never makes God angry with you, or puts you out of the state of grace. But if the matter be great, yet to prevent a great trouble to your self, you may conceal a truth, by saying that which is false; according to the general Doctrine of the late Casuists. So that a man is bound to keep truth and honesty, when it is for his turn; but not; if it be to his own hinderance; and therefore David was not in the right, but was something too nice in the resolution of the like case in the fifteenth Psalm. Now although we do not affirm, that these Particulars are the Doct­rine of the whole Church of Rome, because little things, and of this nature, never are considered in their pub­lick Articles of Confession; yet a man may do these vile things (for so we understand them to be) and find justifications and warranty, and shall not be affright­ed with the terrours of damnation, nor the imposition of penances: He may for all these things be a good Ca­tholick, though it may be, not a very good Christian. But since these things are affirm'd by so many, the opi­nion is probable, and the practice safe, saith Cardinal Tolet. Ubi supra.

[Page 155]But we shall instance in things of more publick con­cern, & Catholick Authority. No Contracts, Leagues, Societies, Promises, Vows, or Oaths, are a sufficient se­curity to him that deals with one of the Church of Rome, if he shall please to make use of that liberty, which may, and many times is, and alwayes can be granted to him. For first, it is affirmed, and was pra­ctis'd by a whole Council of Bishops at Constance, that Faith is not to be kept with Hereticks; and Iohn Hus, and H [...]erom of Prague, and Savanarola, felt the mischief of violation of publick Faith; and the same thing was dis­puted fiercely at worms, in the case of Luther, to whom Caesar had given a safe conduct, and very many would have had it to be broken; but Caesar was a better Chri­stian than the Ecclesiasticks, and their Party, and more a Gentleman. But that no scrupulous Princes may keep their words any more, in such cases, or think them­selves tyed to perform their safe conducts given to He­reticks, there is a way found out by a new Catholick Doctrine; Becanus shall speak this point instead of the rest,Theol. Scholast. [There are two distinct Tribunals, and the Ecclesiastical is the Superiour; and therefore, if a Secular Prince gives his Sub­jects a safe conduct, he cannot extend it to the Superiour Tribu­nal; nor by any security given, hinder the Bishop or the Pope to exercise their jurisdiction:] And upon the account of this, or the like Doctrine, the Pope, and the other Ecclesia­sticks did prevail at Constance, for the burning of their Prisoners, to whom safe conduct had been granted. But these things are sufficiently known by the com­plaints of the injur'd persons.

But not onely to Hereticks, but to our Friends also, we may break our Promises, if the Pope give us leave. It is a publick, and an avowed Doctrine, That if a man [Page 156] have taken an Oath of a thing lawful and honest, and in his power, yet if it hinders him from doing a great­er good, the Pope can dispense with his Oath, and take off the Obligation. This is expresly affirm'd by one of the most moderate of them,Relect. de paea [...]. n [...]. Canus Bishop of the Cana­ries. But beyond dispute, and even without a dispensa­tion, they all of them own it, That if a man have pro­mised to a woman to marry her, and is betrothed to her, and hath sworn it, yet if he will before the con­summation, enter into a Monastery, his Oath shall not bind him, his promise is null; but his second promise, that shall stand.S [...]ss. 8. can. 6. And he that denies this, is accursed by the Council of Trent.

Not only Husbands and Wives espoused may break their Vows, and mutual Obligation, against the will of one another; but in the Church of Rome, Children have leave given them to disobey their Parents, so they will but turn Friers: And this they might do, Girls at twelve, and Boyes at the age of fourteen years; but the Council of Trent enlarged it to sixteen; But the thing was taught and decreed by Pope Clement the III. and Thomas Aquinas did so,Cap. cum vi­rum de regula­ribus. Aquin. 2. q. 88. art. 9. Lib. 1. c. 101. and then it was made lawful by him and his Schollars; though it was expresly a­gainst the Doctrine and Laws of the preceding ages of the Church, as appears in the Capitulars of Charles the Great. But thus did the Pharisees teach their Children to cry Corban, and neglect their Parents; to pretend Re­ligion, in prejudice of filial piety. In this particular AE [...]odius a French Lawyer, an excellently learned man, suffered sadly by the loss, and forcing of a hope­ful Son from him, and he complain'd most excellently in a Book written on purpose upon this subject.

But these mischiefs are Doctrinal, and accounted [Page 157] lawful: But in the matter of Marriages and Contracts, Promises and Vows, where a Doctrine fails, it can be supplied by the Popes power: Which thing is avowed and own'd without a cover: For when Pope Clement the V. condemn'd the Order o [...] Knights Templers, he dis­own'd any justice or right in doing it, but stuck to his power,Thom. Wal­singham. Quanquam de jure non possumus, tamen ex plenitu­dine potestatis, dictum ordinem reprobamus; that is, though by right we cannot do it, yet by the fullness of power we condemn the said Order: For he can dispense al­wayes, and in all things where there is cause, and in many things where there is no cause; fed sub majori pre­tio, under a greater price, said the Tax of the Datary; where the price of the several dispensations, even in causa turpi, in base and filthy causes are set down.

Nay the Pope can dispense supra jus, contra jus; above Law, and against Law and right, said Mosconius in his Books of the Majesty of the Militant Church: For the Popes Tribunal and Gods is but one;Lib. 1. de sum­mo Pontif. vid [...] etiam Iacobum de T [...]ram: & Rav [...]s. de C [...] ­ci [...]. du Tren [...]. Cap. quia circa Extrav. de Bi­gamis. and therefore every reasonable Creature is subject to the Popes Em­pire, said the same Author: And what Dispensations he usually gives, we are best inform'd by a gloss of their own upon the Canon Law, Nota mirabile, quod cum eo qui peccat Dispensatur, cum illo autem qui non peccat non Dispensatur: It is a wonderful thing that they should dispense with a Fornicator, but not with him who marries after the death of his first Wife. * They give Divorces for Marriages the fourth degree, and give Dispensation to Marry in the second. These [Page 158] things are a sufficient charge, and yet evidently so, and publickly owned.

We need not aggravate this matter,Cap. proposuit. de con ess. pr [...] benda, n. [...]. by what Panor­mitan, and others do say, that the Pope hath power to dispense in all the Laws of God, except the Articles of Faith; and how much of this they own and practice, needs no greater instance, than that which Volaterran tells of Pope Innocent the VIII. that he gave the Norve­gians a Dispensation, not only to communicate, but to consecrate in Bread only.

As the Pope by his Dispensations undertakes to dissolve the Ordinances of God; so also the most solemn Contracts of Men: Of which a very great instance was given by Pope Clement the VII. who dispensed with the Oath which Francis the I. of France solemnly swore to Charles the V. Emperour, after the battel of Pa [...]y, and gave him leave to be perjur'd. And one of the late Popes dispenc'd with the Bastard Son of the Conde D' Olivarez, or rather, plainly dissolv'd his Marriage which he made and consummated with Isabella D' Azueta, whom he had publickly Married when he was but a mean person, the Son of Donna Marguerita Spinola, and under the name of Iulian Va [...]easar: But when the Conde had declar'd him his Son and Heir, the Pope dissolv'd the first Marriage, and gave him leave, under the name of Henry Philip de Guzman, to Marry D. Iuana de Vales­co, Daughter to the Constable of Castile.

And now, if it be considered, what influence these Doctrines have upon Societies and Communities of Men, they will need no further reproof, than a meer enumeration of the mischiefs they produce. They by this means legitimate adulterous and incestuous Mar­riages, and disanul lawful Contracts: They give leave [Page 159] to a Spouse to break his or her Vow and Promise; and to Children to disobey their Parents, and perhaps to break their Mothers heart, or to undo a Family. No words can bind your Faith, because you can be dispenc'd with; and if you swear you will not procure a Dispensation, you can as well be dispenc'd with for that Perjury as the other; and you cannot be tied so fast, but the Pope can unloose you. So that there is no certainty in your Pro­mise to God, or Faith to Men, in Judicatories to Ma­gistrates, or in Contracts with Merchants; in the Duty of Children to their Parents, of Husbands to their Wives, or Wives to their contracted Husbands, of a Catholick to a Heretick; and last of all, a Subject to his Prince cannot be bound so strictly, but if the Prince be not of the Popes persuasion, or be by him judg'd a Ty­rant, his Subjects shall owe him no Obedience. But this is of particular consideration, and reserv'd for the III. Sect.

SECT. II.

THere is yet another instance, by which the Church of Rome does intollerable prejudice to Govern­ments and Societies: In which, although the Impiety is not so apparent; yet the Evil is more own'd, and notorious, and defended; and that is, the Exemption of their Clergy from the Jurisdiction of Secular Princes and Magistrates, both in their Estates and Persons: Not onely in the matters of Simony, He­resie and Apostasie; but in matters of Theft, Per­jury, Murther, Adultery, Blasphemy and Treason: In which Cases they suffer not a Clergy-man to be judged by the Secular Power, untill the Church hath quit him,Si Imperator, dist. 96. &c. Ecclesia S. M. de constitut. A. D. 1199. Can. 5. De Clericis l [...]t. c 30 sect quar­to obiiciunt. and turn'd him over, and given them leave too proceed. This was verified in the Synod of Dal­matia, held by the Legats of Pope Innocent the III. and is now in the Church of Rome, pretended to be by Divine Right: [For it cannot be proved, that Secular Princes are the Lawful Superiours and Iudges of Clergy-men, unless it can be prov'd, that the Sheep are better than the Shepherd, or Soxs than their Fathers, or Temporals than Spirituals,] said Bellarmine:De Offic. Chri­stiani Princ. l. 1. c. 5. And there­fore it is a shame (sayes he) to see Princes contend­ing with Bishops for Precedency, or for Lands. For the truth is this (what ever the custom be) the [Page 161] Prince is the Bishops Subject, not the Bishop the Prin­ces:Suarez. d [...]fens. contra sect. An­glie. l. 4. c. 17. sect. 15, 16, & 18. For no man can serve two Masters, the Pope is their own Superiour, and therefore the Secular Prince cannot be. So both Bellarmine and Suarez conclude this Doctrine out of Scripture.

And although in this, as in all things else, when he finds it for the advantage of the Church, the Pope can dispense; and divers Popes of Rome did give power to the Common-wealth of Venice, to judge Clergy-men, and punish them for great Offences; yet how ill this was taken by Paulus V. at their hands, and what stirrs he made in Christendome concerning it, the World was witness; and it is to be read in the History of the Venetian Interdict, and not without great difficulty defended by Marcus Antonius Peregrinus, M. Antonius Othelius, and Ioachim Scaynus of Padua, beside the Doctors of Venice.

Now if it be considered, how great a part of man­kind in the Roman Communion are Clergy-men; and how great a portion of the Lands and Revenues in each Kingdom they have; to pretend a Divine Right of Exemption of their Persons from Secular Judicatories, and their Lands from Secular burthens and charges of the Common-wealth, is to make Re­ligion a very little friend to the Publick; and Causes, that by how much there is more of Religion, by so much there is the less of Piety and Publick Duty. Princes have many times felt the Evil, and are al­wayes subject to it, when so many thousand persons are in their Kingdoms, and yet Subjects to a For­reign Power. But we need not trouble our selves to reckon the Evills consequent to this Procedure, themselves have own'd them, even the very worst [Page 162] of things, [The Rebellion of a Clergy-man against his Prince is not Treason, because he is not his Princes Sub­ject.] It is expresly taught by Emanuel Sà;Apbor. verb. Cl [...]icus. and be­cause the French-men in zeal to their own King, could not endure this Doctrine, these words were left out of the Edition of Paris, but still remain in the Editions of Antwerp and Colien. But the thing is a general Rule, [That all Ecclesiastical persons are free from Secular Iurisdiction in causes Criminal, whe­ther Civil or Ecclesiastical: and this Rule is so gene­ral, that it admits no exception; and so certain, that it cannot be denied, unless you will contradict the Prin­ciples of Faith:]Desens. sid. l. 4. c. 15. s [...]ct. 1. So Father Suarez. And this is pre­tended to be allowed by Councills, Sacred Canons, and all the Doctors of Laws Humane and Divine; for so Bellarmine affirms.Apolog. p. 57. Against which, since it is a matter of Faith and Doctrine, which we now charge upon the Church of Rome, as an Enemy to pub­lick Government, we shall think it sufficient to op­pose against their Pretension, the plain and easie words of St. Paul, Rem. 13. 1. Let every soul be subject to the higher Powers. Every soul,] That is, saith St. Chrysostome, la bu [...]c locum. whe­ther he be a Monk, or an Evangelist, a Prophet, or an Apostle.

Of the like iniquity, when it is extended to its u [...]most Commentary, which the Commenters of the Church of Rome put upon it, is, the Divine Right of the Seal of Consession, which they make so Sa­cred, to serve such ends as they have chosen, that it may not be broken up to save the lives of Princes,Instruct. Sa­cerd. l. 3. c. 16. De poenit. l. 2. c. 19. 15. or of the whole Republick, saith Tolet; No, not to save all the World, said Henriquez: Not to save [Page 163] an Innocent, not to keep the World from burning, or Re­ligion from perversion, or all the Sacraments from demolition. Indeed it is lawful, saith Bellarmine, Apol. contr. Reg. M. Brit [...] c. 13. if a Treason be known to a Priest in Confession, and he may in gene­ral words give notice to a pious and Catholick Prince, but not to a Heretick; and that was acutely and prudent­ly said by him, said Father Suarez. Coutr. Reg. Ang. l. 9 c. 3: Father Binet is not so kind even to the Catholick Princes; for he sayes, that it is better that all the Kings of the World should perish, than that the Seal of Confession should be so much as once broken; and this is the Catholick Doctrine, said Eudae­mon Iohannes in his Apology for Garnet: and for it he al­so quotes Suarez. But it is enough to have nam'd this.Cap. 13: How little care these men take of the lives of Princes, and the Publick Interest; which they so greatly undervalue to every trifling fancy of their own, is but too evident by these Doctrines.

SECT. III.

THe last thing we shall remark for the instruction and caution of our charges, is not the least. The Doctrines of the Church of Rome, are great Enemies to the dignity and security, to the powers and lives of Princes: And this we shall briefly prove, by setting down the Doctrines themselves, and their consequent Practises.

And here we observe, that not onely the whole Order of Jesuites is a great Enemy to Monarchy, by subjecting the Dignity of Princes to the Pope, by making the Pope the Supreme Monarch of Christians; but they also teach, that it is a Catholick Doctrine, the Doctrine of the Church.

The Pope hath a Supreme Power of disposing the Temporal things of all Christians,De sum Pon­tif. l. 5. c. 6. in order to a Spiritual good, saith Bellarmine. And Becanus dis­courses of this very largely, in his Book of the English Controversie, Printed by Albin at Mentz, 1612. But because this Book was order'd to be purg'd (una litura potest) we shall not insist upon it; but there is as bad which was never censur'd. Bellarmine sayes, that the Ecclesiastical Republick can command and compel the Temporal,Ibid. c. 7. which is indeed its Subject, to change the Administration, and to depose [Page 165] Princes, and to appoint others, when it cannot other­wise defend the Spiritual good: And F. Suarez sayes the same. The power of the Pope extends it self to the coercion of Kings with Temporal punishments,Defen [...]. fid. Cath. l. 3. c. 25. s [...]ct. 10. & sect. 18. & 20. and depriving them of their Kingdoms, when neces­sity requires; nay, this power is more necessary o­ver Princes, than over Subjects. The same also is taught by Santarel, in his Book of Heresie and Schism, printed at Rome, 1626.

But the mischief of this Doctrine proceeds a little further.

Cardinal Tolet affirms, and our Countryman Father Bridgewater commends the saying,Corcer. Eccles. in Angl. fol. 336. That when a Prince is excommunicate, before the Denunciation, the Subjects are not absolved from their Oath of Allegiance (as Caje­tan sayes well;) yet when it is denounc'd, they are not only absolved from their obedience, but are bound not to obey, unless the fear of death, or loss of goods excuse them; which was the case of the English Catho­licks in the time of Henry the VIII. In Philopat. sect. 2. n. 160 [...] & 161. And F. Creswel sayes, it is the sentence of all Catholicks, that Subjects are bound to expel Heretical Princes, if they have strength enough; and that to this they are tyed by the Commandment of God, the most strict tie of Conscience, and the extreme danger of their Souls. Nay, even before the sentence is declar'd, though the Subjects are not bound to it, yet lawfully they may deny obedience to an Heretical Prince,Tom. 3. disp. [...]. q. 12. pu [...]ct. 2. said Gregory de Valentia.

It were an endless labour to transcribe the horri­ble Doctrines which are preach'd in the Jesuits School, to the shaking of the Regal power of such [Page 166] Princes which are not of the Roman Communion. The whole Oeconomy of it is well describ'd by Bellarmine; who affirms,Contr. B [...]r [...]l. c. 7. That it does not belong to Monks or other Ecclesiasticks, to commit Murthers, neither doe the Popes use to proceed that way. But their manner is, first Fa­therly to correct Princes, then by Ecclesiastical Censures to deprive them of the Communion, then to absolve their Subjects from the Oath of Allegiance, and to deprive them of their Kingly Dignity. And what then? The execution belongs to others.] This is the way of the Popes, thus wisely and moderately to break Kings in pieces.

We delight not to aggravate evill things. We therefore forbear to set down those horrid things spoken by Sà, Mariana, Santarel, Carolus Scribanius, and some others.Ubi supra, l. 6. c. 6. sect. 24. It is enough that Suarez sayes, An Excommunicate King may with impunity be depos'd or kill'd by any one. This is the case of Kings and Princes by the Sentence of the chiefest Roman Do­ctors. And if it be objected, That we are commanded to obey Kings, not to speak evill of them, not to curse them, no, not in our heart; there is a way found out to answer these little things. For though the Apo­stle commands, that we should be subject to higher Powers, and obey Kings, and all that are in Autho­rity: It is true, you must, and so you may well enough for all this; for the Pope can make that he who is a King, shall be no King, and then you are dis-oblig'd:Contr. E [...]cl. c. 7. so Bellarmine. And if after all this, there remains any scruple of Conscience, it ought to be re­membred, that though even after a Prince is Excom­municated, it should be of it self a sin to depose or [Page 167] kill the Prince; yet if the Pope commands you, it is no sin. For if the Pope should err by commanding sin, or forbid­ding vertues, yet the Church were bound to believe, that the vices were good, and the vertues evil, unless She would sin a­gainst Her Conscience:De Rom. Pontif. lib. 4. c. 5. They are the very words of Bellarmine.

But they add more particulars of the same bran. The Sons of an Heretical Father are made sui juris, that is, free from their Fathers power: A Catholick Wife is not tyed to pay her duty to an Heretical Husband; and the Servants are not bound to do service to such Masters: These are the Doctrines of their great Azorius; and as for Kings, he affirms, they may be Depos'd for Heresie: But all this is only in the case of Heretical Princes. But what for others?

Even the Roman Catholick Princes are not free from this danger. All the World knows what the Pope did to King Chilperick of France: He Depos'd him, and put Pipin in his place; and did what he could to have put Albert King of the Romans in the Throne of Philip, sir-named the Fair. They were the Popes of Rome who arm'd the Son against the Fa­ther, the Emperour Henry IV. and the Son fought against him, took him Prisoner, shav'd him, and thrust him into a Monastery, where he dyed with grief and hunger. We will not speak of the Emperour Frede­rick, Henry the sixth Emperour, the Duke of Savoy, against whom he caus'd Charles the V. and Francis the I. of France, to take Arms; nor of Francis Danda­lus Duke of Venice, whom he bound with chains, and fed him as Dogs are fed, with bones and scraps un­der his Table: Our own Henry the II. and King [Page 168] Iohn, were great instances of what Pri [...]s in their case may expect from that Religion. Those were the piety of the Father of Christendome: But these were the pro­duct of the Doctrine which Clement the V. vented in the Council of Vienna, Q [...] jus R [...]gum à se pendere: The right of all Kings depend upon the Pope: and there­ [...]ore even their Catholick Princes are at their mercy, and they would if they durst, use them accordingly: If they do but favour Hereticks, or Schismaticks, re­ceive them, or defend them; if the Emperour be per­jur'd, if he rashly break a league made with the See Apostolick, if he do not keep the peace promis'd to the Church, if he be sacrilegious, if he dissipate the goods of the Church, the Pope may Depose him,B [...]stit: moral. part. 2. lib. 10. cap. 9. said Azorius. And Santarel sayes, he may do it, in case the Prince or Emperour be insufficient, if he be wick­ed, if he be unprofitable, if he does not defend the Church.Ubi supra. This is very much, but yet there is something more; this may be done, if he impose new Gabels or Imposts upon his Subjects, without the Popes leave;See Mat Vi­valdus de Bulla coenae Domini. for if they do not pretend to this also, why does the Pope in Bulla coenae Domini, Excommunicate all Princes that do it?

Now if it be enquir'd, By what Authority the Pope does these things? It is answered, That the Pope hath a Supreme and absolute Authority; both the Spiritual and the Temporal Power is in the Pope as Christs Vicar, said Azorius and Samarel. The Church hath the right of a Superiour Lord over the rights of Princes, and their Temporalties; and that by Her Jurisdiction, She disposes of Temporals ut de suo peculio, as of Her own proper goods, said our [Page 169] Country-man Weston, Sanct. a [...]. Iur. P [...]nlificis qu. 15 s [...]ct. 5. qu. 17. s [...]ct. 6. & qu. 27. sect. 7. Cat [...]l. glor. mundi part. 4. consid. 7. cae Zod [...]rico. Rector of the College at Doway. Nay, the Pope hath power in omnia, per omnia, super omnia, in all things, thorough all things, and over all things; and the sublimity and immensity of the Supreme Bishop is so great, that no mortal man can comprehend it, said Cassenaeus; no man can express it, no man can think it: So that it is no wonder what Papirius Massonus said of Pope Boniface the VIII. that he own'd himself not onely as the Lord-of France, Verb. Bon [...]f. [...]. but of all the World.

Now we are sure it will be said, That this is but the private Opinion of some Doctors, not the Do­ctrine of the Church of Rome. To this we reply: 1. It is not the private Opinion of a few, but their publick Doctrine, own'd, and offer'd to be justified to all the World, as appears in the preceding Testimo­nies. 2. It is the Opinion of all the Jesuit Order, which is now the greatest and most glorious in the Church of Rome, and the maintenance of it, is the subject mat­ter of their new Vow of Obedience to the Pope, that is, to advance his Grandeur. 3. Not onely the Je­suits, but all the Canonists in the Church of Rome, contend earnestly for these Doctrines. 4. This they doe upon the Authority of the Decreta [...]s, and their own Law, De maj [...]r, & obed [...]ent. un [...]m Sanctam. In Extrav. Pon [...]f. 8. Concil. Late [...]. sub Iu [...]is 2. In Extrav. Iob. 22. cap. Cum inter nonnul­los. In gloss. si­nal, edit. [...]aris 1503. Co [...]cil. Viennens. sub. Clem. 5. and the Decrees of Councills. 5. Not onely the Jesuists and Canonists, but others also of great note amongst them, earnestly contend for these Doctrine; particularly Cassenaeus, Zodericus Voi supra in Cassenao., the Arch­Bishop of Florence Summ. 3. part. l. 22. c. 6. sect. 4., Petrus de Monte In sua Monarchiae quem citat Felinus in cap. si qu [...]ndo, ubi per cum extrav. de rescript., St. Thomas Aquinas In tract. de Rege & regno ad R [...]gem Cypri., Bozius, Baronius, and many others. 6. Them­selves [Page 170] tell us it is a matter of Faith;In Phi [...]pair. sect. 2. 7. 160. 162. F. Creswel sayes, It is the sentence of all Catholicks; and they that doe not admit these Doctrines,Lib. de side baeret. servanda Father Rosweyd calls them half Christians, Grinners, barking Royalists, and a new Sect of Catholicks;In epist. moni­tor. ad. Iob. B [...]rclai. and Eudaemon Iohannes sayes, That without question it is a Heresie in the judgement of all Catholicks. Now in such things which are not in their Creeds, and publick Confessions, from whence should we know the Doctrines of their Church, but from their chiefest and most leading Doctors; who, it is certain, would fain have all the World believe it to be the Doctrine of their Church? And therefore as it is certain, that any Roman Catholick may with allow­ance be of this opinion; so he will be esteemed the bet­ter and more zealous Catholick if he be; and if it were not for fear of Princes, who will not lose their Crowns for their foolish Doctrines, there is no peradventure but it would be declared to be defide, a matter of faith, as divers of them of late do not stick to say. And of this the Pope gives but too much evidence, since he will not take away the scandal, which is so greatly given to all Christian Kings and Republicks, by a publick and a just condemnation of it. Nay, it is worse than thus; for Sixtus Quintus upon the XI of September, A. D. 1589. in an Oration in a Conclave of Cardinals, did solemn­ly commend the Monk that kill'd Henry the III. of France. The Oration was printed at Paris by them that had rebell'd against that Prince, and avouched for Au­thentick by Bouncher, Decreil, and Ancelein: And though some would fain have it thought to be none of his; yet Bellarmine dares not deny it,In resp. ad A­polog. pro [...]. fidelit, but makes for it a crude, and a cold Apology.

[Page 171]Now concerning this Article, it will not be neces­sary to declare the Sentence of the Church of Eng­land and Ireland, because it is notorious to all the World; and is expresly oppos'd against this Roman Doctrine, by Laws, Articles, Confessions, Homilies, the Oath of Allegiance and Supremacy, the Book of Christian Institution, and the many excellent Writings of King Iames of Blessed Memory, of our Bishops and other Learned Persons against Bellarmine, Parsons, Eu­daemon Iohannes, Creswel, and others: And nothing is more notorious, than that the Church of England is most dutiful, most zealous for the right of Kings; and within these four and twenty years, She hath had many Martyrs, and very, very many Confessors in this Cause.

It is true, that the Church of Rome does recriminate in this point, and charges some Calvinists and Presby­terians with Doctrines which indeed they borrowed from Rome, using their Arguments, making use of their Expressions, and pursuing their Principles. But with them in this Article we have nothing to do, but to reprove the Men, and condemn their Doctrine, as we have done all along, by private Writings, and publick Instruments.

We conclude these our Reproofs with an Exhoria­tion to our respective Charges, to all that desire to be sav'd in the day of the Lord Iesus; that they de­cline from these horrid Doctrines, which in their birth are new, in their growth are scandalous, in their proper consequents are infinitely dangerous to their Souls, and hunt for their precious life: But therefore it is highly fit, that they also should perceive their [Page 172] own advantages, and give God praise, that they are immur'd from such infinite dangers, by the Holy Pre­cepts, and Holy Faith taught and commanded in the Church of England and Ireland; in which the Word of God is set before them as a Lanthorn to their feet, and a Light unto their eyes; and the Sacraments are fully admi­nistred according to Christs Institution; and Repen­tance is preach'd according to the measures of the Go­spel; and Faith in Christ is propounded according to the Rule of the Apostles, and the measures of the Churches Apostolical; and Obedience to Kings is great­ly and sacredly urg'd; and the Authority and Order of Bi­shops is preserv'd, against the Usurpation of the Pope, and the Invasion of Schismaticks and Aerians new and old; and Truth and Faith to all men is kept and preach'd to be necessary and inviolable; and the Commandements are expounded with just severity, and without scruples; and Holiness of Life is urg'd upon all men, as indispensa­bly necessary to Salvation, and therefore without any allowances, tricks, and little artifices of escaping from it by easie and imperfect Doctrines; and every thing is practis'd which is useful to the saving of our Souls; and Christs Merits and Satisfaction are intirely relyed upon for the pardon of our sins; and the necessity of Good Works is universally taught; and our Prayers are holy, un­blameable, edifying, and understood; they are accord­ing to the measures of the Word of God, and the pra­ctice of all Saints. In this Church the Children are du­ly, carefully, and rightly Baptiz'd; and the Baptiz'd, in their due time are Confirm'd; and the Confirm'd are Communicated; and Penitents are Absolv'd; and the Im­penitents punished and discouraged; and Holy Marriage in [Page 173] all men is preferr'd before unclean Concubinate in a­ny; and Nothing is wanting that God and his Christ hath made necessary to Salvation.

Behold we set before you Life and Death, Blessing and Cursing, Safety and Danger. Choose which you will; but remember that the Pro­phets who are among you, have declar'd to you the way of Salvation. Now the Lord give you understanding in all things, and reveal even this also unto you.

Amen.