Sect. I.

IT was the challenge of St. Augu­stine to the Donatists,De unit. Ec­cles. cap. 6. 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 Co-heir. 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 [Page 6] be the Foundation of our Faith, what­soever came in after these, for is est, it belongs not unto Christ. Ecclesia ex s [...]cris & ca­nonicis Scri­pturis osten­denda est, quaeque ex il­lis ostendi non potest, Eccle­siae non est, S. Aug. de uni. Eccles. c. 4. &c. 3. [...]bi quae­ramus Eccle­siam, ibi de­cernamus causam no­stram.

To these we also add, not as Au­thors or Finishers, but as helpers of our Faith, and Heirs of the Doctrine A­postolical, the Sen [...]iments 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 acknowledge 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 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 [Page 7] 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 first three Ages, every inquiring Man may easily dis­cern. But the noises therefore which they make are from the Writings of the succeeding Ages; where secular 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 [Page 8] 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 al­leged by us to the contrary, will cer­tainly prove that what many of them (suppose it) do 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 onely in the prime and purest Antiquity we are indubitably more than Conquerors; but even in the succeeding Ages, we have the advantage both numero, pon­dere & men surâ, in number, weight and measure.

[Page 9]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 fore­fathers 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 good 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 [Page 10] 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 al their points of controversie with us, and shew nothing but shadows instead of substances, and little images o [...] things instead of solid arguments; we shall take from them their armour in which they trusted, and choose this sword of Goliath to combat their er­rors; for non est alter talis; It is no [...] easie to find 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 o [...] the Christian Church.

For the Religion of our Church is therefore certainly Primitive and Apo­stolick, [Page 11] 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 Saint 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 [Page 12] Bishops of the Church Lib. Cano. discip, Eccle. Angl. & in­junct. Regin. Elis. A. D. 1571. Can. de concionatori­bus.. This was undoubtedly the Faith of the Primi­tive Church, they admitted all into their Communion that were of this faith; they condemned no Man that did not condemn these; they gave letters communicatory by no othe [...] cognisance, and all were Brethren who spake this voice. [Hanc legen [...] sequentes, Christianorum Catholicorum [...] nomen jubemus amplecti, reliquos ver [...] dementes, vesanosque judicantes haere­tici dogmatis infamiam sustinere] said the Emperors,Dat. 3. Ca [...]en. Mart. Thes­salonicae. Gratian, Valentinia [...] and Theodosius, in their Proclamation to the People of C. P. All that be­liev'd this Doctrine were Christian [...] and Catholicks, viz. all they who be­lieve in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, one Divinity of equal Majesty in the Holy Trinity; which indee [...] was the summ of what was decree [...] 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, [Page 13] 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 we after them? That which we rely upon is the same that the Primitive Church did ac­knowledge 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 [...]he Old Religion, and in which we shall prove that they have in­novated. So that by their con­fession, all the Doctrine, which we teach the people, as matter of Faith, must be confessed to be Ancient, Pri­mitive [Page 14] and Apostolick, or else theirs is not so: for ours is the same, and [...] both have received this faith from the fountains of Scripture and Universa [...] 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 whethe [...] the Faith of the Church of Englan [...] be Apostolick or Primitive; it is so confessedly: But the Question is con­cerning many other particulars whic [...] were unknown to the Holy Doctor of the first ages, which were no part [...] their faith, which were never put int [...] their Creeds, which were not deter­min'd in any of the four first Gener [...] Councils, rever'd in all Christendom and entertain'd every where with gre [...] Religion and veneration, even next [...] the four Gospels and the Apostolic [...] writings.

Of this sort, because the Church of Rome hath introduc'd many, an [...] hath adopted them into their lan [...] Creed, and imposes them upon th [...] People, not only without, but again [Page 15] the Scriptures and the Catholick Do­ctrine of the Church of God; laying heavy 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 [...]hurch of God, and teaching for Doctrines the Commandements 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 [...]s, that we esteem our selves oblig'd to warn the People of their danger, and to depart from it, and call upon them [...]o stand upon the wayes, and ask after the old paths, and walk in them; lest they partake of that curse which is [...]hreatned by God to them, who remove [...]he Ancient Land-marks which our Fa­thers in Christ have set for us.

Now that the Church of Rome can­not [Page 16] not 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 ad [...] that this power is attributed to th [...] Bishops of Rome by Turrecremata Quod sit metrum [...] & regula, acsciet [...]a cre­dendorum. Summae de Ecclesia, l. 2 c 203. Augustinus Triumphus de Ancona Novum Symi [...]ium condere so­lum ad Pa­pam specta [...], quia est caput fidei Christianae, cujus authoritate omnia quae ad [...] dem spectant firmantur & roborantur. q. 59 a. 1. & art. 2. sicut petest no [...] symbolum condere, i [...] po [...]est novos articulos supra alios multiplicare. Petrus de Ancorano Papa potest facere novos articulos fidei, id est, quod modo credi oport [...]at, cum prius non oport [...]ret. In cap. cum Christus. de [...]aeret. n 2., and the Famo [...] Abbot of Panormo Papa potest induceren [...] vum arti [...]u um fidei. In idem., that the Pop [...] cannot only make new Creeds, bu [...] new Articles of Faith; that he can make that of necessity to be believ'd [Page 17] 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 whatever 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 ju­r [...]jur. c. ni­mis. n. 1., and Ferdinandus ab Inciso Apud Pe­trum Ciezam t. 2. ins [...]it. pe­r [...]nae ca [...] 69., who were Ca­suists and Doctors of Law, of great authority 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 Trent; by which all Ecelesiasticks are not on­ [...]y 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 corrobroated by the same decretory clauses that are us'd in the Creed of Athanasius: that this is the true Ca­tholick [Page 18] 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 furthe [...] evidence be believed by all discerning persons, that they have need of this Do­ctrine, or it would not have been taugh [...] [...] and that consequently without mo [...]adoe, it may be concluded that some [...] their Articles are parts of this new faith [...] and that they can therefore in no sen [...] be Apostolical, unless their being Ro [...]man makes them so.

To this may be added another con [...]sideration, not much less material, th [...] besides what Eckius told the Elector [...] Bavaria that the Doctrines of Luth [...] might be overthrown by the Father [...] though not by Scripture; they ha [...] also many gripes of conscience conce [...]ning the Fathers themselves, that th [...] are not right on their side; and of th [...] [Page 19] they have given but too much demon­stration by their Expurgatory indices. The Serpent by being so curious a de­fender of his head, shews where his dan­ger is, and by what he can most readily be 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 Iohanne [...] Clemens ali­quo [...] folia Theodoreti laceravit & abjecit in fo­cum, in qui­bus contra transubstan­tionem prae­clare disse­ruit. Et cum [...]on ita pri­dem Orige­nem [...]xcude­rent, totum illud caput sextum Io­hannes & quod com­mentabatur [...]rigen [...]s [...]mis [...]runt, & mutilum [...]did [...]runt libru [...] propt [...]r candem ca [...]sa [...].; 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 publick complaint and demonstration) they have at last fallen to a new trade, which hath caus'd more dis-reputation to [...]hem, than they have gain'd advantage, [...]nd they have virtually confess'd, that [...]n many things, the Fathers are against [...]hem.

For first, the King of Spain gave a [...]ommission to the Inquisitors to purge [...]ll Catholick Authors; but with this [Page 20] clause, iique ipsi privatim, nullisque consciis apud se indicem expurgatorium habebunt, quem eundum neque aliis com­municabunt, neque ejus exemplum ulli dabunt: that they should keep the ex­purgatory Index privately, neither im­parting that index, nor giving a copy of it to any. But it happened, by the Divine providence, so ordering it, that about thirteen years after, a copy of it was gotten and published by Iohannes Pappus and Franciscus Iunius, an [...] since it came abroad against their wills, they find it necessary now to own it, and they have printed it themselves [...] Now by these expurgatory Table what they have done is known to a [...] Learned Men. In St. Chrysostom [...] Works printed at Basil, these words [The Church is not built upon the Ma [...] but upon the faith] are commanded [...] be blotted out: and these [There is [...] merit, but what is given us by Christ, and yet these words are in his Sermo [...] upon Pentecost, and the former wor [...] are in his first homily upon that of S [...] Iohn, Ye are my friends, &c.] T [...] [Page 21] like they have done to him in many other places, and to St. Ambrose, and to St. Austin, and to them all Sixtus S [...] ­nensis epis [...]. dedicat. ad. P [...]m Q [...]n. [...]auda [...] Pon­ [...]sic [...]m id haec verba, Expur­gari & [...]ma­culari carasti omnium Ca­tholicorum Scriptorum, ac prae [...]i [...]ue ve [...]erum pa­tr [...]m scrip [...]a., 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 St. Ambrose in that edition of his works, which was printed at Lyons 1559. So that what they say on occasion of Bertrams book [In the old Catholick Writers we suffer very many errors, and extenuate and excuse them, and finding out some commentary, we feign 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 [...]f images forbidden] The Eucharist no [...]acrifice, but the memory of a sacrifice] Works, although they do not justifie, yet [Page 22] are necessary to Salvation] Marriage i [...] granted to all that will not contain] Veni­al sins damn] The dead Saints, afte [...] this life cannot helf us] nay out of the Index of St. Austins Works by Clau­dius Chevallonius at Paris 1531. there is a very strange deleatur [Dele, Index expur­gator. Ma­drili. 1612. in Indice li­bror. expur­gatorum pag. [...]9. Solu [...] Deus ador andus] that God alone is to b [...] worshipped, is commanded to be blotted out, as being a dangerous Doctrine [...] These instances may serve instead o [...] multitudes, which might be brought o [...] their corrupting the witnesses and ra­zing the records of antiquity, that th [...] errors and Novelties of the Church o [...] Rome might not be so easily reprov'd [...] Now if the Fathers were not again [...] them, what need these arts? Wh [...] should they use them thus? Their o [...] expurgatory indices are infinite testimo [...] against them, both that they do so, a [...] that they need it.

But besides these things, we ha [...] thought it fit to represent in on [...] aspect, some of their chief Doctrines [...] difference from the Church of En [...]land, and make it evident that they [...] [Page 23] 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 allege that 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, Gal. [...]. [...]. saying, 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 [...]he sentence of the Fathers in the third General Council, that at Ephesus. Part. 2. act. 6. c. 7. [...] That it should not be lawful for any Man [...]o publish or compose another Faith or Creed than that which was defin'd by the Nicene Council: and that whosoever shall [...]are to compose or offer any such to any [...]ersons willing to be converted from [...]aganism, Iudaism, or Heresie, if they [Page 24] 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 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 P. Martin the fifth,De potest. Eccles. Consi [...]. 12. declar'd fo [...] the Popes Supremacy. But Ioh [...] Gerson, who was at the Council sayes that the Council did abate those heights to which flattery had advance' [...] the Pope; and that before that Coun­cil they spoke such great things of th [...] Pope, which afterwards moderate Me [...]durst not speak; but yet some othe [...] [Page 25] 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 Lateran 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, and accor­ding to Bellarmine's expression is ferè de fide, De Consil. author. l. 2. c. 17. Sect. 1. it is almost an article of Faith; they want a little age, and then they may go alone. But the Council of Trent hath produc'd a strange new article;Sess. 21. c. 4. but it is sine controver si â 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 whether they did or did not [Page 26] 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 reproch to Christendom, it was also so very an Innovation, that their great Antoninus confesses that concerning them we have nothing expresly, Part. 1. Sum. tit. 10. p. 3. either in the Scriptures, or in the sayings of the Ancient Doctors: and the same is af­firmed [Page 27] by Sylvester Prieria [...]. Bishop Fisher of Rochester says,In art. 1 [...]. Luther. that in the be­ginning of the Church there was no use of indulgences; and that they be­gan after the people were awhile 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 we are assur'd by Crantzius. This Pope Intravit ut vulpes, regnavit ut leo, mori [...]ba­tur ut canis, de eo saepiu [...] d [...]ctum. lived and died with very great infamy, and therefore was not likely form him­ [...]elf 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 Gratian, and in the sentences of Peter Lombard there is nothing spoken of indulgen­ces: [Page 28] 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 ancient 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 lest the Roman Emissaries should deceive any of the good Sons of the Church, we think it fit to acquaint them,Tertul. 1 [...] ad Martyr. c. 1. S. Cy­prian. lib. 3. Ep. 15. apud Pamelium 11. Concil. Nicen. 1. can. 12. Conc. Ancyr c. 5. Concil. Laodicen. c. 2. S. Basil. in Ep. canoni­cis habentur in Nomocanone Phot [...]i, can. 73. that in the Primitive Church, when the Bishops impos'd severe pe­nances, 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 [Page 29] Martyrs interceded, the Bishop did sometimes indulge the penitent, 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, lest 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 that there is an infinite of degrees of Christs merits 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 opinio D.D. tam Theol [...] ­gorum, quam Canonico­rum, quod sunt ex a­bundantia meritorum quae ultra mensuram demeritorum suorum sancti su­stinnerunt, & Christi, Sum. Angel. v. In­dulg 9. or at lest 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 [Page 30] 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 inferior to the pains of hell, excepting only 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 Unigenitus, de poenitentiis & remissionibus, A. D. 1350. This constitution was published Fifty years after the first Jubilee, and was a new devise 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. sen. dist. 19. q 2. and Durandus Ibid. dist. 20. q 3. not long before this extravagant; and that it was not [Page 31] 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.

But as to the thing it self: it is so wholly new, so merely 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. For as Durandus said,Ubi supra. the Holy Fathers, Ambrose, Hilary, Hierom, Augustine speak nothing of Indulgences. And whereas it is said that S. Gregory DC. years after Christ, [Page 32] 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 histo­ [...]y 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 & 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 ancient Doctors should tell any thing of it: insomuch that there is no one writer of authority and credit, not the more ancient Doctors we have named, nor those who were much la­ter, Rupertus Tuitiensis, Anselm or [Page 33] S. Bernard ever took notice of it; but it was a Doctrine wholly unknown to the Church for about MCC years after Christ: & Card. Cajetane told P. 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; & therfore can be nothing of that which is now a-days pretended.

True it is, that the Canonical penan­ces were about the time of Burchard lessen'd and alter'd by commutations; and the ancient Discipline of the Church in imposing penances was made so loose, that the Indulgence was more than the Imposition, & began not to be an act of mercy but remisness, an absolution without amends: It became a trumpet, & a leavy for the Holy War; in Pope Urban 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 [Page 34] 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 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 only so, but they have introduc'd a way or remittin [...] sins, that Christ and his Apostle [...] taught not; a way destructive of th [...] [Page 35] 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 practice that supposes a new bunch of Keys given to the Church, besides that which the Apostles receiv'd to open and shut the Kingdom 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 tibi in die judicii, quando nemo poterit per a­lium excusa­ri, vel defen­di; sed unus­quis (que) sufficiens onus erit sibi i [...]si: Th. a [...] [...]. 1. d [...] [...]mit. c. 24. That when we have done all that is com­manded, we are unpro [...]itable servants, and therefore certainly cannot super­erogate, or do more than what is infi­nitely recompenc'd by the Kingdom of Glory, to which all our doings and all our sufferings are not worth [...] to be compar'd, especially, since the great­est Saint cannot but say with David, Enter not into judgment with thy ser­vant; [Page 36] for in thy sight no flesh living can be justified; It is a practice that hath turn'd penances into a Fair, and the Court of Conscience into a Lom­bard, and the labours of Love into the labours 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 P. Innocent VIII. 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 Holy 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 [Page 37] unchristian practices. 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 labour of love, a religion of justice and piety, and moral vertues: 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 requir [...]d 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. Augustine Serm. de Martyrib., and S. Bernard S [...]rm. 1. de Advent.: The sense of these Fathers is this, in the words of S. Augustine: 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 inquire for no other in­dulgence to thy sins; if thou wilt retire [Page 38] into the closet of thy heart, there thou shalt find it. That is, All our hopes of Indulgence is from GOD through IESUS CHRIST, and is whol­ly to be obtain'd by faith in Christ, and perseverance in good works, and intire mortification of all our sins.

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 only 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 [Page 39] of the Satisfactions of Christ only, 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 add 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 add 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 the 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 [Page 40] question of Indulgences and Purgato­ry in general and recommendatory terms; affirming, that the power of giving Indulgence is in the Church, and that the use is wholsome: 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 incuri­ous, 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 practice, and set their Do­ctors, as well as they can, to desend all the new, and curious and scandalous [Page 14] questions, and to uphold the gainful trade. But however it be with them, the 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 likely to fall into a de­lirium in his feet, was advis'd for reme­dy to 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,

[Page 42]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 ce [...]tain, that it is expresly against the Word of God, who promises upon our repentance, so to take away our sins, that he will remember them no more:
  Eze. 1 [...]. 22.
  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
  Ne (que) ab iis quos sanas lente languor abscedit, sed illico quem restituis ex integro [...]m­valescit, qu [...]a consummatum est quod sacis, & perfectum quod largiris, S. Cyprian de caena Do­mini: vel potius Ar [...]o [...]dus. P. Ge [...]asius de vincul. anath [...]m. neg [...]t p [...]n [...]m deberi culpaesi culp [...] co [...]rigatur.
  . And [Page 43] this was so perfectly believ'd by the Pri­mitive Church, that they alwayes 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 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 demaud, 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
  D [...]let gra­tia finalis p [...]ccatum ve­niale in ipsa d [...]ssolutione corporis & animae. Hoc ab antiquis d [...]ctum [...]st. Albert. Mag. in compend. Theolog. verit. [...]. 3. 6. 13.
  is there any more of Pur­gatory? [Page 44] 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 pain be removed, what uncleanness can there be left be­hind? 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 post fa­cto, to dress this opinion, and make it to [Page 45] 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 who so searcheth the Writings of the Greek Fathers, shall find 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 [Page 46] 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 Holy 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; even for the Patriarchs and Prophets, for the Apo­stles and Evangelists, for Martyrs and Confessors, and especially for the bles­sed Virgin Mary: So we find it in Haeres. 75. Epiphanius, Cateches, mystag. 5. St. Cyril, and in the Ca­non of the Greeks, and so it is acknow­ledged by their own De riti [...]us, lib. 2. c. 35. Durantus; and in their Mass-book anciently they prayed for the soul of St. Leo: Of [Page 47] 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 St. Leo, in be­half of themselves;Innocent. P. de Celeb. Mis­sar. cap. c [...]m Martha. so by their new doctrine, making him an Intercessor for us, who by their old doctrine was sup­pos'd to need our prayers to intercede for him; of which Pope Innocent being ask'd 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 never did con­demn by any express Article,Apologia confessionis Augustanae expresse ap­probat clan­sulam illam [...], Deus de [...] ei pacatam q [...]i [...]em, ad v [...]am re­surre [...]tionem. 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, [Page 48] 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 for 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, which are Psalms and Lessons taken from the Scripture, speaking of the miseries of this World, Repentance, and Reconciliation with God, the bliss after this life of them that die 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 Iudgment 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 [Page 49] 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 Iudgment, and it is such a fire that destroys the Doctrine of the interme­dial Purgatory. We suppose that Origen was the first that spoke plainly of it; and so S. Ambrose follows him in the opinion (for it was no more;) so does S. Basil, S. Hilary, S. Hierom, and Lactantius, as their words plainly prove, as they are cited by Sixtus Se­nensis, affirming, that all men, Christ only excepted, shall be burned with the fire of the worlds conflagration at the day of Iudgment;Biblieth [...]. l, 5. Anno [...]. clxxi Vide etiam Bellar. l. 2 de Pur­gat sect. c. 1. Ambr [...]sius. even the Blessed Virgin her self is to pass through this fire. There was also another Doctrine very generally receiv'd by the Fathers, which greatly destroys the Roman Purgatory: Sixtus Senensis says, and he says very true, that Iustin Martyr, Tertullian, Victorinus Martyr, Prudentius, S. Chrysostom, Arethas, Euthimi­us [Page 50] and Lib. 6. Bi [...]l. Sa [...]ct. annot. 345, Bernandum e [...]c [...]ssandum arbi [...]ror ob ingentem nu­merum illu­strium Ec­c [...]esiae Pa­trum, q [...]i ante ipsum huic d [...]gmati authori [...]n [...]m suo testim [...]nio visi sunt praebuisse; prae [...]er cita­tos; enum [...] ­ra [...], S. Ja­cobum A­postolum, Irenaeum, Clemen­tem Roma­num, Augu­stinum, Theodore­tum, Oecu­menium, Theophy­lactum, & Johannem 22. ponif. Rom.quam sententia [...] non m [...]do d [...] ­cuit, & de­claravit, sed a [...] om [...]i [...]us [...]eneri mandavit, ut [...]it Adrianus P. in 4. lib. sent. in fine quaest. i [...] sa [...]ram confirmationis. S. Bernard, did all affirm, that before the day of Judgment the 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 find, 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 concor [...] with their new Doctrine.

[Page 51]But besides these things, it is cer­tain, that the Doctrine of Purgatory, before the day of Judgment, in S. Au­gustins time, was not the Doctrine of the Church; it was not the Catholick Doctrine; for himself did doubt of it: [Whether it be so or not, Enchyrid c. 69. lib. 21. [...] civit. Dei c. 26. it may be in­quir'd, and possibly it may be found so, and possibly it may never:] so S. Au­gustine. 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. cap. 26. who liv'd in the year 1146. it was got­ten no further than 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, & liberations of Souls and Spirits after this life; yet we can truly affirm it, and can never be convinc'd to err in this affirmation, that there is not any one of the Anci­ents within five hundred years, whose [Page 52] 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 & en [...]ic'd into this belief by perpe­tual tales and legends, by which they love to be abus'd. To this purporse, 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 impu [...]ed to S. Cyril; but the ill-luck of it was that S. Hierom out-lived S. Cyril, an [...] wrote his life, and so confuted tha [...] story; but all is one for that, they believe it never the less: But the [...] are enough to help it out; and if the [...] be not firmly true Haec de­scri [...]simus, ut tamen in i [...] nuila veluti Canonica constituatur authoritas. l. de 8. quaest. Dulcitii. c. [...] Dist. 3. exem. 3. Exempl. 60., yet if they b [...] firmly believ'd, all is well enough. [...] [Page 53] 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. And a certain Monk saw some souls roasted upon spits like Pigs, and some Devils basting them with scald­ing lard; but a while after they were carried to a cool place, and so prov'd Purgatory.Histor. Lom [...]. 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 Udalric in a Pool of water:Legend. 185. For the place of Purga­tory was not 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 dream­ed [Page 54] of in his Purgatory, or Cicero in his dream of Scipio, or Plato in his Gorgi­as, or Phaedo, 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 arches and centries, taking them away when the parts of [Page 55] 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 Saint Augustine upon the Feast of the Commemorati­on of All-souls (which nevertheless was instituted after S. Augustins 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 blamed, because better arguments than 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, that,Deut. 18. 11, &c. Isa. 8.19. besides that the Scri­ptures expresly forbid us to enquire of the dead for truth; the Holy Doctors of the Church, particularly,Vide Mald [...] ­nat. in 16. cap S. Luca. Tertul. S. A­thanasius, S. Chrysost. Isido. and Theophy­lact, deny that the souls of the dead ever [Page 56] 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 Nov [...]lty 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 add this, That the Greek Church did always 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 Apology directly disappro­ving the Roman Doctrine of Purgato­ry. How afterwards they were press'd [Page 57] in the Council 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 day refuse to own this Doctrine, are things so notoriously known, that they need no further de­claration.

We add this only, to make the con­viction more manifest:Ad Demetri­an. sect. 16. 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 satisfaction is effe­ctus: [When we are gone from hence, there is no place left for repentance, and no effect of satisfaction. Eccles. hier. c. 7.] S. Dionysius calls the extremity of death, [...] The end of all our agonies, and affirms, That the Holy men of God [Page 58] rest in joy, and in never failing hopes, and are come to the end of their holy com­bates. S. Iustin Martyr affirms, That when the soul is departed from the body [...],Quast. & re­spons. ad or­thod. qu. 75. Iustino im­putat. presently there is a separati­on made of the just and unjust: The un­just are by Angels born into places which they have deserv'd; but the souls of the just into Paradise, 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 finds every man, sort 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 Piagam grandinis & orat. 42 in Pascha. De E [...]cles. dog­mat. 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 [Page 59] 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 Catho­lick Church:In Eccle. c. 11. [In what place soever a man is taken at his death, of light or dark­ness, of wickedness or vertue, [...] [...] 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 uujust, 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 [Page 60] 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 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 passed 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 die in the Lord, from henceforth, even so saith the Spi­rit, that they may rest from their labours. If all the dead that die 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: To these words we add the saying of Christ, and we re­lie upon it [He that heareth my word, [Page 61] and believeth on him that sent me, John 5.2 [...]. hath eternal life, and cometh not into judg­ment, but passeth from death unto life.] If so, then not into the judgment 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, judgment or condemnation af­ter death; for death and life are the whole progression, according to the Doctrine of Christ, and Him we choose 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 publickly for an opinion, and the very Council in which it was said to be passed 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 [Page 62] their own parties, by In 4. lib. sent. d. 11. q. 3 Scotus, Ibid. q. 6. Ocham, Lect. 40. in can. missa. Biel, Fisher Bishop of [...]ap. 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 expressed 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 Innocent, the third, MCC years and more after Christ; that since that pretended Venere tum quidem mul­ta in consisla­tionem, nec decerni tam [...]n quicquam a­perte po [...]it. Platina in vit [...] 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, Io­hanes de Bassolis, Cardinal Apud Suar. Tom. 3. disp. 46. sect. 3. Cajetan, and Melchior Loc. com. l. 3. c. 3. fund. 2. Canus, besides those a­bove [Page 63] 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 acknowledgment 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. d [...] Euch. cap. 23. sect. unum [...] S [...]m. l. [...]. c. 20. 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 [Page 64] Council under Pope Gregory the VII. nor that consent of Fathers which (to so little purpose) he had heap'd to­gether.Discurs. mo­dest. p. 13. Rem transubstantiation is 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 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 kind of conversion it is, whether it be formal or substantial, or of another kind? 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 [Page 65] 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 hast, in so short time to passe from a dispu­table opinion, to an Article of faith. But even after the Council, A. D. MCCLXX. secund. [...]u­chol. sed se­cundum Vo­laterranum MCCCxxxv. In lib. 4 sent. dist. 11. qu. 1. sect. pro [...]er [...]er­tium. 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 [Page 66] 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 matter of bread remain; and if this might be ad­mitted, it would salve many difficul­ties, which arise from 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; bu [...] it is also plain, that it is a stranger [Page 67] to antiquity. De haeres. lib. 8. Verbo Indulgentiá. 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 seldome, 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 mere stranger to An­tiquity, will not be denyd 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. E [...]o Berengarius de Conse­crat [...] dist. 2. will but too evi­dently appear by that stating and reso­lution of this question which we find in the Canon law. For Berengarius was by P. Nicolaus, commanded to recant his error in these words, and to affirm, [Page 68] 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 Berengarias 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 i [...] is now decreed. But as it happened to the Pelagians in the beginning of their [Page 69] 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.A [...]ver. Mar­c [...]on [...] 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.

The same is affirmed by Iustin Mar­tyr. Contr. [...]ryph. Jud. The bread of the Eucharist w [...]s a figure which Christ the Lord com­manded to do in remembrance of his pas­sion. Origen In dial [...]g. cont. Marci­on. collect [...]s [...] Maximo, tempo e [...] & Seve [...] Im [...]. In Ma [...]. 1 [...]. calls the bread and the chalice, the images of the body and bloud of Christ: and again, That bread [Page 70] 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.

Demonst. Evang lib. 1 c [...]p. 1. 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: & 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 bloud.

Homil. 27. S. Macarius says, that in the Church is offered bread and wine, the antitype of his flesh and of his bloud, 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 [Page 71] is explicated. For when they af­firm, that in this Sacrament is offered the figure, the image, the antitype of Christs body and bloud, although they speak perfectly against Transubstantia­tion, yet they do not deny the real and spiritual presence of Christs body and bloud; 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 Photium, l. 1. c. 229. The body of Christ received by the faithful, de­parts 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.

S. Gregory Nazianzen spake so ex­presly in this Question,Orat. 2. in Pasch. 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 [Page 72] Law. For the Legal Passover (I will not be afraid to speak it) was a more ob­scure figure of a figure.

Ep. ad Caes. cont. heres. Apollinarii. cit. per Da­mascen. & per collect. senten. Pp. cont. Sere­rianos, edit. per Tur [...]ia­num Homil. 23. in 1 Cor. 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; as thou drinkest bloud, 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. This great Doctor brings [Page 73] in Christ thus speaking as to his Di­sciples,In Psal. 98. [You are not to eat this body which you see, or to drink that bloud which my crucifiers shall pour forth. I have commended to you a sacrament, which being spiritually understood shall quicken you:] And again;Cont. Adi­mantium cap. 12. Christ brought them to a banquet, in which he commended to his Disciples the figure of his body and bloud] For he did not doubt to say, This is my body, when he gave the sign of his body] and,Lib. 10. cont. Faust. Ma­nich. 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. Prima qui­dem, & cap. Non hoc cor­pus, & cap. Vt quid pa­ras. Sentent. l. 4. dist. 11. Dialog. 1. c. 8 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, and make fire and water en­ter into natural and eternal friend­ships.

[Page 74] Theodoret and P. Gelasius speak more emphatically, 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. Dial. 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 allege the words of Pope Gelasius, D [...] duabus naeturis con r [...] Eutych. & Nestor. Videatur Pi­ch [...]rellus in dissert. de Missa & ex­positione v [...]r­borum insti­tutionis coenae Domini. [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.

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 [Page 75] own people caution and admonition; 1. That they be not abus'd by the rhe­torical words and high expressions al­leged 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 Ancient; since, although the Roman errour hath been too long admit­ted, and is ancient 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 [Page 76] his flesh for meat, and his bloud 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 ancient 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 bloud 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 errour in the understanding; for it carries them to a dangerous practice, which cannot reasonably be excus'd from the crime of Idolatry. To con­clude,

This matter of it self is an error so prodigiously great and dangerous, that we need nor tell of the horrid and blas­phemous questions which are sometimes [Page 77] 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 bloud 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 chanels, [Page 78] but give onely a general 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 1. to say, That 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 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 bloud, it is certain that on the Altar, Christs body naturally and properly cannot be bro­ken 2. And since they say that every [Page 79] 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 there are two Wafers. 3. 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 spiritual, that is, truly sacramental. 4. 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 consecration. 5. 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. Con­s [...]ant. s [...]ss. 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 [Page 81] 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 aud wine, yet this notwithstand­ing — And although in the primi­tive Church this Sacrament was receiv'd of the faithful under both kinds] Here is the acknowledgment, 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 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 in­currs [Page 82] 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 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 be 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 ancient? 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 [Page 83] what we do, is of it self our rule and pre­cept; (according to that of the Law­yer,Accursius praefat. super Instit. Iustin. Institutiones sunt praeceptiones qui­bus instituuntur & docentur homines) yet besides this, Christ added preceptive words, Drink ye all of this:Mat. 26. 27 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, 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 practise 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. sect. 22. That in the Latine Church for aboue a thousand years, the body of Christ, and the blood of Christ were separately giuen [...] the body apart, and the blood apart, after the consecration of the mysteries. So [Page 84] Aquin as also affirms,Commen. in 6 Ioh. lect. 7. [According to the ancient custom of the Church, all men as they communicated in the body, so they communicated in the bloud; which also to this day is kept in some Churches.] And therefore Paschasius Ratbertus re­solves it dogmatically,De corp. & sang. Domini, cap. 19. That neither the flesh without the bloud, nor the bloud 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,Tract. 35. ingenuously and openly con­fesses, That it was a general custom to communicate the Laity under both kinds.

It was so, and it was more: There was anciently a Law for it,Apud Gra­tian. de con­secr. dist. 2. cap. Compe­rimus. Aut integra Sacramenta percipiant, aut ab integris arceantur, said Pope Gelasius. Either all nor none, let them receive in both kinds, or in neither; and he gives this reason, Quia divisio unius & ejusdem mysterii sine grandi sacrilegio non potest pervenire. The mystery is but one and the same, and therefore it cannot be di­vided without great sacrilege. The [Page 85] 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,Vide Ocha­gav de Sacr. tract. 2. de Euchar. q. 18. De consecrat. dist. 2. cap. Si non sunt [...] & cap. Quia passus, & cap. Prima qui­dem, & cap. Tunc ei [...], & cap. Accesse­run [...]. and thus we see it ought to have been: And for the Greek Church there is no questi­on; 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 [Page 86] 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 conclude, 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. contra Celsum. Origen affirms, that the Grecians in their prayers use 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. [Page 87] S. Chrysostom 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 says, 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 g [...]erali­ter tantum, ibi exiguus assurgit affectus. Azor. Inst. moral. to. 1. lib. 9. c. 34. q. [...]. 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 [Page 88] 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 Su [...]hron. affirms, that himself tran­slated the Bible into the Dalmatian Tongue; and Sozom. l. 6. [...]ist. cap. 37. Ulphilas 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 [...] ̄ [...]an. S. Chrysostome, De Doctr. Christ. cap 5. S. Austin, and Serm. 5. de Graecar. [...]f­fect. curat. Theodoret.

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 Li [...]. Q [...] ex var. Script. lo [...]q. 278. S. Basil, In 1 Cor. h [...]m. 35. S. Chrysostom, Super 1 Cor. 14. S. Ambrose, and S [...]per Psal. 1 [...]. con. 2. S. Austin, In 1 Cor. 14. and this is consented to by Aquinas, Ibid. Lyra, [Page 89] and Liturg. cap. 28. Cassander: And besides that, these Doctors affirm, that in the pri­mitive Church the Priest 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. [...] AEneas Sylvius, who was af­terwards 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 Tre [...]t 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, [Page 90] 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 edified 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? For he that hath no tongue, and he that hath none to be understood, is alike insignificant to me.De Doctr. Christ. lib. 4. cap. 10. Quid prodest locutionum integritas quam non sequitur intellectus audientis? cum loquendi nulla fit causa, si quod loquimur non intelli­gunt propter quos ut intelligant loqui­mur, said S. Austin: What does it avail that man speaks all, if the hearers under­stand none? and there is no cause why [...] 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 [Page 91] 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 stir up one ano­ther, and joyn 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 says 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 Emperour made a Law in these words, [We will and command, that all Bishops and Priests celebrate the sacred Oblation, and the Prayers there­unto [Page 92] added in holy Baptism, not in a low voice, but with a loud and clear voice, which may be heard by the faithful peo­ple; that is, be understood, for so it follows,Novel. 123. that thereby the minds 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 l. 2. [...]. 13. sect. ad Novellā. 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, [Because in most parts within the same City and Diocess, Cap. 9. 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 [Page 93] and Dioceses 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 by 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 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 [Page 94] and for whom they must give ac­count.

Indeed the old Toscan Rites, and the Sooth-sayings of the Salian Priests, Vix Sacerdotibus suis intellecta, Quintil. l. 1. 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, and the Heracleonitae of whom S. Austin gives account;Verb. Osseni. Cap. 6. ad Quod vult De [...]m. 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 Jews 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 intolerable 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 [Page 96] 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 ministery; as appears in all their great Churches, and publick actions, and pro­cessions, and Temples and Festivals, and endowments, and censings, 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 [Page 97] 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 lawfull, 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 distincti­o [...]s, and directly put confidence in them; and that it is impossible that ignorant persons, who in all Christian countreys 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 superstitious 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 pra­ctise is an innovation in the Christian Church, not practis'd, not endured in the primitive ages; but expresly [Page 98] 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 Ancient, but very heretical and abominable: but that he brought some in to be worshipped, we find in Lib. 1. [...]a­ret. fabul. Theo­doret, and De haeres. S. Austin, Lib. 1. cap. 23. vide eti­am Epiphan. 10. 2. lib. 1. haeres. 27. & S. August. de haeres. S. Irenaeus tells, That the Gnosticks or 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 of Lib. 6. strom. & in paran [...]i [...]. 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; in which he not onely affirms,Lib. 7. & 3. cont. Cels. That Christians did not make or use Images in Religion, but that they ought not, and were by [Page 99] 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 Gentilism, 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 honourable 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 [Page 100] temptations;Epist. ad Ioh. Hi [...]ros. and S. Epiphanius (it is a known story) tells, that when in the village of Bethel he saw a cloth picture, as it were 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; affirming, 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.

Can. 36. Pla­cuit pictur as in Ecclesia esse non debe­re, ne quod colitur aut a­doratur in pari [...]ibus depingatur. De mori [...]. Eccles. [...]. 1. c. 34. Idem de fide & Sym­b [...]o. c. 7. & contr. Adi­mant. cap. 13.The Council of Eliberis is very an­cient, and of great fame; in which i [...] is expresly forbidden, that what is wor­shipped, should be depicted on the walls; and that therefore Pictures ought not to be in Churches. S. Austin complaining, that he knew o [...] many in the Church who were Wor­shippers of Pictures, calls them Super­stitious; and addes, that the Church condemns such customs, and strives to correct them: and S. Gregory writing to Serenus Bishop of Massilia, says he would not have had him to break the [Page 101] Pictures and Images, which were there set for an historical use; but commends him for prohibiting 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,A [...]no Dom. DCCLXIV. he convoca­ted a Synod of German and French Bishops at Francfurt, 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, Hincmarus, Aventinus, Blondus, Adon, Aymonius [...]and Regino, famons 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 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, [Page 102] not onely the infinite fraud 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 he preach'd 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 onely 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 retain'd, [Page 103] 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 with­all adds, 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 prevaricate in this question; yet it is evident, that in France this Doctrine was not accounted Catholick for al­most nine hundred years after Christ;Lib 2 [...] in vitae Isaac [...] An­geli, A.D. 1160. and in Germany it was condemned for almost MCC years, as we find in Ni­cetas.

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 ways of Salvation. And therefore we exhort [Page 104] 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 Strom. l. 6. & in Pro [...]rep. Alexandrinus, Lib. 2. c. 22. advers. Mar­cion. & de Ido [...]olatr. c. 3. Tertullian, and Lib. 4. cont. 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 i [...] ministers infinite scandal to all sober minded men, and gives the new Arri­ans in Polonia and Antitrinitarians, great and ridiculous entertainment exposiag that sacred Mystery to deri­sion [Page 105] 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 says,Stromat. l. 1. that in the Discipline of Moses, God was not to be represented in the shape of a Man, or of any other thing: and that Christians understood themselves to be bound by the same Law, we find it expresly taught by Ori­gen Lib. 7. contra Celsum., Tertullian De coron a [...]il [...]is., Euse­bius Lib. 1. c. 5. praep. Evang., Athanasius Orat. contra gentes., S. Hi­erom In c. 40. Isa., S. Austin De fide & symbol. c. 7., Theo­doret In Deut. q. 1., Damascen Lib [...] 4. d [...] Orthod. fide c. 17., and the Synod of Constanti­nople, as it is reported in the 6. Action of the second Nicene Council. And cer­tainly if there were not a strange spirit of contradiction or superstition or de­flexion from the Christian Rule, greatly prevailing in the Ch. 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 [Page 106] 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 majesty, and a sacred fear; and the reason is given by Macrobius, Lib. 1. in somn. Scip. cap. 2. 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 Fig­ments should come thither.

Lib. 18. c. 53. Nicephorus Callistus relating the he­resie of the Armenians and Iacobites says, they made Images of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, quod perquam absurdum est. Nothing is more ab­surd, [Page 107] than to make Pictures or Images of the Persons of the holy and adorable Trinity. And yet they do this in the Church of Rome. For in the windows of their Churches, even in Conntrey-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 error with the words of their own Polydore Virgil: Lib. 2. de In­vent. c. 23. Since the world began never was any thing more foolish than to picture God, who is present eve­rywhere.

Sect. X.

THe last Instance of Innovations in­troduc [...]d in Doctrine and Practise by the Church of Rome, that we shall [Page 108] represent, is that of the Popes Uni­versal Bishoprick. That is, not onely that he is Bishop of Bishops, superiour to all and every one; but that his Bi­shoprick is a Pleni [...]ude of Power; and as for other Bishops, of his fulness they all receive, a part of the Ministery and sollicitude; and not onely so, but that he onely 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 reproch, but the spiritual are of greatest malignity; so it happens in this Article. For though it be not so scandalous as 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 Er­rours [...]

[Page 109]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. 2 [...]. S. Paul gave them caution to take care of the whole flock 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 [Page 110] 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. Ecclesia ad Novatian. & habetur caus. 24. qu. 1. [The other Apostles are the same that S. Peter was, endowed with an equal fellowship of honour and power: and they are all shephards, and the flock is one] and therefore it ought to be [...]ed by all the Apostles with unanimous consent.

This unity and identity of power without question 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 [Page 111] 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. Ambrose. de dignit. sacerd. c. 1. S. Aug. de baptism. contra Donat. l. 7. c. 43. & ibid. Claru [...] a Muscula. Idem de verb. Dom. Ser. 24. Con. Rom. sub Sylvest. Const. Apost. l. 8. c. ult. Anacl. P. ep. 2. Cle­mens P. ep. 1. S. Hieron. ep. 13. & ep. 54. Euthym. in Ps. 44. S. Gregor. in Evang. Hom. 26. ad Heliod [...]. ep. 1. S. Chrysost. ser. Damascen. 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 oper is tui Vicarios eidem con­tulisti 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 Christen­dome.

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 [Page 112] 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 hun­dred years by-gone invaded the rights of Bishops, and 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 Co [...]ncil of Bis [...]ops: 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 [Page 113] 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 practise, when he pretends to a power over all Bishops, and that this power is deriv'd 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 derived, to whose sentence in things Divine every Christian under pain of damnation is bound to be subject Extravi Com lib 1. tit. 9. de ma­ior. & obed. cap. Vnam Sanctam..

Now this is it which as it is produ­ctive of infinite mischiefs, so it is an Innovation and an absolute deflexion from the primitive Catholick Do­ctrine, and yet is the great ground­work and foundation of their Church. This we shall represent in these follow­ing testimonies. Pope Eleutherius [...] Arch [...]pisc. Granate [...]si in Concil. [...]rid. in an Epistle to the Bishops of France says that Christ committed the Universal Church to the Bishops;Vbi sup [...]a. and S. Am­brose says that the Bishop holdeth the place of Christ, and is his substitute [...] [Page 114] But famous are the words of S. Cypri­an, [...] 4 [...] 2 [The Church of Christ is one through the whole world, divided by him into ma­ny members, and the Bishoprick is but one, diffused in the agreeing plurality of many Bispops.] 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 Prela­tion of one and Subordination of ano­ther, commanded by Christ, or by virtue of their Ordination; but onely what was for orders sake introduc'd by Princes and consent of Prelates. And it was to this purpose very full which was said by Pope Symmachus: Ap [...]d Ba [...]. [...]m. 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 [Page 115] 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, whenever they reckoned 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.Dionys. Ar [...] ­op. de Eccles. hierarch. de sacer. p [...]rfect. For as the whole Hierarchy ends in Iesus, so does every particular one in its own Bishop. Beyond the 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.E [...]is [...]. ad S [...]ne [...] & ad P [...]a [...]. S. Ig­natius therefore exhorts that all should obey their Bishop, and the Bishop obey Christ, as Christ obeyed his Father. [Page 116] 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. c. Duo sunt., by S. Hierom In Ierem. hom. 7. & adver. Lucif., and Fulgentius In Conc [...]. Pari [...]. 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 de­clared themselves, that one Bishop is not superiour to another, and ought not to judge another, or force another [Page 117] to obedience. They are the words of S. Cyprian to a Council of Bishops:In Co [...]cil [...] Cart [...]ag. [None of us makes himself a Bishop of Bishops, or by tyrannical power drives his collegues to a necessity of obedience, since every Bishop according to the li­cense 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 onely and alone hath the power of setting us in the Go­vernment of his Church, and judging of what we do.] 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. Iohn for this usurpation, and Stephen by S. Cyprian, De Bapt. contr. Dina­t [...]s [...]l 3. c. [...]. 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 [Page 118] Universal Bishop, said,Lib. 4. ep. 76, 78, 31, 34, 38, 39 [...] & lib. 6. ep. 24. 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 pontifici oblatum est, sed nullus unquam eorum hoc singularitatis nomen assump sit. His predecessors (it seems) had been tempt­ed with an offer of that title, but none of them ever assumed that name of sin­gularity,Lib 4 p 32. [...] [...]st [...], cont [...]a Ca [...]n [...]m de­cret [...]. novum sibi usurpare nomen praesumit? Videatur Epistola S. Hieron. a [...] Evagrium, Concil. Ch [...]ced. action. 16. Concil. Nicen. can. 6. & can. 7. & Conci [...]. C. P can. 3. & Nov [...]l. Iustin. 131. 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 Saint 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, [Page 119] yet S. Pau [...] 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 not carry himself so as to give the least overture or umbrage to make any one suspect he had any such preheminence; but he was (as St. Chrysostom truly says) [...],In Acta A­post. hom. 3. 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, [...] loc. lib. 6 c. 8 p 23 [...]. Ed. S [...]man [...]. 1563. and we being there told that S. Peter was at Antioch, but never that he was at Rome;C [...]ncor. Cu [...] l. 2. c. 34 S [...]nt. l. 4 [...] 24 q 2 [...] 4 c. 3. it being confessed by some of their own parties, by Cardinal Cusa­nus, Soto, Driedo, Canus and Segovius, [Page 120] 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 superiour: and that the General Council held at Chalcedon did give to the Bishops of C. P. equal rights and preeminence 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 foreknows all things, did also know that t [...]ere would be great di­sputes and challenges of this preemi­nence, [Page 121] did indeed suppress it in his Apo­stles,Luk. 22.25. Mat. 20.26, 27. and said not it should be 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 tha [...] [...] never intended any such thing, and [...] the Bishops of Rome have to the great prejudice of Christendom made a great schism, and usurped a title which is not their due, and challenged 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 Invoc [...]n of Saints: the Insufficiencie of S [...]ures without Traditions of Faith unto Sal­vation: their absolving sinners before they have by canonical penances 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 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 [Page 123] 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 forbidden under pain of Excommunication.De consecra. d [...]st. 2. cap. Peracta. Vi­de etiam ib. cap. In coena, & cap. Si quis. Peractâ consecratione omnes communi­cent, qui noluerint ecclesiasticis carere liminibus; sic autem etiam Apostoli statuerunt, & sancta Romana tenet Ec­clesia. When the consecration is fi­nished let all communicate that will not be thrust from the bounds of the Church; for so the Apostles appoin­ted, and so the Holy 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 consecr. dist. 1. c. Omnes fidel. Omnes fideles qui conveni­unt in solen­nitatibus sacris ad Ecclesiam & Scripturas Apostolorum & Evange [...]a audian [...]. Qui autem non perseverant in oratione usque dum Missa peragatur, nec Sanctam Commu [...]ienem percipiunt, velut inquie [...]udines Ecclesiae commove [...]es convenit communione privari.

[Page 124]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 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 scarse 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, [Page 125] 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, Andre as Fri­cius, [Page 126] Modrevius, Hermannus Coloniensis, Wasseburgius Archdeacon of Verdun, Paulus Langius In Chron [...] Zilizensi., Staphilus, Telespho­rus de Cusentiâ, Doctor Talheymius, Francis Zabarel the Cardinal, and Pope Adrian himself, with many others; not to reckon Wiclef, Hus, Hierom 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, superstiti­ous, her [...]es and impieties which had deturpated the face of the Church; [Page 127] 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 [Page 128] 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 don [...] 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 days, especially the great ones. But this is thought too severe by Soto and Medina, who teach that a sinner is bound 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 tied to so mu [...], but onely to repent in the danger or article of death. This is the [Page 129] express Doctrine taught in the Church of Rome by their famous Navar;Enchyr. c. 1. [...]. 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, It is true, and the opinion of all men,Praxis fori aenit. l. 5. c 2. s [...]ct. 4 n. 23. 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 o [...]ght to repent presently, because untill he [Page 130] hath repented he is an enemy to God [...] This they confess, but they suppo [...]e it concludes nothing; for though they consider and confess this, yet they still saying, a man is not 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 [...] 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 something worse than this yet that D [...]m. à Soto in quart. sent. dist. 17. qu. 2. art. 6. conel. se­cu [...]d [...]. So [...] says, [even to resolve to d [...] ­fer our repentance, and i [...] refuse to repent for a cer­tain time, is but a venial sin.] But Non est dubium quin [...]d li [...]i­tum sit. Cod. de pae [...]en. [...]ract. 1. q. 6. p. 18. edit. Sa [...]mantic. A. D. 1553. Medina says it is none at all.

If it be replied 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 ties a sinner to repent, by collate [...]l positive laws; for having bound every one to confess at Easter [...] [Page 131] consequently she hath tied every one to repent at Easter, and so, by her laws, can lie 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 supposed to have been design'd by the law of Festivals,Regina [...]d li [...]. de con [...]rit. c. 2. cap. 4. Non est id quod per praeceptum de observatione Festorum injungitur, is not that which is enjoyn­ed by the Church in her law of Holy­days. 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 selves or our charges with con [...]uting this impi­ous [Page 132] 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, 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 i [...] the articles of their simple belief, the [...] take a liberty to say and to do wha [...] they list, and to corrupt all the Worl [...] by their rules of conscience. But, tha [...] this is also the Doctrine of their Churc [...] their own men tell us. Communis o [...]nium. It is the Doctrine of all the men; so they affirm, as we have cite [...] their own words above: who also un [...]dertake [Page 133] 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 charg'd, 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 nothing be publish'd but what is consonant to the Catholick faith. And therefore these things can­not [Page 134] be esteem'd private opinions Non illico ut [...] h [...]mo se re [...]m se [...]t cuipae p [...]enitentiae lege poeni­tere con [...]ringitur. Haec profecto conclusio more & usu Ecclesiae sa­ [...] vide [...]ur constabilita. Dom. [...] Soto. in quart. sent. d [...]st. 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 Jews 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 [Page 135] 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 Latin 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 is not reconcil'd to God, with­out their Sacramental or Ritual pe­nance, actual or votive; and this is de­creed by the Council of Trent, which thing besides that it is against Scrip­ture,Sessio 4. c 4. and the promises of the Gospel, and not only teaches for Doctrine the Commandments of Men, but evacu­ates the goodness of God by their tra­ditions, and weakens and discourages [Page 136] 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 a [...] 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 Gu [...]lielmus de Rubeo explains this doctrine.In 4. [...]n [...]. d [...]st. [...] [...]. q. 1. He that confes­ses his sins, grieving but a little, obtains remission of his sins by the Sacrament of [Page 137] 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 of no severity or af­frightment by the Roman Doctrine: One contrition, one act of it, Lib. 3. i [...]strus. sacerdot. cap. 5 n. 4. Sum qu. 16. art. 1. though but little and remiss, can blot out any, even the greatest sin (always understanding it in the sense of the Church, that is in the Sacrament of Penance) saith Cardi­nal Tolet. A certain little inward grief of mind is requir'd to the perfection of Repentance, said Maldonat. De contrit. num 107. Q [...]aecun (que) [...] contra [...]atum, in quocun (que) in­stanti sufficiet ad consequen­d [...]m m [...]s [...]ri­ [...]diam & [...]: sionem. Ibid. n. 106 [...] 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. The greatest sin and the smallest, as to this, are all alike; and as for the Contrition it self, any intension or degr [...]e whatso­ever, [Page 138] 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 [...]ourscore years together, yet if in the article of his death, sooner than which God hath not commanded him to re­pent, he be a little sorrowful 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.

[Page 139]Upon these terms, it is a wonder that all wicked men in the world are not Papists; where they may live so merrily, and die so securely, and are out of all danger, unless peradventure they die 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.

WE 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 it is 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 troublesom as for a bashful 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 [Page 140] done to any one besides the Parish-Priest, to a Friar 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 Viciousness takes off; when we see Women and Boys, Princes and Pre­lates do the same every day: And as oftentimes 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 clothes 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, weep or are unmov'd, as it happens under their veil, 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 observation will suffice to conclude, that this practise of Con­fession [Page 141] hath in it no affrightment, not so much as the horrour 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 loosly the Italians, Spaniards and French do live in their Carnivals, giving to themselves all liberty and license to do the vilest things at that time, not onely 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 never-failing 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 [Page 142] Confession is made a Minister of State, a Pick-lock 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 Rome, is so far from bring­ing peace to the troubled Consciences, that it intromits more scruples and ca­ses than [...] can resolve.

For be [...]ides, 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 Bicl. l. 4. dist. 17. q. 1. & Sco­tum ibid. & Bonavent. i [...]. n. 72. teach, and the Canonists say the contrary, Me [...]ius di­citur cam in­stitutam su­isse à qua­dam univer­sali Ecclesiae traditione, quam ex novi vel vete [...]is Testa [...]enti authoritate, & tamon negatur haec traditio esse universalis. Confessio non est necessaria apud Graeco [...], quiae non [...]a­navit ad illos traditionaliter. De panit. d [...]st 5. in principio Gloss. ibid. Vide eti­am Panormit [...]n. super Decr [...]a l. 5. cap. Quod au [...]em, c. Omnis utriús (que) se [...], sect 18. extrav. Gloss. Maldonatus sa [...]ctur omnes Canonistas in hanc sententiam con [...]sisse. Disp. de Sacram. [...]om. 2. c 2. d [...] cons [...]ss. orig. and that it is onely of humane and positive Constitution) and by this difference in so great a point, have made the whole O [...]conomy of their repentance, which relies upon the supposed necessity of Confession, to fail, or to shake vehemently, and at [Page 143] 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, and lead into temptation. An instance of this is in that which is de­creed in the Canons of Trent, Sess. 4 [...] can. 7. That the Penitent must not onely confess every mortal sin which after diligent inquiry he remembers, but even his very sinf [...]l 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 it be to be repeated in whole or in part, and how often, and how much? these things are so uncertain, casual and [Page 144] contingent, 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. [Page 145] For, first, if we consider what the Pe­nances themselves are which are en­joyn'd; they are reduced from the an­cient 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 Confessours 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 somebody else [...]man. [...] [...]. V. S [...]. n 10 T [...] [...] instr. sa­ [...]r [...]. [...]. 11. n. [...]. to do them for him: and if his Penances be never so great, or never so little, yet it 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 [Page 146] 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 the Pope Paschal I. Boniface VIII. and Gregory IX. In the Church of S. Vitu [...] and Modestus there are for every day 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 Sepulcre of Christ in Venice there is hung up a prayer o [...] S. Augustine, with an Indulgence o [...] 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 o [...] Sancta Maria de gli Angeli, and this pardon is abomni poena & culpa. Th [...] [Page 147] 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 entangled 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 Cord. The saying a few Pater nosters and Ave's before a privi­leg'd 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 appendent Medal of the Popes benediction. Eve­ry Priest at his third or fourth Mass is [...]s 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 Regnault [...] [Page 148] A. D. 1536. May 25. called The hours 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 Chapel 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 wha [...] Penance is ordinarily imposed, doe [...] not take away all the punishment th [...] is due; for they do not impose wh [...] was anciently enjoyn'd by the Penite [...] ­tial Canons, but some little thing i [...] ­stead of it: and it may be, that wha [...] was anciently enjoyned by the Penite [...] ­tial Canons, is not so much as Go [...] will exact, (for they suppose that [...] will forgive nothing but the guilt a [...] the eternity; but he will exact all th [...] can be demanded on this side Hell, [...] to the last farthing he must be [...] some way or other, even when the [...] [Page 149] is taken away) but therefore to prevent any failing 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 so. An Indulgence will be no great charge, but that will [...]ake off all the supernumerary Penan­ [...]es which ought to have been impo­ [...]ed by the ancient Discipline of the [Page 150] Church, and may be required 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 S. Francis Cord, saying over the Beads with an hallowed Appendent, entering into a Fraternity, praying at a privi­leg'd Altar, leaving a Legacy for a Soul-Mass, visiting a privileg'd Ce­metery, and twenty other devices will secure the sinner from suffering punish­ment here or hereafter, more than 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 ancient Canons en­joyned Penance all their life Vide Con­cil. Tribur. c. 54. Bur­c [...]ard. l. 19. Tertul. lib. de poenitentia.; 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, and done innumerable other sins, for every one of which he deserves to [Page 151] 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 suf­fer'd 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 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, for this is the ac­count of it which we find in Bellar­mine: D [...] Indulgen. l. 1. c. 9. sect. Existit autē. and although Gerson and Domi­ni [...]us à Soto are asham'd of these pro­digious [Page 152] Indulgences, and suppose that the Popes Quaestuaries 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 sins are pardon'd 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 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. [Page 153] 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 life, which is the only 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 sequel of these things, will not wonder that the Church of Rome should have a nume­rous company of Pro [...]elytes, 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, [Page 154] we have thought fit to adde 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 ways of releasing souls out of Purgatory, the innumerable Masses said every day, the power of the Keys so largely imploy'd, 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 great softness and easiness of procedure would give confidence to the greatest sinners, and the hopes of Purgatory [Page 155] would destroy the fears of Hell, and the certainty of doing well enough in an imperfect life, would make men careless 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 forty years, or it may be an hundred, or a thousand, (and that is a great matter) yet perad­venture according to the old peniten­tial rate you have deserved the Penance of forty thousand years; or at least you may have done so by the more severe account of God: If the Penance of for­ty years be taken off by your Indul­gence, [Page 156] 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 c [...]e.

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 days. It is well; but were you well advis'd? 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 [Page 157] 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, Vide Ioan. d [...] Turrecrem [...] ­ta in com­ment. dist. 1. de poenitent. 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 enjoyned by the Confessor, or how far they go further. 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 Indulgences [Page 158] 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 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 assertivè, that is, by any confidence; but opinativè or recitativè, they can onely tell what is said, or what is their own opinion.

5. When this difficuly 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: [Page 159] it is good to be certain in this, lest 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 a part 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. Con [...]il. Trident. l. 1. pag 20. Lon­din. [...]dit. 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 [Page 160] of Venial sins, 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 days on certain conditions, whether these forty days are to be taken collectively or distribu­tively; for, because it is confessed that the matter of Indulgences is res odibi­lis, Fab. Incar­ [...]at. serutin. Sacerd. de. Indulgent. an hateful and an odious matter, it is not to be understood in the sense of favour, but of greatest severity; and therefore it is good to know before­hand what to trust to, to inquire how the Bull is penn'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 days in every year, it were fit you inquire for how many years that will la [...]t; 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: [Page 161] 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 errour serve when you shall indeed die?

9. You must also inquire and be rightly inform'd, 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 movable Feasts, and on S. Bartholomews-day, and some others.

10. When your Lawyers have told you their opinion of all these Questi­ons, and given it under their hands, 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 [Page 162] done in matters of favour and privile­ges; and the German Princes com­plain'd sadly of it;C [...]ntura gra­vam. Ge [...]m. and it was com­plain'd in the Council of Lions, that Martin the Legate of Pope Innocent the VIII. revok'd and dissipated all former Grants:Idem fatere volu [...]t 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 knows 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 sa [...]e at all. [...]ut there­fore be sure still to get Masses to be said.

[Page 163]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 entertained 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 Keys, it is very needless; because the Pope cannot evacuate Fabius In­carnatus Scrutin. Sa­cerdot. de in­dulgent. sect. antepen. edit. Barcinon. 1628. Purgatory, or give so many Indulgences as to take out all souls from thence: And therefore if the Popes, 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 post-pon'd, and must stay and take its turn God knows when. And therefore we can­not but commend the prudence of Cardinal Albernotius, Apud Genes-Sepulvedam in vita Egi­dii Alberno­ti [...] Cardinal. who by his last [Page 164] 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. 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 parr, why will you suffer your selves [Page 165] 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?

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 Unum 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 stomach with wind and imagina­tion. But to return to the main In­quiry.

We desire that it be considered, how dangerously good life is under­mined, [Page 166] 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. [...]bi 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 sins, 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.

2. Pope Adrian taught a worse mat­ter. [Page 167] 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: Apud Pe­trum de Soto lect. de instit. Sace [...]d. de necessariis ad effectum in­du [...]g. 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 externally good work done ungratiously, 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 [Page 168] 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, lest 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 j [...]bila [...] n [...] ab. 34. n. 4. & 6., and Antonius Cordubensis Q [...]. 37. de indu [...]g. [...]r. p. 3, and Bellarmine Lib. 1. de indu [...]g. c. 10. Sect. Alt [...]ra dubitatio., though he asks the question, denies it 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.

4. If any man by reason of poverty, [Page 169] cannot give the prescrib'd Alms, he cannot receive the Indulgence.Serutin. Sa­cerd. ubi supra. 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 poison'd, if our staff be broken, if our hopes make us [Page 170] 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 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 energy, 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; [Page 171] 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 Satisfactions 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 onely by the declension of primitive Discipline, but by new Doctrines and Indulgences, regular and offer'd Com­mutations for money, 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.

[Page 172]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 the Church of of Rome, we mean in the instance of their Taxa Camerae, seu Cancellariae Apostolicae, the Tax of the Apostolical Chamber or Chancery; a book publick­ly printed, and expos'd to common sale; of which their own Esp [...]ncaeus gives this account,Digres. 2. ad cap. 1. epist ad Titum. 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 a price set down for his Absolution that hath kill'd his Father or his Mo­ther, Brother, Sister, or Wife, or that hath lien with his Sister or his Mother. We desire all good Christians to ex­cuse us for naming such horrid things; ‘Nomina sunt ipso penè timen­da sono.’ [Page 173] But the Licenses 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 that which Augustinus de Ancona teaches, [That the Pope ought not to give Indulgences to them who have a desire of giving money, De potest. Papae q. 3. ad. 3. but cannot as to them who actually give. 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 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. satisfa­ [...]um. 10.

  Serutin. Sa­cerd. tract. de Indulg. sect. penult.

  Suarez. 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 in corpore, is a Canonical rule; [Page 175] and though it was spoken in the matter of publick penances, and so relates to the exterior 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 this Doctrine, it is not to be said of Christ alone, that he was woun­ded for our transgressions, that he onely 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 sin, is not a sin, 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 [Page 176] 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 sin (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.
  Granat. in materia de peccatis, tract 8. desp. 1. sect. 1. F. Knot against Chillingworth in his Infi­delity un­mask'd, p. 105, 106, 107, &c.
  Now that this is the avow­ed Doctrine of the Roman Guides of souls, will sufficiently appear in the Writings of their chiefe [...]t, of which no learned man can be ignorant. The thing was of late openly and professed­ly [Page 177] 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 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 mention'd, 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 pro­fane oath, than he that acts them sel­dom, [Page 178] because by his habit he is more in­clin'd, and his sins are almost natural, & less considered, less chosen, and not dis­puted against; but pass by inadve [...]tency, 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 sav'd by all means; and therefore all such Teachers, and all such Doctrines, are carefully to be declin'd, who give so much easiness, not onely 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 we do with all the an­cient Doctors admit of the distinction [Page 179] 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, [Page 180] without the allowances of the Divine mercy.

But the Church of Rome teaches, that there is a whole kind of sins, which are venial in their own nature; such, which if they were all together, all in the world conjoyn'd, could not equal one mortal sin Bellar. l. 1. de amiss. gra­tiae. cap 13. sect. alterum est. Et de Sa­cram Eucha. l. 4. c. 19. sect. responde [...]., nor destroy charity, nor put us from the favour of God; such, for which no man can perish, Cap. 14. sect. a [...]po, [...]. etiam si 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;D [...] [...]. lib. 1. cap. 11. sect proba­tur ultimo. 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 flames. 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.

[Page 181]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 kind 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. Add 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 appendent 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 [Page 182] all their kind Doctrines in this Article, signifie no comfort or ease, but all danger and difficulty, and useless dis­pute; 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 daily 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.

[...]his Doctrine also is worse yet in the handling. For it hath infinite in­fluence to the disparagement of holy life, not only by the uncertain, but as it must frequently happen, 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 your Confessor says it is venial, your soul is betrayed. And it is but [Page 183] 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 says 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 phantastick 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 however it happen in this particular, yet because the Doctors differ so infi­nitely [Page 184] 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 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 Sent. dist 21. q. 1. art. 2. S. Thomas, whom also Bellarmine Lib. 1 cap. 14. de Pur­ga [...]or. [...]e [...]t. [...]. e [...]g [...] [...]pinio vera. 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 kind of penance. But in this particular we follow not. S. Thomas nor Bellarmine in the Church of England [Page 185] 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 kind 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 relie, 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: [Page 186] And if it be enquir'd, What is sufficient to make an opinion proba­ble; the Answer is easie, Sufficit opi­nio alicujus gravis Doctoris aut Bono­rum exemplum: Emanuel Sà aphor. verb. Dubium. Escobar. The. moral. Exa. 3. c. 3. de Conscientia probabili, &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 allege the publike and al­lowed sayings of their Doctors; be­cause [Page 187] these sayings are their Rule of living: and because the particular Rules of Conscience, use 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 publike 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 says so? Does the Church? No; [Page 188] 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.

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 [Page 189] 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. Sà. aphorism. V [...]rb. Dubi­um. Escobar. d [...] conscientia probabiti.: 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, & then it is safe enough to do so.

And upon this account,Apud Nau­clerum. ge­nerat. 21. 2 [...]. who could find 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 [Page 190] Sergius Bishop of Ravenna, and Stephen Bishop of Naples. Here was exem­plum bonorum, honest men had done so before him, and therefore he was innocent.Dist. 82. Can. Presby­ter in glossa. When it is observ'd by Cardinal Campegius, and Albertus Pighius did teach, That a Priest lives more holily and chastely that keeps a Concubine, than he that hath a mar­ried wife;3 Qu. 7. Lata Extravag. de bigamis. Quta circa. C [...]mmuniter dicitur quod Clericus pro simplici fornicatione depo [...]i non debet dist. 81. Maximianus, Glossa in Gra­tian. and then shall find in the Popes Law, That a Priest is not to be removed for fornication; who will not, or may not practically conclude, that since by the Law of God, marriage is holy, and yet to some men, fornication is more law­ful, and does not make a Priest irre­gular, that therefore to keep a Con­cubine is very lawful; especially since abstracting from the consideration of a mans being in Orders or not, for­nication it self is probably no sin at all? For so says Durandus, [...]e [...]t. l. 4. dist. 33. Simple forni­cation of it self is not a deadly sin ac­cording to the Natural Law, and ex­cluding all positive Law; and Mar­tinus [Page 191] de Magistris says,Lib. de Temp. qu. 2. de lu­xuria. to believe sim­ple fornication to be no deadly sin, is not heretical, because the testimo­nies of Scripture are not express. These are grave Doctors, and there­fore the opinion is probable, and the practise safe. Vide Dan. Tilen. de Verbo 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 says, 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 says, 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 [Page 192] Commandment of Christ, Search the Scriptures. Instruct. Sa­cerd. l. 5. c. 6. n. 15. Cardinal Tolet says, 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 says, if in that case he does blaspheme, he does not always sin: L [...]b. 5. c. 10. n. 3. That if a man be beastly drunk, and then commit fornication, that fornication 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 lawfull for a man to expose his bastards to the Hospital to conceal his own shame. He says 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, Lib. 8. c. 49. n. 4. may lawfully make his measures less than is appointed; or mingle water with his wine, 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. Debi [...]um Con­jugale. 6. affirms, That if a man [Page 193] lie with his intended wife before Mar­riage, it is no sin, or a light one; nay, quinetiam expedit si multum illa diffe­ratur, 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, saith Tolet;Lib. 1. cap. 6 [...]. and that in their Cradles they can be made Bishops, said the Archdeacon and the Provost;Ibid. and though some say the contrary, yet the other is the more true, saith the Car­dinal. Vasques saith,De Adorat. l. 3. disp. 1. c. 2. That not onely an Image of God, but any creature in the world, reasonable or unreasonable, may without danger be worshipped together with God, as his Image: Ibid c. 5. sect. 33. That we ought to adore the Reliques of Saints, 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. [Page 194] (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 dissolved, and that the other may marry another; and the Marriage is nefarious,Con [...]il. C [...] P. 6 c [...]n. 76. and they are Irritae Nuptiae, 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. part. 2. cap. 7. sect. 5. n. 4. Covaru­vias, In sent. 4. d. 39. art. 1. concl. ult. Mathias Aquarius, and Lib. 1. de Matrim. c. 14. sect. secundo [...]ine 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 [Page 195] 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 practice, and securities to the con­science of their disciples.

To this we add, that which is usual in the Church of Rome, the Praxis Ecclesiae, the Practice 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. Id enim confirmat Ecclesiae praxis, says Fabius;Scrutin. Sa­cerd. de In­dulg. The practice of the Church in this case gives first a probability in speculation, and then a certainty in [Page 196] practice. 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 lawful 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 practice; & [...]ie est Ecclesiae praxis, [...] 25. art. 4. Vide eti [...]m [...], 163. the Church also practises so, 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 [...]alutis. Cantat enim Ecclesia, O Crux ave spes unica, Hoc passionis tempore, Auge piis justi­tiam, Reís (que) do [...]a 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 practice of the [Page 197] Church) Hail O Cross, our onely hope in this time of suffering; increase 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 practice 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 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 shipwreck, 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 be 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 t [...] think particularly of what he says; it is not necessary to think of the things signi­fied by the words: De Crat. 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 [Page 199] 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, says Salmeron. Su [...]. part. 3. [...]it. 23. Or as Antoninus, They are like a pretious stone, of as much value in the hand of an unskilful man, as of a Ieweller. Vide etiam Iacobum de Graffiis de orat. l. 2. In­struct. Sa [...]er. 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 too 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. [Page 200] 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, intend to do so, and do not change his mind, although he does not attend: And he who does not change his mind, that is, unless observing him­self not to attend, he still turn his mind 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 [Page 201] Devotion is (it may 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. 7. 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, n [...]c aliud jubet, Vbi supra. saith Reginaldus: 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 mind wander, or wander not, if you mind what you pray, or mind 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 [Page 202] after they have done, shall say this prayer, [To the Holy and Undivided Trinity, To the Humanity of our Lord Iesus Christ crucified; To the fruitful­ness of the most Blessed, and most Glori­ous Virgin Mary, and to the University of all Saints, be Eternal praise, honor, 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:Vbi supra cap. 13. Pater noster. Ave Maria.] This pray­er, to this purpose, is set down by Navar, and Cardinal Tolet.

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 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 [Page 203] 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 Chnrch of Rome, the difference in this Article is plainly this. They pray with their lips, we with the heart; we pay with the un­derstanding, they with the voyce; 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 neer me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me: But we know, that we are commanded to ask in faith, [Page 204] 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 strengthened in faith, and confirm'd in hope, and increase in charity, and are protected by Provi­dence, and are comforted in their sorrows, and derive help from God: Ye ask, and have not, because ye ask amiss [...]; that is Saint 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, [Page 205] 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 [...]tick 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 [Page 206] 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.Ohe jam de­ [...]ne Deo [...] uxor gratulando [...]btundere, [...]si illos tuo e [...] ingenio ju­di [...]as, ut nil cr [...]das intelli­ge [...]e nisi idem dic [...]um est cen [...]es. He [...]uton­ [...]im. act. 5. scen. 1. Now we are ignorant how to distinguish this from the [...], 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.

BUt this mischief is gone further yet:Summa Ca­jetan. v. ora­tio. 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 publick 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 Health: Which is so formidable a Devotion, that we for them, and for our selves too, if we should imi­tate them, are to dread the words of Scripture,Jerem. 17.5. Psal. 115. 9. & 146. 3. & 118. [...] & 50. 15 [...] Cursed is the man that trust­eth in man. We are commanded to call upon God in the time of trouble;Heb. 4.16. Mat. 11. 28. John 6. 37. and it is promised, that he will deliver [Page 208] us, and we shall glorifie him. We find 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 through 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 only fit to be spoken to God; prayers which have no testimony, 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 only [...] desire the Saints to pray for them; for though that be of it self a matter indifferent, if we were [Page 209] 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 [...]hurch 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 too neer 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 kind of prayers, and what causes [Page 210] of confidence they teach towards the Blessed Virgin Mary, and all Saints: Onely we shall recite a few words of Antonnius 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 justifi [...]d and saved. And whereas it may be objected out of Iohn, 1 Jo. 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 hat [...] provided us of an Advocatess, who is gen [...]le, and sweet, in whom nothing that is sh [...]rp is to be found. And to those words of St. Paul, Come boldly to the Throne of Grace: (He says) That Mary is the Throne of Christ, in whom he rested, to he [...] therefore let us come with bold [...]ess, t [...]at we may obtain mercy, and fi [...]d grace in time of need; and adds, th [...] Mary is c [...]lled full of grace, be­cause she is t [...] means and cause of [Page 211] Grace, by transfusing grace to man­kind;] 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 find too great abundance in the Mariale of Bernar­dine, Bernardin de b [...]sti [...], d [...] Con­cept. Mariae. 1. part. serm. 1. part. 2. which is confirm'd by publike Authority, Iacobus Perez de Valentia In Canti [...]. Mar. Mag­nificat., and in Ferdinand Quirinus de Sala­zar Comment. in 8. Proverb. in vers 19., 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 mankind should be ascrib'd to her; and that this was com­mon to Christ and the blessed Virgin his Mother, 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 Privilege of Philip the III [Page 212] of Spain, and by the Authority of his Order. But we insist not upon their Doctrines delivered by their great Writers, though every wise man knows that the Doctrines of their Church are delivered 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 of Probability will make it safe enough: But we shall produce the publick practice 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 Cate­chism, Ti [...]. [...]e Sanctu. 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 mankind, and God gives us many bene­fits by their merit and favour: And it is [Page 213] lawful to have recourse to the favour or grace of the Saints, and to use their help; for they undertake the Patronage of us.] And the Council of Trent does not onely say it is good to fly to their pray­ers, Sess. 9. 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 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.

This 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 be supplied to you. But the practice of the Church tells their secret meaning best. For besides what the Common people are taught to do, as to pray to S. Gall [Page 214] for the health and [...]ecundity 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 E [...]stachius, 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 privilege to cure the Plague, S. Petronilla the Fe­ver, S. Iohn and S. Bennet the Abbot to cure all Poison, S. Apollonia the Tooth-ach, S. Otilia Sore eyes, S. Apol­linaris the French Pox, (for it seems he hath lately got that imployment, 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 cu [...]e the Stone, and S. Felicitas (if she be hear­tily call'd upon) will give the teeming Mother a fine Boy. It were strange [Page 215] if nothing but Intercession by these Saints were 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. Otilia 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 femal sinner, who by sad diseases pays 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 tied 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 Council of Trent very goodly forbids all [...]uperstitions in this Article, but yet tells us not what are Supersti­tions, and what not; and still the world goes on in the practice of the same in­tolerable follies, and every Nation hath a particular Guardian-Saint, and every City, every Family, and almost [Page 216] 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 onely, running wilfully into such follies, but the practice of their Church, and warranted and taught by their Guides, appears by the publick prayers themselves; such as these, O generous Mary,Ex cursu [...]o­ [...]arum l [...]a [...] Mariae. [...]. beauteous above all, 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 wisdom, and with the elect to enjoy grace, that we may with [Page 217] melody praise thee; and do thou drive our sins away: O Virgin Mary give us joys. These, and divers others like these, are in the Anthem of our Lady. In the Ro­sary of our Lady this Hymn is to be said;

That is, [Thou Repairer and Saviour of the despairing Soul, the Dew-giver and Bestower of spiritual grace, heal my wounds, and give to the mind that prays 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 [Page 218] 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 always, enlighten my heart, de­fend me always from the snare of the Enemy, deliver us from all evil, and from the pains of Hell.

So that it is no wonder that Pope Leo Ad Reca­natenses do Lauretana imagine, a­pud Bembum l. 8. ep. 17. the X. calls her a Goddess, and Turcelin In epis [...] d [...] ­dicat. histor. Lauretan. the Jesuit, Divinae majesta­tis, potestatís (que) sociam. Huic olim coe­lestium, mortaliúm (que) principatum de­tulit. Ad hujus arbitrium (quoad homi­num tutela postulat) t [...]rras, maria, coe­lum, naturám (que) moderatur. Hâc annu­ente, & per hanc, divinos thesauros, & coelestia dona largitur; the companion or partner of the Divine Majesty 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 and Celestial gifts. Nay, in the Mass-books penned 1538. and us'd [Page 219] in the Polonian Churches, they call the B. Virgin Mary, Fol. 323, 324,325. Viam ad vitam, totius mundi gubernatricem, peccatorum cum Deo reconciliatricem, fontem remis­sionis peccatorum, lumen luminum; the way to life, the Governess of all the world, the Reconciler of sinners with God, the Fountain of Remission of sins, Light of Light, and at last sa­lute her with an Ave universae Trinita­tis Mater, Fol. 327. Vide [...]pist. Andr. Dudi­ [...]hi [...] quinque Eccles. episc. edit. A.D. 1590. sine loci & [...]ypo­graphi no­mine. Hail thou Mother of the whole Trinity.

We do not pick out these onely, as the most singular, or the wor [...]t 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 onely are the instances which amongst many others presently occurr. Two things onely we shall adde, instead of many more that might be represented.

The first is, That in a Hymn which they (from what reason or Etymology [Page 220] we know not, neither are we con­cern'd) call a Sequence, the Council of Constance did invocate the B. Virgin, in the same manner as Councils did use to invocate the Holy Ghost; They call her the Mother of 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, [...]hey sing to her with the heart, they call themselves her sons, they declare her to be their health and comfo [...]t 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 St. Bonaventure, Bishop of Alba, and [Page 221] 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 Blessed 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.In Cantici [...] quae vocant sequentia. Dominic. ante as [...]ensionem Domini.

O Mary Magdalen, hear our pray­ers, which are full of praises, and most [Page 222] clemently reconcile this company unto Christ: That the Fountain of Supreme Piety, who clensed thee from thy 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, and 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 pub­lickly avowed and practis'd in the Church of Rome, to rely upon the Saints Intercession;Vide spe [...]uli in R [...]sa [...]i [...]r [...] s [...] ­q [...]entias; & Bre [...]r. Rom. and this interces­sion to be made valid by the Merits of the Saints: [We pray thee, O S. Iude [Page 223] the Apostle, that by thy Merits thou wouldst draw me from the custom of my 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 Chri [...]t: So that there is nothing re­maining of the honor due to Christ our Redeemer, and our Confidence in him, b [...]t the same in every 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 useless and laborious distinctions, and protestations against evidence of fact, and with fear and trembling to [Page 224] 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. 3.1. Gal. 1. 8. 2 Kings 17. l [...]b. 1. [...]a [...]. de V [...]itation. in [...]orum [...] [...] [...]r [...]p. S. A [...]. places. And at least let us remember those excellent words of S. Austin, Tu­tius & jucundius loquar ad meum Iesum, quàm ad aliquem sanctorum spirituum Dei; 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 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.

[Page 225]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 hinde [...]s not, but that they are tempted to do it frequently. But con­cerning the thing it self, the best we can say, is what Christ said of the Sa­maritans,John 4 [...] 22. They worship they know not what. Such are S. Fingare, S. Anthony of Padua, S. Christopher, Charles Bor­romaeus, Ignatius Loyola, Xaverius, and many o­thers;Vide libr. de Sanctis Hibernisis nuper Latine edit. p [...] D. Pica [...] ­dum Par [...]s [...]ensem. of whom Cardinal Bessarion A [...]ud B [...]din. in me [...]h [...]d. histor [...] l 4. A [...]ud Aug. Triumphum de Aneona, q. 14 ad. 4. & quaes [...]. 17. ad. 4. ver [...]. H [...]rman [...]u [...]. complain'd, that many of them were such per [...]ons whose life he could not approve; and such, concerning whom they knew nothing, but f [...]om their Parties, and by pretended Reve­lations [Page 226] made to particular and hypo­chondriacal persons. It is a famous say­ing of S. Gregory, That the bodies of many persons are worshipped on Earth, whose souls are tormented in Hell: and Augustinus Triumphus affirms, That all who are canonized by the Pope can­not be said to be in Heaven [...] And this matter is beyond dispute; for Prateo­lus tells, that Herman, the Author of the Heresie of the Fratricelli, was for twenty years together after his death honoured 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 call'd in question, then the rest may; what will become of the Devotions which are paid to such Saints which have been canonized within these last five [...]enturies? Concerning whom we can have but slender evidence that they are in Heaven at all. And therefore the Cardinal of Cambray, Li [...]. de Re­ [...]r [...]. Ec [...]les. Petrus de Alli­aco, wi [...]es that so many new Saints were not canoniz'd. They are indeed so many, that in the Church of Rome [Page 227] the Holy-days, which are called their Greater Doubles, are threescore and four, besides the Feasts of Christ and our Lady, and the Holy-days which they call Half double Festivals, toge­ther with the Sundays, are above one hundred and thirty. So that besides many Holy-days kept in particular pla­ces, there are in the whole year about two hundred Holy-days, if we may be­lieve their own Gavantus; which,De Fasti [...] Sanctor. 7.10 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 unchristian 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:1 Tim. 2.5. For there is but one [Page 228] Mediator between God and man, the man Christ Iesus. 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 impiety 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 a society of Christians should be least suspected; we mean the infinite Superstitions and Incantations, or Charms us'd by their Priests in their Exorcising 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 [...]harms, insomuch that the Spanish Inquisitors in their Expurga­tory Index, printed at Madrid A. D. [Page 229] 1612. commanded delea­tur tota exorcismus Ne mir [...]tur lector erud [...]u [...] quod exorcismus apud Inquis [...]o­res sit foeminini generis. fortasse dispe [...]saetum fuit cum bonis viris in hoc a [...]ticulo. An po [...]us fa­ctum quia bonus Angelus nun­quam, mali autem Genii saepis­sime sub forma foeminina ap­paruere: quod notavit T [...]ithe­mius. 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 find 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 Devillish Exorcism, is reprinted at Lyons, A. D. 16 [...]4. 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 Rome: The most famous, and of most publike use are The Trea­sure of Exorcisms, of which we but now made mention; the Roman Ri­tual, The Manual of Exorcisms, prin­ted at Antwerp, A. D. 1626. with [Page 230] Approbation of the Bishop, and pri­vilege of the Archdukes; the Pastorals of several Churches, especially that of Ruraemund; and especially the Flagel­lum Daemonum, The Devils whip, by Father Hierom Mengus a Frier Mi­nor; which the Clergy of Orleans did use in the Exorcising of Martha Brosser, A. D. 1599. the story where­of is in the Epistles of Cardinal D' Ossat, [...]ib. 133. and the History of the Excel­lent Thuanus.

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

Their manner and form is this,

Flag [...]lum [...]. 3.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;Vid [...] Raimun [...]. lib 2 de [...] with which if they cannot cast the Devil out, yet they may do good to the Patient; for so Pope Alexander the [Page 231] 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; and this was well tried of old against an Empuse that met Apollonius Tyanaeus at Mount Caucasus, P [...]ilostrat. de vita Apollo­ii. against whom he rail'd and exhorted his company to do so.

Next to this, the Exorcist may ask the Devil some questions; What is his name? How many of them there are? For what cause, and at what time he entered? 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 al­ways [Page 232] 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 cunning­ly to get out of the Devil, the con­fession of some Article of Faith, for the edification 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 Deuil; for if the Reliques be counterfeit, the Devil will be too 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 [Page 233] sure to be exercis'd and skilful in all things that belong to the conjuring of the Devil: 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,

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 [...]e makes three †] by the most powerful name of God, Heloy, 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 †, [Page 234] 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 St. Gabriel, by Raphael, and all Angels and Arch-angels, by the Patriarchs, 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 agai [...] 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 [Page 235] 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 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 Bauhinus 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 centre of the world, and must damn him eternally to [Page 236] the Sulphurous flames of Hell, and to be tormented worse than Lucifer himse [...]f, 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, until the Devil tells you all his mind 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 †, and by these he must cast him headlong into Hell.

But if the Devil b [...] [...]ubborn (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, 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 [Page 237] obey his word, and conjures all 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 horribl [...] and hastily; [and if the picture be upon wood or paper, it is [...]en to one that may be done.] After all this [...]tir, Sprinkle more holy water, and take Sulphur, Galbanum, Assa foetida, Aristolochia, Rue, St. 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 [Page 238] them all;] and then pray once more, and so throw the Devils picture into the fire, and 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 Pix, 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 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 mind 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, [Page 239] 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 loses 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 [Page 240] it could be more evidently prov'd [...] Origen condemned this whole proce­dure of conjuring Devils long since.Tract. 35. in Matth. 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 secundùm Potestatem datam à salvatore adjurare Daemonia. Iudai­cum enim est: If any one asks, Whe­ther it be fit to adjure Devils? He that 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 Blessed Saviour; For it is a Jewish trick:In i [...]s verba, [Qui credit in me majora facie [...].] and S. Chrysostom spake soberly and truly, 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 [Page 241] 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 [...],Quast. nam [...] l 4. c. 6. of whom Seneca makes men­tion: 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 [Page 242] 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; ar [...] so perfectly of their own devising, and wild 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 Commandment; 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 [Page 243] the interests of true Religion, whose very essence and formality is to glorifie God in all his attributes, and to do good to man, and to advance the ho­nour and Kingdom 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,Cyril Hieros [...] Cat [...]ch. 4. [...], said S. Cyril. 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 these Sa­cramentals; and promises not onely temporal blessings and immunities, and benedictions, but the collation or in­crement of Spiritual graces, and remis­sion of venial sins, and alleviation of pains due to mortal sins, to them who [Page 244] shall use these Sacramentals: Which because God did not institute, and did not sanctifie, they use them with­out faith, and rely upon them with­out a promise, and make themselves the fountains of these graces, and pro­duce confidences, whose last re­sort is not upon God, who neither was the Author, nor is an Approver of them.

Of this nature are Holy Water, the Paschal Wax, Oyl, Palm-boughs, Holy Bread (not Eucharistical) Hats, Agnus Dei's, Meddals, Swords, Bells, and Roses hallowed upon the Sunday called Laetare Ierusalem; such as P. Pius the second sent to Iames the II. of Scotland, B [...]llarm. de cultis [...]anct. lib 3. cap [...] 7 sect. s [...]c [...]d [...] pr [...]sit [...], & s [...]ct s [...]d ad d [...]leti [...]nem. and Sixtus Quintus to the Prince of Parma: Concerning which, their Doctrine is this, That the blood of Christ is by these applied unto us, that they do not onely signifie, but produce spiritual effects, that they blot out venial sins, that they drive away Devils, that they cure diseases, and that though these things do not operate infallibly, as do the Sacraments, [Page 245] and that God hath made no express Covenant concerning them, yet by the devotion of them that use them, and the prayers of the Church, they do prevail.

Now though it be easie to say, and it is notoriously true in Theology, that the prayers of the Church can ne­ver prevail, but according to the grace which God hath promis'd; and either can onely procure a blessing upon na­tural things, in order to their natural effects, or else an extraordinary super­natural effect, by vertue of a Divine promise; and that these things are pretended to work beyond their natu­ral force, and yet God hath not pro­mis'd to them a supernatural blessing (as themselves confess;) yet besides the falseness of the Doctrine, on which these superstitions do rely, it is lso as evident, that these instru­mentalities produce an affiance and confidence in the Creature, and estrange mens hearts from the true Religion and trust in God, while they think themselves blessed in their own in­ventions, [Page 246] and in digging to them­selves Cisterns of their own, and leav­ing the Fountain of Blessing and Eter­nal Life.

To this porpose the Roman Priests abuse the people with Romantick stories out of the Dialogues of S. Gre­gory, and venerable Bede; making them believe, that S. Fortunatus cur'd a mans broken thigh with Holy Wa­ter, and that S. Malachias the Bishop of Down and Conor, cur'd a mad-man with the same medicine; and that Saint Hilarion cur'd many sick persons with Holy Bread and Oyl (which indeed is the most likely of them all, as being good food, and good medicine;) and although not so much as a Chicken is now a days cur'd of the Pip by Holy Water, yet upon all occasions they use it, and the common people throw it upon Childrens Cradles, and sick Cows Horns, and upon them that are blasted; and if they recover by any means, it is imputed to the Holy Wa­ter: And so the Simplicity of Chri­stian Religion, the Glory of our De­pendence [Page 247] on God, the Wise Order and Oeconomy of Blessings in the Gospel, the Sacredness and Mysteri­ousness of Sacraments and Divine In­stitutions, are disorder'd and disho­nour'd: The Bishops and Priests in­venting both the Word and the Ele­ment, institute a kind of Sacrament, in great derogation to the Supreme Prerogative of Christ; and men are taught to go in ways 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 [Page 248] remark'd 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 Commandment, 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 [Page 249] their people to commit Idolatry: For they affirm, That the same worship which is given to the Prototyp or Prin­cipal, the same is to be given to the I­mage of it. As we worship the Holy [...]ri­nity, and Christ, so we may worship the Images of the Trinity, & of Christ; that is, with Latria, 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, Instit. moral. par. 1. l. 9. c. 6. said Azorius, their great Master of Casui­stical Theology. And this is the Do­ctrine of their great St. Thomas, of Alexander of Ales, Bonaventure, Al­bertus, Richardus, Capreolus, Cajetan, Coster, Valentia, Vasquez, the Jesuists of Colein, Triers and Mentz, approving Coster's 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 [Page 250] or Christs sake. For this is that we complain of, that they give the [...]ame 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 a [...]firm, and it is of it self evident, that whoever, Christian or Heathen, worships the image 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 [Page 251] 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 cons [...]quently, 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. [Page 252] these words are found, The Legats Cross must be on the right hand, Edit. Roman. p. 672. because Latria, or Divine honour is due to it. And if Divine honour relative be due to the Legates Cross, which is but the Image of [...]hrist Cross, then this Di­vine worship is terminated on Christs Cross, which is certainly but a meer Creature. To this purpose are the words of Almain, The Images of the Trinity, and of the Cross, are to be ador'd 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 [Page 253] 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 man 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 men are. The Heathens did indeed infinitely more violate the first Commandment; but [Page 254] against the second, precisely and sepa­rately from the first, the transgression is alike.

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, that 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 [Page 255] 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 chang'd 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 find an excuse for it, and that they would not. But this we are most sure of, that they might, if they pleas'd, find many ex­cuses, or rather just causes for not gi­ving Divine honour to the Consecra­ted Elements; because there are so many contingencies in the whole con­duct of this affair, and we are so uncer­tain of the Priests intention, and we [Page 256] can never be made certain, that there is not in the whole order of causes any invalidity in the Consecration; and it is so impossi­ble that any man should be sure that Here, and Now, and This Bread is Transubstantiated, and is really the Natural body of Christ;Nemini po­ [...] est per fidem constare se recepisse vel minimum sa­ [...]ramentum. Est (que) hoc i [...]a certum ex fide ac cla­rum est nos vivere. Nul­la est [...]ia, qua cit [...]a re­velationem nosse possumus intentionem ministrantis, vel evidenter, vel certo ex fide. Andreas Vega, lib. 9. de j [...]st [...]fic. c. 17. Non potest quis esse certus certitudine fidei se percipere verum Sacram [...]ntum [...] Cum Sacramentum sinè int [...]ntione Ministri non conficiatur, & intentionem al [...]erius nemo videre potest. Bellarm. lib. 3. cap. 8. se [...]t. Dicent. 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 cetainly to have a Divine being.

Sect. XIII.

AND now we shall plainly represen [...] to our charges, how this whole matter stands. The case is this, The [Page 257] Religion of a Christian consists in Faith, and Hope, Repentance and Cha­rity, Divine Worship and [...]elebration of the Sacraments, and finally in keeping the [...]ommandments of God. Now in all these, both on Doctrines and Practises, the Church of R [...]me does dangerously err, and teaches men so to do.

They do injury to Faith, by crea­ting new Articles, and enjoyning them as of necessity to salvation. * [...]hey 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 th [...] [...]ommandments, they leave one of them out of their Cate­chisms and Manuals, and while they [Page 258] 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 seven Sacraments, which we onely reckon to be an unnecessary, and unscholasti­cal error; 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, what they please themselves, of their own heads, without a Divine Warrant or Institution: and, * At last persuade 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 onely to eat what they worship, but to adore those things with Divine Worship, which are not God: To reconcile a wicked life [Page 259] 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 ra [...]e, then we h [...]ve 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 goodn [...]ss of God, yet by all or any or these opinions they are not so: But the very best suffer diminution, [Page 260] and allay by these things; and very many more are wholly subverted and destroyed.

Sect. I.

THat in the Church of Rome, it is publikely taught by their greatest Doctors, That it is lawful to lye, or d [...]ceive 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 Engli [...]h Priests have behav'd themselves in the times of Queen Elizabeth, King Iames, and [Page 261] the Blessed Martyr King Charles I. Emonerius wrote in defence of it; and Father Barnes who wrote a Book against Lying and Equivocating, was suspected for a Heretick, and smarted severely un­der their hands.

To him that asks 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 asks his wife if she be an Adulteress, though she be, yet she may say, she is not, if in her mind se­cretly she say [not with a purpose to tell you: [...] Sa­ [...] l 4. [...]. 21. [...]. 22.] 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 [Page 262] a Thief, that he will give him Twenty Crowns, he may secretly say, [If I please to do so,] and then he is not bound. And of this Doctrine Vasquez brags,In [...] Tom. 4. qu. 93. ar [...]. 5. [...]. 13. as of a rare, though new inven­tion, saying, it is gathered out of St. Austin, and Thomas Aquinas, who only 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, Man [...]a [...]. c. 1 [...]. u [...] 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 goods, (that is) to cease from doing injury, with the peril of his credit. So Navar, and Cardinal Cajetan and Tolet teaches;A [...]ud Tolet. i [...]str [...]ct. S [...] ­l [...]rd l. 5 c 27. who adds also, Hoc multi dicun, quoram sententiam potest quis tutâ conscienti [...] [Page 263] sequi. Many say the same thing; whose Doctrine any man 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, says Diana.

Now by these Doctrines a man is taught how to be an honest Thief,In compend. p. 335. Lug­du [...], A. D. 1641. and to keep what he is bound to restore; and by these we may not onely deceive our Brother, but the Law; and not the Law onely, 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 [Page 462] 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 Con [...]ession; 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 terrors 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. Vbi [...]up [...]a.

But we shall instance in things of more publike concern, and Catholick Authority. No Cont [...]acts, Leagues, Soci [...]ties, Promises, Vows, or Oaths, are a su [...]ficient security to him that deals with one of the [...]hurch of Rome, if he shall please to make use of that li­berty, which may and many times is, and always can be granted to him. [Page 265] 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 Hierom of Prague, and Savanarola, felt the mischief of violarion 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 tied 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. Schol [...]. [There are two distinct Tribunals, and the Ecclesiastical is the Superior; and therefore if a Secular Prince gives his Subjects a safe conduct, he cannot extend it to the Superior Tribunal; nor by any security given, hinder the Bishop or the Pope to exercise their jurisdicti­on:] [Page 266] 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 only 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 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, Canus Bishop of the Canaries. But be­yond dispute,Relect [...] de paenitent. 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 in [...]o a Monastery, his Oath shall not bind [Page 267] him, his promise is null; but his second promise, that shall stand. And he that denies this, is accursed by the Council of Trent. Ses. 8. can. 6.

Not onely 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 Boys 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 regu­laribu [...]. A­quin. 2.2. q. 88. art. 9. Lib. 1. c. 101. and then it was made lawful by him and his Scholars; though it was expresly against the Doctrine and Laws of the preceding ages of the Church, as appears in the Capitulars of Charls 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 AEro­dius a French Lawyer, an excellently [Page 268] 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 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 of 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 fulness of power we condemn the said Order: For he can dispense always, and in all things where there is cause, and in many things where there is no cause; sed sub majori pretio, under a greater price, said the tax of the Datary; where the price of the several dispensations, even in causâ [Page 269] turpi, in base and filthy causes, are set down.

Nay the Pope can dispense suprà jus, contra jus; above Law, and against Law and right, said Mosconius in his books of the Majesty of the Militant Church: Li. 1. de sum­mo Pontif. vide etiam Iacobum de Terano: & Ravis. de concile. du Trent. For the Popes Tribunal and Gods is but one; and therefore every reasonable creature is subject to the Popes Empire, said the same Autho [...]: And what Dispensations he usually gives, we are best inform'd by a gloss of their own upon the Canon Law,Cap. quia circa Extra. de [...]igamis. 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 in the fourth degree, and give Dispensation to marry in the second. These things are a sufficient charge, and yet [Page 270] evidently so, and publikely owned.

[...]ap. proposui. de concess. praebondae, n. 20.We need not aggravate this matter, 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 practise, 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 onely.

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 Charls the V. Emperor, after the Battel of Pavy, and gave him leave to be perjur'd. And one of the late Popes dispens'd with the Ba­stard Son of the Conde D' Olivarez, or rather, plainly dissolv'd his marriage which he made and consummated with [Page 271] Isabella D' Azueta, whom he had pub­likely married when he was but a mean person, the son of Donna Marguerita Spinola, and under the name of Iuli­an Valeasar. 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 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 dispens'd with; and if you swear you will not procure a [Page 272] Dispensation, you can as well be dispens'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 in­tolerable 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, and turn'd him over, and given them leave to proceed. This was verified in the Synod of Dalmatia, Si Imperator dist. 96. &c. E [...]clesia [...]. M de co [...]stitut. A.D. 1199. Can. 5. De Clericis l. 1 c. 30. sect. quarto objici­unt. 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 [Page 274] Secular Princes are the Lawful Superi­ors and Iudges of Clergy men, unless it can be prov'd, that the Sheep are bet­ter than the Shepherd, or Sons than their Fathers, or Temporals than Spi­rituals,] said Bellarmine:De Offic. Christiani Prin. l. 1. c. 5. And there­fore it is a shame (says he) to see Prin­ces contending with Bishops for prece­dency, or for Lands. For the truth is this, (whatever the custom be) the Prince is the Bishops Subject, not the Bishop the Princes:Suarez. de­fens. contra sect. Anglic. l. 4. c. 17. sect. 15,16, & 1 [...]. For no man can serve two Masters, the Pope is their own Superior, 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 diverse 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 stirs he made in Christendom concerning it, the [Page 275] 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 Exem­tion 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 always subject to it, when so many thousand persons are in their Kingdoms, and yet Subjects to a Forein Power. But we need not trouble our selves to reckon the [Page 276] evils consequent to this procedure, themselves have own'd them, even the very worst 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;Aphor. verb. Cericus. and because the French­men 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 Collen. 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:]Defens. fid. l. 4. c. 15. sect. 1. So Father Sua­rez. And this is pretended to be al­lowed by Councils, Sacred Canons, and all the Doctors of Laws Humane and Divine;Apolog. p. 57. for so Bellarmine affirms. Against which, since it is a matter of Faith and Doctrine, which we now charge upon the Church of Rome, as [Page 277] an Enemy to publick Government, we shall think it sufficient to oppose against their Pretension, the plain and easie words of S. Paul, Let eve­ry soul be subject to the higher Powers. Rom 13.1. Every Soul,] That is,In hunc lo­cum. saith Saint Chrysostom, whether he be a Monk or an Evangelist, a Prophet or an Apostle.

Of the like iniquity, when it is ex­tended to its utmost Commentary, which the Commenters of the Church of Rome put upon it, is, the Divine Right of the Seal of Confession; 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, or of the whole Re­publick, saith Instruct. Sac [...]rd. l. 3. c. 16. Tolet; No, not to save all the World, said De poenit. l. 2. c. 19. n. 5. Henriquez: Not to save an Innocent, not to keep the World from burning, or Religion from perversion, or all the Sacraments from demolition. In­deed it is lawful, saith Apol. cont. Re [...]. M. [...]rit. c. 13. Bellarmine, if a Treason be known to a Priest in Confession, and he may in gene­ral [Page 278] 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. [...]ontr Reg. Ang. l. 9. c. 3 Father Binet is not so kind even to the Catholick Princes; for he says, 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 Ioannes in his Apo­logy for Garnet: and for it he also quotes Suarez. Cap. 13. But it is enough to have nam'd this. 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 pra­ctices.

And here we observe, That not onely the whole Order of Jesuits 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 in order to a [...]piritual good,De su [...]. Pon­tis. l 5. c. 6. saith Bellarmine. And Becanus di­scourses of this very largely in his book [Page 280] of the English Controversie, print­ed by Albin at Mentz, 1612. But be­cause this book was ordered to be pur­ged, (Una litura potest) we shall not insist upon it; but there is as bad which was never censur'd.Ibid. c. 7. Bellarmine says, that the Ecclesiastical Republick can command and compell the Temporal, which is indeed its Subject, to change the Administration, and to depose Princes, and to appoint others, when it cannot otherwise defend the Spi­ritual good: and F. Suarez says the same.Defen [...]. F [...]d Cath. l. 3. c. 23 sect. 10. & sect. 18. & 20. The power of the Pope ex­tends it self to the coertion of Kings with Temporal punishments, 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;Ca [...]ce [...]. Eccl. i [...]. [...]. [...]ol. 336. That when a Prince [Page 281] is Excommunicate, before the Denun­ciation the Subjects are not absolved from their Oath of Allegiance, (as Ca­jetan says well;) yet when it is denoun­ced, they are not onely 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. & 162. And F. Creswel says it is the sentence of a [...]l Catholicks, that Subjects are bound to expell Heretical Princes if they have strength enough; and that to this they are tied by the Commandment of God, the most strict tie of Conscience, and the extreme danger of their souls. Nay, even be­fore the sentence is declared, though the Subjects are not bound to it, yet lawfully they may deny obedience to an Heretical Prince,T [...]m 3. disp. 1 q. 12 punct. 2 said Gregory de Valentia.

It were an endless labour to tran­scribe the horrible Doctrines which are preached in the Jesuites School, to the shaking of the Regal Power of such Princes which are not of the Ro­man [Page 282] Communion. The whole oeco­nomy of it is well describ'd by Bellar­mine, [...]nt. Barol. [...]. 7. who affirms, That it does not be­long to Monks, or other Ecclesiasticks, to commit Murthers, neither do 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 Allegeance, 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 evil things. We therefore forbear to set down those horrid things spoken by Sà, Mariana, Santarel, Carolus Scri­banius, and some others. It is enough that Suarez says,Vbi supra, l [...] 6. c. 6. sect. 24. 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 [Page 283] to obey Kings, not to speak evil 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 disoblig'd: so Bellarmine. Cont. Bar [...]l. c. 7. 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 kill the Prince; yet if the Pope commands you, it is no sin. For if the Pope should erre 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.D [...] Ro. Po [...] ­tif. l. 4. c. 5. They are the very words of Bellarmine.

But they adde more particulars of the same Bran. The sons of an Here­tical [Page 284] father are made sui juris, that is, free from their fathers power. A Ca­tholick Wife is not tied 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 onely 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 sirnamed 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 died with grief and hunger. We will not speak of the Empe [...]our Frederick, Henry the sixth, Empe­rour; [Page 285] the Duke of Savoy, against whom he caused 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 Iohn were great Instances of what Princes in their case may expect from that Religion. These were the piety of the Father of Christendom. But these were the product of the Doctrine which Clement the V. vented in the Council of Vienna, Omne jus Regum à se pendere: The rights of all Kings depend upon the Pope. And there­fore 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 [Page 286] goods of the Church, the Pope may depose him, said Azorius. And San­tarel says, [...]us [...]i [...]. Moral. part. 2. l. 10. [...]. 9. 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. This is very much,Vbi supra. but yet there is some­thing more; this may be done, if he impose new Gabels or Imposts upon his Subjects, without the Popes leave; for if they do not pretend to this also, why does the Pope in Bulla Coenae Do­minici excommnnicate all Princes that do it?See Mart. Vivaldus de bulla coenae Dominici.

Now if it be inquired, 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 Santarel. 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 Countreyman [Page 287] Weston, Sanctuar. Iur. Pontifici [...] qu. 15. sect. 5. qu. 17. sect. 6. & qu. 27. sect. 7. Catal. lor. mundi part. 4. [...]onsid. 7. ex Zode­rico. Rector of the College at D [...]way. 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 owned himself not onely as the Lord of France, V [...]rb. Bonif. 8. 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 [Page 288] 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 do upon the Authority of the Decretals, their own LawDe major. & obedient. unam Sanctam. In [...]xtrav. Benif. 8. concil. Later. sub Iulio 2. In Ex­trav. Ioh. 22. cap. C [...]m in [...]er nonnullos. In gloss. fi [...]al. edit. Paris. 1503. concil. Viennens. sub Clem. 5., and the Decrees of Councils. 5. Not only the Jesuits, and Canonists, but others also of great note amongst them, earnestly contend for these Doctrines; particu­larly Cass [...]naeus, Zodericus Vbi supr [...] in Cass [...]naeo., the Arch­bishop of Florence Summ 3. part. l. 22. [...]. 6. sect 4., Pe­trus de Monte In s [...]a Monarchia quem citat Felinus in cap. Si quando, ubi per eum extrav. de rescript., St. Tho­mas Aquinas In tract. de Rege & Regno ad Regem Cypri. Bozius, Ba­ronius, and many others. 6. Themselves tell [...] us it is a matter of Faith; F. Creswell In P [...]i opa [...]r. sect. 2. n. 160,162. says, it is the sentence of all Catholicks; and they that do not admit these Doctrines, Fa­ther Rosweyd Lib. de fide h [...]ret. s [...]r­vanda. calls them half Christi­ans, Grinners, barking Royalists, and a new Sect of Catholicks; and Eudaemon Ioannes In epist. m [...] ­ [...]itor. ad Ioh. Barclai. says, That without question [Page 289] 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 de fide, 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 [Page 290] 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 Boucher, Decreil, and Ancelein: And though some would fain have it thought to be none of his, yet Bellarmine dares not deny it,In re [...]p. ad Apo [...]o [...] prouiam [...]ide [...]it. but makes for it a crude, and a cold Apo­logy.

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 [...]hops and other Learn­ned persons against Bellarmine, Parsons, Eudaemon Iohannes, Creswel, and [Page 291] 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 ia 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 Exhortation to our respective Charges, to all that desire to be sav'd in the day of the Lord Iesus, tha [...] they decline from these horrid Doctrines, which in their birth are new, in their growth are scandalous, in their pro­per [Page 292] consequents are in [...]initely dange­rous to their souls, and hunt for their precious life: But therefore it is high­ly fit that they also should perceive their own advantages, and give God praise, that they are immur'd from such infinite drngers, 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 Lantern 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 Com­mandments [Page 293] 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 relied 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 practise 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 all men is preferr [...]d before unclean Concubinate in any; and Nothing is wanting that God and his [Page 294] 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.