(3) Tranſubſtantiation (whatſoever it ſignifies more than a Real preſence, and the benefits which flow from it) with the unaccountable hypotheſes which depend upon it: And Purgatory, as it is blown up into Climaerical flames by the Schoolmen; with the means and manner of deliverance out of it, are no better than Scholaſtical ſpeculations. And many of the reſt valued but as probabilities, or matters of doubtful diſputation.

2. For the impoſition of theſe reſpective Articles the difference is vaſt. For thoſe of Pope Pius we have not only, I receive, admit and embrace (this Faith;) not only, I do affirm and aknowledge, conſtantly hold and moſt ſtedfaſtly aſſert it: not only, I do with a ſtedfaſt Faith believe and profeſs it; but under the high and ſolemn obligation, I do promiſe, vow, and ſwear, to hold, teach and preach the ſame to the very laſt breath of my life, and to procure all others under my charge to do the like. But to the Articles of Religion in the Church of England ſubſcription is only required, without any obligation to teach, profeſs or aſſert them, further than they are contained in the Holy Scripture, or may be proved thereby to be Articles of the Faith; or admitted for diſcipline and good order. And it is moreover to be obſerved, That his Majeſty in his Declaration before theſe Articles printed 1630, though he forbids the offering violence to the liberal and Grammatical ſenſe of theſe Articles; yet he ſeems to allow a modeſt liberty (without contention) in putting the moſt favourable conſtruction upon them. The words are theſe, Though ſome differences have been ill raiſed; yet we take comfort in this, that all Clergy-men within our Realm, have always moſt willingly ſubſcribed to the Articles eſtabliſhed; which is an Argument to Us, that they all agree in the true literal meaning of the ſaid Articles: and that even in thoſe curious points, in which the preſent differences lie, Men of all ſorts take the Articles of the Church of England to be for them; which is an Argument, that none of them intend any deſertion of the Articles eſtabliſhed. Where we ſee his Majeſty took notice, that men of all ſorts took theſe Articles to be for them; and he declares, that he took comfort therein. Which argues, that the impoſition was not ſtrict and rigid as to the ſenſe and meaning of the Articles. And though in the Synod 1640. Can. 6. an Oath was enjoyned; yet it was with as much modeſty and tenderneſs, as any ſober and peaceable Subject can deſire: for thus it runs, I A. B. do ſwear, that I do approve the Doctrine and Diſcipline, or Government in the Church of England, as containing all things neceſſary to ſalvation. Where two things are very obſervable, (1) The aſſertion is only this, That I do approve the Doctrine, &c. the (2) Only as containing all things neceſſary to ſalvation; for which we are referred to the authority of the Holy Scripture by the Sixth Article, as was obſerved before.

3. As to the end of theſe reſpective Articles; Thoſe of Pope Pius are declared to be neceſſary to ſalvation, not only Neceſſitate praecepti, ſed Medii; neceſſary as well upon the account of a Means as of a Precept: for the Pope declares, Hanc (eſſe) veram Catholicam fidem, Extra quam nemo ſalvus eſse poteſt. That this is the true Catholick Faith, without which no man can be ſaved. But the Articles of the Church of England generally are intended for a decorum and order (matters of neceſſary Faith being herein reſtrained to the Holy Scriptures) to keep out diſputes and vain jangling, and to preſerve peace and concord in her Communion. Thus much is intimated in the very Title prefix'd to thoſe Articles; but much more clearly in his Majeſties Declaration before mentioned, where he ſaith, We hold it moſt agreeable to our Kingly Office and our own Religious Zeal, to conſerve and maintain the Church committed to our charge in the unity of the true Religion, and in the bond of peace, and not to ſuffer unneceſſary Diſputations, Alterations, or Queſtions to be raiſed, which may nouriſh Faction both in the Church and Commonwealth. We have therefore thought fit to make this Declaration, That the Articles, &c. do contain the true Doctrine of the Church of England agreeable to Gods word; which we do therefore ratifie and confirm, &c. But this is more clear in a Book ſet forth 1571. called, Liber quorundam Canonum Diſciplinae Eccleſiae Anglicanae SS. de Concionatoribus. Where it is ordered thus: Imprimis vero videbunt, &c. Let the Preachers take care, that they teach nothing in their Sermons, which they would have the People hold and believe as a matter of Religion; but what is conſonant to the Doctrine of the Old or New Teſtament, and what the Catholick Fathers and Ancient Biſhops have gathered out of the ſame. And becauſe thoſe Articles of Chriſtian Religion, which were agreed upon by the Biſhops, &c. are without doubt collected out of the Sacred Books of the Old and New Teſtament, and do in all things agree with the heavenly Doctrine contained therein: Alſo, becauſe the Book of Common Prayers, and the Book of the Inauguration of Archbiſhops, Biſhops, Prieſts and Deacons, do contain nothing that is contrary to that Doctrine; whoſoever ſhall be ſent out to teach the People, ſhall confirm the authority and belief of thoſe Articles, as well by their ſubſcription as in their Sermons. Qui ſecus fecerit & contrariâ doctrinâ Populum turbaverit, excommunicabitur; Whoſoever ſhall do otherwiſe, and diſturb the People with any contrary Doctrine ſhall be excommunicated. Here indeed the Clergy are implicitly enjoyned to preach up the belief and authority of theſe Articles: But withal, (1) The belief and authority of them is required, not as grounded upon the Declaration and Sanction of the Eccleſiaſtical Governours (though a hearty ſubmiſſion and obedience is due thereto in matters of Religion, Diſcipline, and Order, upon the account of a Divine precept,) but upon their Congruity with the Holy Scriptures, according to the ſenſe of the Ancient Fathers. (2) That ſuch as tranſgreſs theſe Articles are puniſh'd (for want of good manners) as diſturbers of the publick Peace.

Wherefore, though the Author of the Guide in Controverſies* Diſc. 3. cap. 7., hath made it his buſineſs to ſtrain every Sentence, Phraſe, and word in the Canons as well as the Articles of the Church of England, to make thoſe Articles ſeem to run parallel in the Charge of a new Impoſition of Faith, with thoſe in the Creed of Pope Pius the Fourth aforementioned; yet, by what hath been obſerved, it is evident, that the Articles of the Church of England were not intended (as thoſe of that Pope clearly were) for an Addition to the Faith declared by the Fathers at Nice, which (with all Chriſtian Churches) we profeſs as Catholicks; but for information to direct our publick diſcourſes generally as occaſion ſerves, in matters of Religion, as we are united in the Communion of the particular Church of England, after a deliberate and ſober Reformation; which to attempt and perform, as far as in them lies, no doubt all Biſhops are as well obliged in duty by Chriſt's Command, [Apoc. 2 & 3 Cap.] as preſcribed to do it orderly, by the 34. of the Apoſtles CanonsEpiſcopos uniuſcujuſque gentis noſſe oportet eum, qui in eis eſt primus, & exiſtimare eum ut caput: & nihil facere magni momenti, praeter illius ſententiam: illa autem ſola facere unumquemque quae ad ſuam paroeciam pertinent, & pagos qui ei ſubfunt..

To leave this long, though not unneceſſary digreſſion; This Infallibility (in the latitude the Roman party pleads for) is ſo very improbable, that Mr. Creſſey (in his Neophytiſm) was not able to ſwallow it till he had ſhrunk it up into an Indefectibility; wherein we can heartily cloſe with him. And for all that great priviledge, which make ſo much noiſe in the world, I do very well obſerve, that in many caſes they are glad to reſt ſatisfied with a probable Conſcience. And in ſpight of that Infallibility, They muſt ſtand to the courteſie or hazard of a probable Opinion, to ſecure themſelves (according to their practice) from the peril of Idolatry. And this is acknowledged by the Jeſuite Ant. Terill, our Countryman, in his Tractate de Conſcientia Probabili: Edit. Leodii, 1668. p. 387, &c. His words are theſe; Quid magis ad mores, &c. What does more concern manners and the ſtrictneſs of the Law of Nature, than that the worſhip due to God be not beſtowed upon a Creature; and yet it is lawful many times, out of a probable Opinion only, to beſtow Divine worſhip upon the Euchariſt, and to adore God when he is but probably latent there. For there is no true certainty; but only a Probability, that this numerical Hoſt is rightly conſecrated. Firſt, It is not certain that he who did conſecrate was a Prieſt, both becauſe it is not certain that he was baptized, as alſo, becauſe it is not certain that he was (lawfully or) validly Ordained by a true Biſhop, having an intention requiſite to that effect, &c. Secondly, It is not certain that he did pronounce the words of Conſecration. If he did duly pronounce them, yet Thirdly, perhaps he had not a due intention. If all theſe things were (obſerved) as they ſhould be, It is not certain, in the Fourth place, that a due matter was made uſe of; for the Bread might not be made of Wheat. Fifthly, Although all theſe things proceeded well and rightly; yet it is not indubitable, that the Officer to whom the cuſtody of the venerable Sacrament belongs, did not expoſe an Hoſt that was not conſecrated, inſtead of one that was (truly conſecrated) to be adored. All theſe are generals, to which we may add the malice of mans heart, which is too vigorous in ſome perſons. Upon theſe heads (ſaith he) we have known many Cheats too frequently practiſed in this matter; and they know it much better, who are employed as Judges upon the Tribunal of the Sacred Inquiſition. Thus far Father Terill.

Now, if they of the Church of Rome have no certainty in their Sacraments, no certainty in their Sacrifice of the Altar, no certainty in their Prieſthood, no certainty, but they may commit Idolatry every day; if they cannot be certain, but the malice of their Prieſts may fruſtrate all the ſacred Ordinances of God to them, and make them abſolutely null, though they be never ſo worthily diſpoſed to receive the benefit of them: (And this is the Doctrine and Belief commonly maintained in the Church of Rome.) They ſhould rather bluſh at ſuch an Infallibility, than boaſt of any great advantage to be reaped from it. For grant further, that that Infallibility were ſuch as they would have it, yet they can have no ſecurity in it for ſalvation. 'Tis ſuch as a man may carry into Hell with him (if it proves not a means to lead him thither,) where (for ought I know) the Devils have it as much as he. And Gregory the Seventh was of the ſame mind; Nam, ut Jacobus frater Domini teſtatur, fides ſine operibus mortua eſt, qualem & Daemones habere fatetur; Non Ergo minùs eſt reſiſtendum pertinacibus authenticarum inſtitutionum impugnatoribus quam Sacrae fidei violatoribus, cùm & Daemonibus aſſimilentur quicunque inſtitutionem SS. Patrum in fide tantum, & non etiam in converſatione pro viribus aſſectatur? For as James, the Brother of our Lord, doth teſtiſie, Faith without Works is dead, which kind of Faith he doth acknowledge to be in the Devils. We ought therefore no leſs to reſiſt ſuch as are obſtinate impugners of Authentick Inſtitutions (viz. of Piety) than ſuch as do violate the Sacred Faith, ſeeing they that do earneſtly follow the inſtruction of the Holy Fathers in (matter of) Faith only, and not in (a holy) converſation are like unto the Devils. For this Infallibility is reſtrained to matters of Faith, and that Faith is but hiſtorical (as they call it) and not ſufficient to ſalvation. To the Eſſence of a Church, right Doctrines in Practicals are as neceſſary as in Speculatives, if mortal Sin excludes from ſalvation, as well as an erroneous Faith R. H. Diſc. of the Neceſſity of Church Guides. p. 82.; as the Author of the Guide in Controverſies does acknowledge. And this is the Doctrine of the Council of Trent, Seſſ. 6. de Juſtificatione: Si quis dixerit, ſolâ fide juſtificari, ita ut intelligat nihil aliud requiri quod ad Juſtificationis gratiam conſequendam cooperetur, & nulla ex parte neceſſe eſſe cum ſuae voluntatis motu praeparari atque diſponi, Anathema ſit, Can. 9. If any man ſhall ſay, that Faith alone does Juſtifie, ſo that nothing elſe is required to cooperate towards the attainment of the Grace of Juſtification, and that it is in no wiſe neceſſary that he ſhould be prepared and diſpoſed (to it) by any motion of his own will, let him be accurſed. Et Can. 19. Siquis dixerit, nihil praeceptum eſſe in Evangelio praeter fidem, caetera eſſe indifferentia, neque praecepta neque prohibita, ſed libera; aut Decem Praecepta nihil pertinere ad Chriſtianos, Anathema ſit. If any man ſhall ſay, there is nothing commanded in the Goſpel, but Faith; that all other matters are indifferent, neither commanded nor forbidden, but left free: or that the Ten Commandements do not concern Chriſtians; let him be accurſed. Et Can. 21. Si quis di • erit Chriſtum Jeſum à Deo hominibus datum fuiſſe, ut Redemptorem, cui fidant, non etiam ut Legiſlatorem, cui obediant; Anathema ſit: that is, If any man ſhall ſay, that Chriſt Jeſus was given unto man of God, as a Redeemer in whom they ſhould truſt, and not alſo as a Lawgiver, whom they ſhould obey; let him be accurſed. (Which Canons we can readily ſubſcribe to:) From which it appears beyond exception, that the Infallibility pretended by the Church of Rome is not to be relied on as ſufficient for ſalvation. The Creeds chiefly comprehending Speculatives, there muſt be a great body of Articles alſo of neceſſary Faith relating to Practicals; as R. H. C. 1. §. 3. p 4. maintains in his Diſcourſe of the Neceſſity of Church Guides. But doth this Infallibility extend to all matters of Practical belief, as well as Speculative? Yes, ſaith R. H. Chriſt hath left an Infallible Guide for Manners as well as Faith Id. p. 176; and a little after, God hath provided by the ſame Church Authority to preſerve his Church in truth, and to reſtrain it from ſin; giving an equal Commiſſion to teach the ignorant, and to correct the vicious. And that ſince their Doctrine directs our Manners, as well as Faith; their Infallibility is as neceſſary for things of Practice, as of Speculation. But if there be ſuch an Infallibility in the Guides of the Church, not o • ly in reference to points of Faith, but to Doctrines of Practice alſo,1 Sam. 15.14. What meaneth then this bleating of the Sheep in mine ears, and this lowing of the Oxen, which I hear? Of the degeneracy of the Church in his time V. Bede writes thus:Apud Meiſner de Eccleſia. p. 681, 682, 684. Videt quiſque non ſine lachrymis, &c. Every one ſees not without tears, into what a weak and infirm condition the ſtate of the Church does daily dwindle. And St. Bernard, in his time; Hodie ſerpit putida tabes, &c. Now-a-days an infectious and ſpreading Conſumption hath ſeized the body of the Church, which the further it is dilated the more deſperate it grows; and it is ſo much the more dangerous, by how much the more inward. And after him the Cardinal, Petrus de Aliaco, in a publick Sermon at the Council of Conſtans. Manifeſtum eſſe, ſaith he, &c. 'Tis apparent, that the Church hath of a long time been in ſeveral reſpects deformed, and not only hath (in time paſt) but doth now extreamly want a reformation as well in Faith as Manners. The like complaints are made in theſe our days; not againſt the corrupt Manners of wicked men only, but againſt the New Extravagant and pernicious Doctrines, which do lead to, and incourage ſuch ill Manners: witneſs what was lately written by Macarius Havermans Canon of the Church of St. Michael, Ordinis praemonſtratenſis, in his Tyrocinium Chriſtianae Moralis Theologiae Printed at Antwerp An. 1674.. Where, in his Epiſtle Dedicatory to the Abbot, writing of the (unhappily) fertile Age into which we are fallen; he ſaith thus, Quot Theologias Morales non edidit, &c. How many Syſtems of Moral Divinity hath this Age brought forth, which are as ſo many whimſical fictions and opinions of Divines, grounded upon philoſophical Arguments, ſwelling with curious and exquiſite probabilities, and big with humane inventions. And in his Preface to the Reader he complains of the Arrogance of theſe new Doctors, in preferring their own Sentiments before the Doctrine of the Ancient Fathers, Councils, and Holy Scriptures: Hinc vix ullum, ſaith he, &c. Whence it comes to pa •• , that in their Writings you ſhall ſcarce find any place of Sacred Scripture, or the Ancient Councils, or Holy Fathers alledged; but they weight every thing in the ballance of their own underſtanding: And thus for Chriſtian Divinity (whoſe concluſions concerning God and his Attributes, &c. ought to be deduced from the unerring and uncontrollable Doctrine of Gods word, and from the moſt ſecure Decrees of the Holy Fathers) they ſet up a Natural Theology or Philoſophy grounded upon the Principles of Ariſtotle and his Followers, whoſe Authority they alledge more frequently than that of St. Ambroſe, Jerome, Auſtin, or any other Holy Father; not to ſay they do more value them: nay, ſo devoted are they to their own Inventions, that a plauſible Reaſon of their own ſhall be preferr'd before the graveſt Sentiments and Maxims of the Holy Fathers.

Hereupon Caramuel breaks out into that ingenuous acknowledgment, I ſpend not much time, or rather loſe it not, in turning over the Writings of the Ancients. And gives us his reaſon elſewhere, Becauſe, ſaith he, as to Manners the Opinions of the Moderns are to be preferr'd to thoſe of the Ancients. For as a late Writer hath it [in novae libertatis explicatione] the Modern Schoolmen had a greater inſight into things, than the former. And have alſo thought fit to reject whatſoever they approved or looked upon as not improbable: And (ſaith he) now, who ſees not at the firſt glance, that thoſe exorbitant Tenents are ſo abhorring from the Decrees of Antiquity, that they need no conſutation; but that barely to mention them is to confute them? So that, to ſpeak with St. Auſtin, I think them fitter to be bewailed by Believers, than diſputed againſt by me. Their clamours will ſooner be drowned by Prayers and Tears, than by the noiſe of Arguments: And without doubt we ſhall do more advantage for ſuch perſons, if with our Prayers we endeavour their reformation, leſt they periſh with their great Wits, or ruine others with their damnable preſumption. Moreover, this ſlighting of the Holy Fathers is like to be very, pernicious to the Church; for if their Authority be ſo diſeſteemed and undervalued in matter of Manners, and that by Roman Catholick Writers, who can blame the Hereticks for not valuing their Authority in matters of Faith? for why ſhould they be valued in matters of Faith, more than in matters of Manners? Are not Manners to be directed by the Authority of Divine Tradition, as well as Faith? Are not the Faithful as well Truſtees of the Tradition of Manners, as of Faith? And a little after he exhorts his Reader thus: Pro paradoxo ergo reputamus, &c. Wherefore let us account that of a late Writer for a mere paradox (viz.) [Tota Theologia Moralis eſt nova] All Moral Divinity is wholly New. For if it be New, then it was not delivered by Chriſt, nor by his Apoſtles, nor by the Holy Fathers: And conſequently, neither Chriſtian, nor Apoſtolical, nor Orthodoxal; and that which is more, neither is it true, nor genuine; but ſpurious and adulterate, and for that reaſon not to be applauded, but condemned, not to be embraced, but baniſhed, not to be alledged, but exploded. Tantum enim à veteri ſimplicitate, &c. (as it follows a little aftey) For we have ſo far ſtarted from the Primitive ſimplicity and Obedience, that there is ſcarce any Law but is rendred uſeleſs by the gloſſes of the Schoolmen, as it may appear, if we pleaſe to trace them in ſome particular Laws: Of what great efficacy (I pray) will that Eccleſiaſtical Law be, concerning Anniverſary Confeſſion and Communion, if it may be ſatisfied by a bare external, though ſacrilegious Communion and Confeſſion? Nevertheleſs, that a man may ſatisfie that Precept by ſuch a ſacrilegious Communion, many Schoolmen, de facto, do ſtill teach. Again, of what force is that Law about hearing the Sacred Offices on the Lords day, and other Holy-days, if that Command may be ſatisfied only by an external preſence of the body; although during the whole time of the Sacrifice a man ſuffers his mind voluntarily to wander and be diſtracted, and taken up with impure and filthy Cogitations? And yet many Schoolmen teach this Doctrine. The Law for the obſervation of Faſting, how unprofitable it is rendred, is very notably ſet forth by Marchantius in the Complaint of (his perſonated) Sr. Jejunium Querimonia S. Jejunii, by Marchantius.. The like may be ſhewed in other Inſtances. Thus for Havermans. By all which we ſee the fruits of this great priviledge of Infallibility in the Church of Rome; viz. by their own Confeſſion they have entertain'd a new MoralSee Montaltius's Provincial Letters, with Wendorchius's Notes upō them. Latinè Colon. 1678. (and not the Primitive) for matters of Practice; and in our obſervation, they have done the like in matters of Faith and Speculation. And when we find ſo great a variation, we muſt needs conclude, That either the Ancient Church was not then; or elſe, That the preſent Church (which differs ſo much from it) is not now Infallible.

And now the Queſtion may be put, Which particular Church is in the more ſafe condition? In the Church of England we have The Faith of our Lord Jeſus Chriſt, as St. James calls it, (James 2.1.) we have St. Peters 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (1 Peter 3.15.) his Rationale of the Chriſtian hope. We have St. Paul's Depoſitum, 1 Tim. 6.20.Quid eſt Depoſitū? id eſt, quod tibi creditum eſt, non quod à te inventum, Quod acceptiſti, non quod excogitaſti. Rem non ingenii, ſed doctrinae. Non uſurpationis privatae, ſed publicae traditionis. Rem ad te perductam, non à te prólatam, in qua non Author debes eſſe, ſed Cuſtos; non inſtitutor, ſed ſectator: non ducens, ſed ſequens. Vincent. Lirinenſis. and form of ſound words, 2 Tim. 1.13. And it is undoubtedly St. Judes Faith we contend for, which, as Beza very well notes upon the place, was once, (and at once) ſo delivered to the Saints, that it ought never to be changed. That Faith which the Fathers of the Council of Nice profeſſed we do very heartily embrace; we keep this Faith whole and undefiled. But from receiving any other, we are deterred by the Sentence of the Synod of Epheſus forementioned; Qui aliam fidem audent componere, &c. Whoſoever ſhall dare to compoſe, alledge or introduce any other Faith, if he be a Biſhop or Clergy-man, he ſhall be degraded; if a Lay-man, excommucated. If the Faith thus delivered were ſufficient for their ſalvation (in genere fidei) why not for ours? And herein, without all doubt, we are no leſs Infallible than the Church of Rome. And to the Ancient Fathers in the moſt Sacred Councils, this was their Lud. Bail. Sum. Concil. Tom. 1. in decreto de Symbolo. Seſſ. 3. m. pa. 522. Shield againſt all Hereſies, Quo ſolo, &c. Through whoſe attractive power alone they have, in times paſt, drawn unbelievers to the Faith, reſiſted and rooted out Hereticks, and confirm'd the Faithful; as the Fathers of the Council of Trent do acknowledge. If there be any other points of Faith needful to ſalvation, our ignorance thereof (after a long and diligent ſearch) is both involuntary and invincible, and that will totally excuſe us.

For that ſuperfatation of Articles by Pope Pius the Fourth, we were never Baptized into them, nor can we anſwer for them. The truth is, the Faith of the Church of England the Romaniſts can never juſtly reprehend, being more pure, more Primitive, and more Catholick than their own, and was profeſſed intirely by all Chriſtian Churches before ſome Articles of the preſent Church of Rome were ever known to have had a being. And for part of this we have a pregnant acknowledgment in the Council of Trent, where they ſet down this Symbolum fidei totidem verbis, quibus in omnibus Eccleſiis legitur; Lud. Bail. ubi ſupra. In the ſame words in which it is read in all Churches: And this they ſet down as that principle, wherein all that do profeſs the Faith of Christ do neceſſarily agree; (and) as that firm and only foundation, againſt which the gates of Hell ſhall never be able to prevail.