§. 1. Diversity of feuds.

THe applaus and honour of this world is a thing desired and pleasing to all persons, from the Prince in the court to the Peasant in the cottage; even as wealth and place by which it is atchieved. Nor is there one of a thousand that follows not the inclination, to the end be may attain it in that degree his condition is capable: and they get it som by chance of birth and educa­tion, som by industry and worth, som by sub­tilty and wit. Hence proceed those many high attempts we so much wonder at in this world, (for arts and trades began at first through a ne­cessity of food, and the conveniency we found [Page 20]in mutuall society) such attempts I mean as were apt to lead the vulgar into a fit of admi­ration; as be the two great excellencies of power and knowledg, and their great atchieve­ments, that for defence of laws and kingdoms, this for the adornment of nations and purer pleasurs of more refined intellects. And both of these have many branches and kinds, and each hath a diversity of graduall perfections. He that cannot sway a Province, will tirannise in his Parish, and if he cannot appear abroad, will domineere in his own hous: so likewise on the other side, what glory the emulous Plebei­an sees given to higher spirits for sciences they cannot reach, or for a supervisorship of Re­ligion they may not hope for, this by the con­tempt of the one and reformation of the other do they go about to compas in the world, first by words and pen (if they can write) then, if they multiply and grow strong enough, by rude force and violence: and still the pretens for all is cleanly and fair washed over; that applaus and glory may both accompany strengthen and crown the design.

What strang things have been attempted by emperours and great captains and commanders upon earth all histories make mention, and it is a pleasant speculation to consider it. But the method and severall wais of enhancing fame by inventions and discoveries of truths prosecu­ted [Page 21]by contemplativ heads, what and how vari­ous they have been in the Pagan world, we may in part gather out of Aristotle, Plato, Lucreti­us, M. Tullius Cicero, and som other few mo­numents yet kept amongst us. What they have been in the Christian world lives more fresh in our memories: but these are of two sorts; one in explication and defens of faith against all opposition possible to be made by any kind of adversaries, Jew, Heretick, or Pagan; and this hath been the emploiment of the most sublime eagles that ever the Christian Church had, S. Austin, Magister sententiarum, Alensis, S. Tho­mas Aquinas, Bonaventure, Gandavensis, Sco­tus, and the like: The other in opposition to faith, which rose up in severall ages for the ex­ercise of this mystick Body who was in his own person not onely opposed by outward adversa­ries but deserted by his own.

I love those eminent Pagan wits: and this commendation they have that they are our first masters in all our Sciences; that they perform­ed what they undertook to write most solidly acutely and exactly both for judgment clear­nes and method; and thirdly that they con­futed one another (for they were divided in opinions as well as we, and it was expedient they should be so) not in reviling words, as we Christians do, but in sober and purest reason; although the arguments of their discours in­ferred [Page 22]somtimes very little to the confutation of an adversary, becaus they often proceeded upon severall principles not ever rightly under­stood, or at least for more particular advan­tage wilfully mistaken.

And in this method of sobriety do our two great Schollers the Lawyer and Physician write, when they put forth treatises either one body of art against another, or one member and person in particular against another in the same body: So likewise did our subtile Schoolmen proceed five hundred years ago, with no lesse sweetnes of spirit than profundnes of reason; whose intention was to explicate and defend Christianity even in the way of Aristotles Phi­losophy, by which the Pagans had for a thou­sand yea [...] opposed it to the much prejudice of Christian Religion, which the Priests and Do­ctours of ancient times would not undertake to defend by a Philosophy they found so much tending to atheism, and in so many things fals, that is to say contrary to the principles and faith they had received from Jesus, whose word they preferred before all the Philosophers rea­sons in the world.

These Schoolmen divided into divers branch­es by occasion of a severall interpretation of Aristotle, either in the way of S. Thomas of Aquin the Dominican, whose doctrine for the most part was followed in Cambridge, or of [Page 23]subtile Scotus the Franciscan whose chair was at Oxford. And in other parts of the Christi­an world they had their chairs erected accord­ing either as chance or favour pleased. But all was then don with no less exact charity than sublime reason: for they had nothing els to do in their Schools, but onely by argument and disputation to try the grounds and solutions, whether if a Pagan himself or others antago­nist whose person every opponent represents, should dispute against them, they could then be able to come off in their defensions with ap­plaus and honour and without prejudice of their Faith.

But when we come to view the oppo­site judgments in matters of religion common­ly called heresies, especially in this last age, (for the rest before these daies have perished by the prevalency of one party against which all the rest bandied together) as these be very gross and homly disputes so are they mannaged on the op­ponents side with so much unseemly behaviour, such unmanly expressions, that discreet sobriety cannot but loath and abhorr to read them. Not reason but defiances, not charity but execrati­ons, not subtilties but downright defamations, not civil respect but vilest disesteem, not cool perswasion but precipitous condemnation fills each page we look on, and fire and stones fly a­bout where meeknes peace and charity should most appear.

And all these religion-disputes whether we consider the subject they are about, or the man­ner they are handled, or the distracting variety into which they run concerning faith revealed (which can be but one) I do not see what other effect they can hav upon mankind but to sub­vert all civill respect and charity, and good manners, and laws and kingdoms where they come. For no man is content if he pretend to have discovered a new way of religion, unless all other men embrace it, and press and pulpit must ring with loud cries against all that do not be they neighbours or superiours, untill the sword it self be sharpened in our hands for bat­tle. Thus beginning with the spirit we end with the flesh.

It is not my meaning to interpose in any par­ticular controversy whose multitude hath al­ready made the world to nauseate, but to hold up my discours in such generall tearmes, as I shall think may serve, if we lay our hands upon our heart, and ponder them with a Chri­stian seriousnes, so many of us as be now un­charitably bent against our neighbour, some­what to allay and mitigate the many flaming heats of discord raging here in England, as much or rather more than any other countrey for opinions concerning faith; which as they are taken up at first upon self-conceit inte­rest as experience hath sufficiently shown, so [Page 25]are they upon all rules of Christian vertue and prudence if we ever mean to be happy, to be deposed. Be not many maisters, for where all would sway there none obay, and so ruin and mischief must needs follow.

The difficultie is, I know not how to express the parties in this religion-feud, that I may not offend: for so bitterly is each side bent against the other, that they will not endure to have them called by their own names. But I notwithstanding should deem it not only a ci­vility but a due debt so to do; for that is every ones name by which himself will be called, and not what an enemy gives him. The Prote­stant is such a one, and so to be named, though his foe on one side sirname him Papist, and his adversary on the other call him heretick; so the Catholick likewis by his junior foe is called Papist, by his elder enemy, a Galilean; and al­tho he may if he will, yet do not think him bound to answer either to that appellation or this, and therfore if I behave my self civilly to­wards him, I can use neither.

And as it is for nomination of persons; so likewis for the verities of their opinions, no par­ty will endure that any one truth of the other side should be acknowledged, and he that shall do it will be looked upon as a common enemy by the rest: Insomuch danger is even ordinary neighbourhood and civility amongst us, when [Page 26]these feuds are once raised. I have known good Protestants endangered these times of our civill wars for calling their neighbour (of whom they had occasion to speak) by the name of Catho­lick, wheras according to the usual language of the feud he should have said Papist. So strangly are we incensed in these matters. Even our good nature is changed: for Englishmen have been thought in the opinion even of forreign nations the fairest conditioned and best natured people in Europe, wheras now these religious feuds have made us the very worst. The Hol­lander, what a kind of man he is by natur it is well enough known; and yet in this piece of prudence and civellity he excels us beyond compare: their towns do often exhibite in one and the same street; here a Jew, there a Chri­stian, Lutheran, Calvinist, or Catholick; and yet all these convers together without any ran­cour or misprision at all, heeding without any thought or consideration of their opinions only the moderation and common honesty they use in their contracts, which if it be good, all is well that concerns neighbours; for the rest let God judg. And in every hous they serv God each one in his own way undesturbedly, without fear of penal law, danger of pillaging, vexati­on of pursuivant, harrassing of souldier, any ill looks or maledictions or heart burnings at all upon that account. This comportment is [Page 27]more manlike, it is more Christian, it is far more gentile and honourable than the contra­ry in the judgment of any discrete sober man in the world: and yet in all other respects that be commendable how far doth the English-man exceed the Hollander?

Witty observing travellers have noted that all other Nations besides ours, can admit of se­verall opinions or reformations without ha­zarding their wits; but we and onely we loos ours; and the testimony is too true. Indeed to undermine the place and dignity of such as maintain an old religion or science is a piece of some kind of ingeniousness or industry; but to do it with rancour disturbance and ruin, this carries with it neither ingenuity nor any reason at all: if the thing be good, by a supervening hatred and uncharitablenes the good work is in­fected; if it be ill, the malignity is doubled. But charity covers a multiude of sins.

§. 2. Ground of quarrells.

THe nois and tumults that be in the world are partly about things known, partly about things unknown, accordingly as men ap­ply their spirits to the one or the other; the in­tent and aim of all men in these their heats, being in truth, whatever they pretend, (and [Page 28]the pretens is ever coloured over) no other thing but an affectation of power and tyran­ny over other men.

The known things about which we do so much contend, are reduced by a wise man unto these three heads; concupiscence of flesh, con­cupiscence of eyes, and pride of life; expres­sing by an usuall metonimy the object by the act: and he addes, that, this is all the world contains, namely in order to the worldly or sensual mans desire: for a worldly temptation must needs be one of these; and about some of these is all our worldly emulations conver­sant, the concernment either of our pleasurs or wealth or honour. Unto concupiscence of flesh belongs all that is apt to pleas the lower senses of Touch Taste and Smell; which be versed in the more tangible employments of nu­trition, vegetation, and generation. To concu­piscence of the eyes all that may delight the up­per senses of sight and hearing; as gold, silver, chains, jewels, costly attires, dresses, furnitures of rooms, delicious walks and gardenings, mu­sick, applaus of men, and the like. To pride of life, the things that tickle the inward senses and imagination, as great titles, large retinue, offi­ces and command of state, with all worldly superiority. These are the things that inflame mankind to so many combustions in this world; each man thrusting forward and crowding to be [Page 29]first, in that he proposes to himself as the ob­ject of his chief content. The feud began with the world, and will not wholly ceas so long as it lasteth in its present state of corruption: tho it hath been in som times and places much mitigated by vertue of a religion which Jesus our Lord planted upon earth on very purpos to slake this hellish fire.

And it is to be observed that the Tempter (as it is recorded by one of the Evangelists) as­saulted even the very sacred Person of our Lord himself with one of all thes three temptations; according as he thought meet to make chois of som one of each, that might best correspond unto such a conceived person in those circum­stances of time and place he either found or put him in. He found him in the desart hungry; and there, Command that these stones be made bread, as it was a temptation of carnal concu­piscence most befitting the time and place, so is it of that kind such a one as might seem least unbefitting such a person, being of all the most innocent, especially to a hungry man. Upon the battlements of a high church, in the face of a populous city, who might behold and admire at his miraculous preservation and sanctity, Jacta te deorsum, leap down, was a temptation belonging to concupiscence of eyes, in order to vulgar applaus; nor would it ap­pear so manifestly evill to do such a thing in the [Page 30]face of the multitude, who seeing his safety might look upon him him ever after with greater honour and respect, as lord of the very Angels who stood about to guard him in so dangerous a precipice. In the prospect of the world, All these things will I give thee, was a congruous temptation, and clearly pertinent to pride of life; but joined with a condition ma­nifestly sinful, (wheras the two former were but such in lesser circumstances, and of them the first in the least) If thou wilt fall down and wor­ship me, which Satan annexed here, not so much out of any hopes he could have to bring that person to such a sin, whole constancy he had al­ready tried; as to speak forth and express the ordinary way by which men do generally ar­rive unto their height of dignities, wealth and honour in this world: they dissemble, they sa­crifice their conscience, they bow their heads, they fall down and worship Satan, and so take from him their livery and seisin, their haec omnia tibi dabo.

What heats are raised about these things in the world betwixt man and man, in city and countrey, so thick, so general in all places, to set down with pen and ink it is impossible they be so many, and also superfluous they be so obvi­ous. And from whence are all these wars intestin and forreign, domestick and civil, personal and national, be they not from our concupisence? [Page 31]it is not to be denied. And so long as there is concupisence in the world, these things will be, or at least a motion towards them. Nor is it my present purpos to disswade any thing in this kind, after the endeavours of so many thou­sand sacred persons, apostles, prophets and do­ctours, who have both by their example and doctrin endeavoured incessantly the eradication of the sinful weed. But happy is that man in whom the three fold members of concupiscence are become through his care and industry over himself either quite dead, or at least expiring; for he only lives, and lives like a man, and is free.

The other noises (which is the subject and matter of this my present consideration) are the many clashing opinions about God and re­ligion: an empty aiery business as I think ere long will appear, a ghostly fight, a skirmish of shadowes, or horsmen in the clouds: and yet 'tis prodigious to speak what real heart-burn­ings, what deadly rancour it breeds in mens minds, and what a deluge of mischief it causes in the world. It is a thing I have often and deeply considered, not without horrour and commiseration.

The result of my thoughts herein is thus much: surely, there is somthing invisible over man, and stronger and more politick than he, that does this contumely to mankinde, that [Page 32]casts in these apples of contention amongst us, that hisses us to war and battle, as waggish boyes do dogs in the street, which being once set on tear and devour one another, upon no other cause or motive than that impulsion. For how els could it possibly come to pass, that a company of men altogether unknown to one another, in several places, grabs, constitutions; employments, ages, and educations, should all of a suddain, no man knows how rise up con­spire and jump together in a conceit before un­thought of, and to all other men besides them­selves improbable, so unanimous and vigo­rously, as to put all to a hazard for its defence and propagation, will or nill the whole world that may dislike it, with such heat of earnest­nes as is never seen to appear in any known good thing. Can this be any thing els, than an impression made upon us by som invisible sub­stance or doemon; that by this aiery phantosme inflames us one against another unto our utter worrying and devouring, unto whom our deadly feuds arising thereon, may haply give no less content and sport then dogs fighting in the streets to wanton boys that set them on. This we may suspect at least; and if we do, methinks it should make our pens and weapons drawn for the maintenance of our fansy fall out of our unwary hands. And is it otherwayes possible, that any faction in the world should [Page 33]not have the capacity to think, that as they judge and condemn all the world besides them­selvs, so also by all the rest of the world are they themselvs judged: and can they not see it as ridiculous in themselvs to judg, as in an­other whose judgment they contemn, and as easily suspect themselvs, as they do censoriously disesteem their neighbour, whom they cannot but acknowledg to be in other things their equalls, ther elders oftentimes in age, superi­our haply in naturall parts, more eminent in birth and breeding, equally subjects of our common creatour, and haply in all civil respects their betters. Is not this prodigious? and what can it rationally be attributed unto, but some maligne substance invisible, that makes a fool of mankind? Are not men blasted? Are they not inchanted. I should think nothing els can be said for it: and therfore they run and fling, and turn up tail, and snuff the wind, and hoof-beat the earth, and bellow to battle, as if they were stung with gad flies. But let us use moderation, God dwells not in a whirl­wind. If every one would but once begin to suspect himself as in all prudence he may, the business were half ended, and a right under standing very forwardly on.

§. 3. Nullity of title.

FOr the things of this world why men should contend so much, the reason is enough apparent: we live, and our being is supported by them. Nor is it an easie thing, especially if men do not apply themselves unto very serious consideration, to distinguish between things ne­cessary and superfluous, or to know when we have enough.

But that we should struggle so much about opinions, even unto blood and utter ruin some­times of whole Kingdoms, except it be don in order to the things of this world, wherin we labour by such means for a greater share than otherwis would happen to us, or that the wic­ked fiend is in it, no satisfactory reason in the world can be given.

For tell me, I pray you Sir that struggle so much and so earnestly for the propagation of your opinion; What good is it that I should think as you do? Is it for your own interest, or for mine? If your own, I am not bound to serv your fansy, or inslave my understanding to your pleasur; if for mine, I thank you for your good will, but refuse your service. Al­though you may have a thought concerning God or natur, perhaps better than mine, (if I [Page 35]have any) or worth my hearing, if I have none; yet can you not rationally think either that you are bound in justice to communicate it unto me, or I to embrace it? There is nothing but charity to urge you, which is neither obsti­nate nor seditious; nor doth any law of ju­stice oblige me to accept of your favour if you offer it; sith every one stands as free in him­self either to refuse or accept a good turn prof­fered by another, as that other to present it. Will you urg and force me to be of your opi­nion, which perhaps I look upon either as of no concernment at all to me or false? And who made me your vassail? So great a vassail as to command my thoughts; and those too, which are versed not about your self or me, but our common creatour, and his works and provi­dence; which if they be rectified in you by any light to me unknown, enjoy your own hap­pines, I envy it not; leav me to my self as I do you, and do not importunely against the very laws of right reason obtrude a courtesy upon him that likes it not, nor thinks it so. Had you any true charity for me, you would not disturb my peace, which even in your own judgment is one of our greatest goods, for an opinion of yours which you cannot but see to be in my judgment of so little valiew. Let it be what it will, a forced favour is an affront: force but a dog to eat or drink when he has not a list to it, [Page 36]and see but how that very poor beast will take it. Are not you and I worms of the earth both of us, and equally subject unto that sours of light which is above? Why then should you go about to perswade me to take my influence from your body, which is of no less opacity than mine own? You are inlightened, you say, and have received a truth which I want. First you are assured no more than my self that it is a truth; and although you may think you be, one mans word is in this thing I am sure as good as anothers; and if you have received it, and it be such, can you not be happy alone as well in this as other things, or permit your neighbour to walk as well naked of truth as clothes or other necessaries, which you will never thrust upon any, although your self never so much abound and he want: if I do want your truth, my want if it be any harm, it is mine own not yours. But let it be a truth received, is therfore the whole cours and order of the Univers changed? Why may not I have that light if any such thing it be, from that generall superiour caus whence you received it? it cannot be wrought in me with­out him, why may it not by him without you as well in me as your self? How are you be­come of a sudden unto me a star of influence, who was the other day a portion of the same earth and darkness with me?

But now you begin to be angry, that I will not admit of the happines you bring me: and are you so indeed? then by your favour your proposition was made to me not from charity but pride not unto my good but slavery: becaus I am really perhaps above you, ther must be a trick invented to bring me under in conceit; and to captivate his understanding who is in power and ability your betters: thus shall you get a dignity by the shadow of your fansy, where you could not appear by any demonstra­tion of reall and apparent worth. But now grown more wroth, you call me bruit beast, and dog and imp of darknes: and so you break forth out of the cloud you walked in, and the sheepskin broken, the true face of a wolf is seen; it was pride not charity that spake in you; you offered to give to me, in hopes I should thereupon fall down and worship; upon my refusal you claw me with your curses; a sign that your proposall was not for my good but your own, to work a glory not in me but over me, and to boast your self in my conquest. If you had been born my Prince you could not have commanded my thoughts, do you think by commanding them to make your self one? Content your self. Puffing gusts of new fan­sies under what pretens soever they com (new reason, new light or new revelation in any par­ticular person) are for their very violence to be [Page 38]suspected. When I hear any to censur all man­kind, and to disparage all judgments but his own, I begin then to think worse of his than all others; for true knowledg walks not with universall contempt. If the way be indeed of God, peace and meeknes will accompany it at least in the first teacher. God resides not in tempests, nor does even he himself force mans will. The very Gospel and volum of our Chri­stianity was not thrust upon us, but gently put into our hands upon our own good liking, by perswasion of miracles and words of peace.

I suppose we are severed you and I as well in soul as body; nor is my soul any more than body any part of you; how comes it then, that being so carles of my body which you do see you are so zealous of my soul you see not? You are no more to answer for me herafter in another life, than you eat and drink for me in this; nor partake there more than here either of my weal or woe. But your charity urges you forsooth for my future good, and how coms it then so dead and senceles of my pre­sent. There be many waies of help you might afford me in this life, in order to my welfar in it; if you heed me not in all these distresses which you see and I feel, what esteem can I have of your pretended wellwishes in a state ima­ginary abroad, for charity if it be true begins at home.

I have reason to think that God is as good to me as he is to you, and will afford me as ma­ny helps of light and reason as another: if not, he hath left me at least in my own power to choos my guide, which shall be such a one as I shall judg aforehand to be wiser than my self. All vassailage is against natur, and when any man enters upon it on his own accord, it is up­on some hopes of a foredeemed greater good than without it he could have had; but it can­not be so thought without an imagined prece­dency in the guide we fix upon. Now there is no captivity more eminent than that of the understanding, which therfore is of all others to be most spontaneous and rationall, and with­out either temerity or force; but it is rashnes in me and not reason, to trust my self to the conduct of a man I know to be as ignorant as my self, and destitute of all autority over me in those affaires, without either conviction of reason or motive of miracle; and for him to raise any mutiny against me, thereby to com­pell to the obeysance of his thoughts whom he hath no reasons to perswade, is a force too too bruitish and contrary to all lawes both of God and reason. I may indeed if I pleas sub­mit to your direction: but can I do this in re­allity and earnest, unles beforehand I conceiv more of wisdom to be resident in you, than I find to be in my self? Can any Pilgrim yield up [Page 40]himself to the guidance of a person he has no reason to think more skilfull in the waies than himself is, and if upon his refusall to follow, that person should offer violence and either drag him by force into the way himself showes, or offer to cut his throat for refusall, would you esteem such a directour to be the Pilgrims friend or a thief and robber. Becaus you can­not maister my thoughts and make me a vassail to your conceits, which I am so far from judging rationall, that I cannot but think them both im­pious and senceles, you will therfore take upon you to maister my estate and life: and perhaps only to effect this you pretend the other: what is this but robbery and murder commenced up­on a pretens of charity? There be som theeves in the world that will not assault a traveller, till they have offered him as a preparative to their convenience, the sight of som curiosity to stand and demurr upon: I heard once of an honest traveller who in this manner gave thir­ty peeces of gold for a hare offered him in his journey by a seeming countrey man to buy for his supper, choosing rather against his judgment to make such a market than to dye for his ob­stinacy; but is this a good and commendable violence? Shall we prais these actions or do like to them? God forbid.

You look upon me as an accursed thing with­out the beleef and light you walk by: And why [Page 41]so? What if I think the like of you, for that very fals light and beleef you boast of? If I do it not, learn vertue of me, that so you may the sooner perswade me to com to you for knowledg. And how coms it to pass you do so look upon me? Are you a Christian? So am I. Have you meditated seriously upon the pro­mises of Gospel, and hopes of a future resur­rection? I have don so too: have you lived justly soberly and piously in this world, ex­pecting our blessed hopes in the comming of our Lord Jesus in glory? I do the same; and if I may speak on word secundum insipientiam perhaps more, in mortification more frequent, more abounding in charity, more constant in the integrity of all my dealings, more chast and sober, less intangled in this present world, or any affections therof, more affected to my ma­ker and redeemer, and I am perswaded, that God doth inhabit and dwell within me. Why then do you trouble me? he was of another spirit who said, Siquis aliter sentit, Deus ipsi & hoc revelabit: He that never judged amiss in points of Religion had so much meeknes in him, as to conceit if any one in this or that par­ticular thought otherwis than himself, that God either had or would reveal it him, and so ab­stained from censuring; wheras you condemn all men that think not as you do, who for aught I know think aright of nothing.

The very true beleef and right judgment of things, whence is it, or how come we by it? If it be mans own operation, you cannot tell but that I have it. If it be Gods work, you cannot blame me if I have it not; his gifts are free and dispensed as himself pleases: Am I in fault or do I deserv to be vext and harassed by my neighbour, becaus the Kings majesty hath not given me a chain of gold? Whether he hath promised it or no, I am sure the performance is only in his hand, and my duty being don I can­not in justice be either checkt or beaten for de­fault of the donary, which is to com only from above; and if my King or God detain it, it is a vertue in me to be resigned and think he hath a reason for it altho I know it not; and that I have it not, may be indeed my misery, but not my fault.

St. Paul having severely chid the people of Corinth in his first Letter he wrote to them for their many disorders, and some such like dissen­tions (though in a far inferiour degree) as ours in England be, and their great obstinacy and feuds therupon, with variety of pious rheto­rick upon every subject they so contentiously disagreed in, insinuated at last; that whatso­ever they might pretend for those their various Schismes, from the power and Spirit of God, (even as we here do) yet God was not indeed and really amongst them at all; for God, saith [Page 43]he, is not the God of dissention but of peace: and then he addes a great Oracle, which he left behinde him for after ages, to stop all dissenti­ous feuds that might ever arise in any people about the preheminence of doctrin in Christi­anity, wherin each one may pretend to be chief­est guide. An à vobis, saith he, verbum Dei pro­cessit, an in vos solos pervenit? Did the word of God proceed from you, or unto you only did it com? as if he should have said, you have not reason, you people of Corinth, to stand so much upon your opinions in matters of religi­on, or to contest so hotly about them to your mutuall disparagements and breach of peace, sith the Gospel and word of God neither came forth from any of you, nor yet did it com only to you, that any of you should therby (and otherwis it could not be) presume to be teacher of the rest in opinions and waies they cannot in their reason approve of, unles they should pre­fer your autority before it. Here then is prescri­bed a most oraculous rule, both to know whence the right Christian truth is to be deduced in any matter of doubt, and whose conduct is to be rejected, whatever light or knowledg any one may pretend by way of priviledg, for the ob­taining over other men the preheminencie of a guide or leader. That man or those people who can rightly challenge a power of leading other men in a way of religion must be such and only [Page 44]such, as either the word of God came from, or unto whom alone the word of God came. And it must needs in reason be so; for who should teach us in any science, or resolv any doubts arising in it, but the maister who first shewed it (if any such can be found) or which at first pro­fessed it: I ask then all these our religious duellists, both Anabaptist and Quaker, Pres­byterian and Protestant: Did the word of God com from you, or came it unto you alone? and unto which of you did it first come, that we may adhere unto that party without dispute. He from whom it came, must have the primary guidance over all; and he unto whom it first came, must carry a secondary presidentship over all such as be derived from him; but which of you is it that can pretend to either. That it came not alone to either our Puritan or Prote­stant is evidently apparent, sith by the testimo­ny of the apostle it went forth unto all the ends of the earth: and indeed our own experience and knowledg of severall Kingdomes that be Christian would sufficiently witnes that with­out any testimony at all: and that it came not forth from either of them is as manifest as the other, sith the word and Gospel of Christ was in the world many ages before any of those waies were extant: and the Puritan with all their factions found that word here in England in the hands of the Protestant, and the Potestant it is [Page 45]well enough known wrested it from the Ro­man Catholick, who had lived in it a thou­sand years before any Protestant was known or heard of in the Land [...] and the catho­lick received it from his Papal Pastour or Bishop, the Brittain from Pope Eleutherius, the Saxon from Pope Gregory the Great as all hi­stories witness. Let us take heed then, we incurr not the censur of mad men, for pretending with so many furious quarrells both by tongue and pen and sword a precedency in religion one over another, where according to this great oracle of S. Paul it is manifest that none of us can have any; nay by this rule we cannot have so much as truth amongst us, any further then we are conformable unto him from whom the word of God came, or to them unto whom it first came: and if we make a strict examin, we shall find that they unto whom the Gospel in this nation first came, were not either Protestants, Presbyterians, or Independents; and he from whom it came was one whom all these do hate. Where then is truth, and which of these duel­lists hath the precedency in it? I mention not the the Papist or Roman Catholick amongst the rest; both becaus he raises not troubles but is on the suffering side, oppugned by all opini­asters of what ever kind they be, and defamed and vexed by them all, who notwithstanding upon the same account of religion defame and [Page 46]vex one another, unto the daily disquiet and overthrow of our Kingdom: as also becaus I beleeve he would soon answer the doubt, and by the test of this great oracle carry away the precedency from us all, and we all found to have no more truth in us than we have confor­mity unto Roman-catholicks. Wherefore gen­tlemen I shall never ingage my self in any of your feudes, (and I would to God none els would do it) till you answer me to this my que­stion, which I make to you all in generall, and to each party in particular. An à vobis verbum Dei processit, an ad vos solos pervenit, did the Gospell first com from you, or only to you: If either, tell me which and on what side it is, and I shall be on that; if neither, I can be of no side, to follow it as my guide: for though each party may haply have in it some re­liques of truth amongst other fals inventi­ons (and all truths are not utterly abolish­ed on the sodain) yet can no such party hold forth any doctrin I may safely build upon. That person, or that See, or that congregation from whom the gospel came, or those people at least unto whom it first came legally delivered and not extorted and totally accepted without diminishment, commensuratively unto his mind who sent it, these are the onely persons unto whom of divine right precedency so much be­longs, as all that will be of Christs mystical bo­dy [Page 47]not onely may safely, but must universally follow them. But where this body of men may be, the Pope and Papists from whom and unto whom alone the gospel first came, being by us concluded under errour, is so obscure that I for my part having lost them cannot find out whom I may safely adhere unto in the opinions and practises of religion: sith none of us in England besides them can according to this great oracle of St. Paul, pretend any right to guide his neighbour in those wayes. Wherfor it were good wisdom in my judgment to sheath both our swords and pens, and be at peace, till we can find out a party among us that can make good this canonical title of prehemi­nence; for she that can do it is the onely pure and mother Church, whom all must hear and obey unto: and all other factions that be un­conformable unto that holy Church from whom or unto whom first the gospel came, are little better perhaps then stark naught.

I cannot see then as yet why we should all of us▪ Presbyterian, Protestant, and Independent, inveigh so furiously either one against another within our selves, or all of us against the Pa­pist: or why upon this account any one should be puft up against his neighbour, or hate and prosecute him as an execrable thing; but that we should rather study mutual comiseration, charity and peace.

§. 4. Heats and resolution.

THere have ever been variety of opinions in the world, and considering the diversity of our constitution and complexion will ever still be unto the end, so long as we be left to our selves.

In the small knowledge we have of times past there is enough to certifie the division of mindes and opinions in all ages and places. But it is to be noted that none of these ever submit­ted to another, nor fell into unity by convicti­on of any one reason above the rest? and yet doubtles there was ever som such reason extant. But they rested notwithstanding at length, like boisterous whirlwinds after some ages puffing one against another, well broken, tired and de­caying for want of further matter: but that which never fails is truth.

Nor do I find that they used in former times of old among the Pagans, other weapons of­fensiv or defensiv in the heats of their opinion-wars, but onely pen and speech. Our Chri­stians, those huge eminent professours of humi­lity peace and moderation, are the onely hot­spur opiniasters, and surely the sharpest darers and eagerest fighters for their self-wills and conceits that were ever yet brought upon this [Page 49]worlds amphitheater. And as they show the greatest fury; so do they exhibite the least rea­son of all controvertists upon earth. For, the spirit, the light, the Lord, the word, and such like motives of a new fansy, what can these things signifie between men of the same profes­sion, that pretend all to the same things, but onely this, that the Papal chair being once re­moved every one may advance his own seat in the place: for all are equally infallible, equally resolute and unmoveable in their decrees. Nor does any ever heed the invalidity of his mo­tives, not for the most part understand when he is confuted even by his own weapons; so eager we are and withal impertinent and resolute.

In truth opinions and controversies once rai­sed were never yet allaied by reason, nor ever can be: for the first founder and forger of the novelty being moved thereunto by passion and interest (as in time it proves evident to the world) put on a resolv never to yield, whether he held forth a natural or supernatural light as a weapon of his warfar; and therefor he will onely be tried by his own weapon, and that too shall signify nothing but in his own hand: which is a certain way of victory at least in the eyes of the vulgar whom he seeks to inveigle, and consequently both of interest and glory to himself. And let there be never so many opini­ons, they all overcome.

How shall he be confuted that brings with himself (I mean in appearance and his own pre­tens) the Lord or light, or word or spirit, or tra­dition or reason, with open defiance to the whole world as utterly devoid of all such helps which himself and he alone enjoyes in all abundance? confute him that can. Let truth and wisdom flow like streams from the lips of his opponent, let all sort of rhetorick conspire to his satisfa­ction; if he do not laugh at it as empty sounds and not the true word, as flesh and not spirit, as man and not the Lord, as darknes and not light, as folly and not reason, as humane inven­tions and no divine tradition, let me lose belief for ever. And what end can there be made of such new started doubts? or where lies the de­fect or reason of their indeterminables, but only in the pride and obstinacy of the first prophet and his disciples, who indeed are not such if they be not self-willed and self-conceited like himself.

And this may be the reason of that sage ad­vice the Apostle gives to Titus; Haereticum ho­minem post unam & alteram correptionem devita, &c. An heretical man check him once or twice and then avoid him: for he is utterly subverted and condemned in his own judgment. As if he had said; dispute not with him but check him, if that will do no good avoid him for he is past hopes. But how is such a one condem­ned in his own judgment! and why should we [Page 51]therfor treat no further with him. Namely, be­caus he knows aforehand in his own heart what ever he pretend, that out of malice, pride or other passion he holds forth his novelties, and yet means not to yield or be convicted of it, whatsoever shall be said against him, becaus it would put a lettance to his interest and the un­lawful end he aims at either to be subdued or seem to be overcom.

If there were any true respect in the world or esteem of one another; if every man had but that value of his neigbour which he hath of himself, whereas he hath oftentimes reason to have more) then would all these opinion-feuds either not kindle at all, or be soon extinguished. For although it could hardly be prevented con­sidering humane constitution, but that odde thoughts and various whimsies would rise in the minds of men that are left to themselvs; yet so long as they remained inward without issuing forth to life, or as a still-born child never to walk abroad, all would be well enough betwixt neigh­bours, and charity inviolate amongst them. It were a most happy thing, if the fanatick wombs, and brains of mortals would thus miscarry in the child-birth, and their conceit com forth still-born: and so indeed it would, did not self-opinion midwife it into the world and preserv its life.

But as soon as the mind has once conceived [Page 52]of her incubus, she swells presently with pride, that every vein stretches, and labours hugely to bring forth; the featous babe when it is once out, does so mightily pleas the dam, that it is carried from city to city to be shown; and see the wonder within a small space we have thou­sands of that opinion all ready prest to undergo a martyrdom for the imp; so prone is mankind to delusion. But in the true hous and mansion of Jesus, who is the right and onely splendour of divine glory all this bastardly brood is suf­focated, for the most part in the conception by the spirit of him who resides there, but gene­rally in the birth by the care of government in­stituted and observed in that place: and if the harlot do by her subtilty bring forth and expose her brat to view she flies for it, and the chat­tering moon-calf as soon as they can catch it is stifled.

Ith interim there is nothing brought forth so deformed, but it is hugged and caressed as the fairest of creatures; such self conceit accom­panies all these natural conceptions: go about to convince it to be the seed of satan, and dirt will be thrown in your face; this is the success and event of all disputes in religion: no man will ever be confuted, or if really he be, he will not acknowledge it, not desert his caus; for to seem to be convinced, is to suffocate his interest and glory with his own hands.

When opinions therefor once rise, there is some reason indeed in Power, but no power at all in Reason, either to asswage or stifle them: and if they do multiply, as they are very nimble and volatile, apt to fly and encreas like fire in dry stubble before a strong wind, then power it self is humbled before them as unreasonable and senceles, even as before all reason was esteemed impotent and weak. If princes would seriously lay these things to heart, much of evil might be prevented in a kingdom.

Let any man think within himself what he pleases; thoughts are free and do harm to none, but haply to the spirit of himself: but if once having invented a conceit he go about to compel his neighbours to think as he does, otherwise to bring upon them vexation and ruine; if he be restles till one of these be don, and begin to make signs thereof, as symptoms of an approaching earthquake, then let all men take heed and he especially that sits above the rest, whose care it is to look to the safety of us all, and all our welfare too is involved in the peace and safety of himself.

I have often wondered in my self, that since all mens opinions are their own selfcreated pa­radises wherein they solace and pleas themselvs, why they should not be content to enjoy their pleasures alone, but are restles till they have brought all others in to their garden of delight [Page 54]and made them taste of their fruit. It is not usually so in other delightful pleasures of this world, whereof all men endeavour to make a monopoly to themselvs, if they be more spe­cial delights. And yet after som serious thoughts we may discern a reason for it upon sight of the great pride which their own words and gestures bewray in them. They would be as gods unto men, for whom they create out of nothing so pretty a fansy of pleasure: Another would say, they rather appear like the serpent in the gar­den, discovering more as they pretend of Gods secrets than plain old Adam and Eve ever dreamed of.

Let it be what it will, believe me in this the hieroglyphick is clear; After God hath once setled a Church wherein is the tree of life, if any one neglecting the things which are ordained for his use and benefit begin to discover new disturbing secrets not before heard of in the place, let every one then beware; latet anguis in herba.

§ 5. Motives to moderation.

THree things, if they were seriously consi­dered, would methinks much weaken selfconceit of our own judgments which ob­structs all right understanding in matters of re­ligion.

First is, the great ignorance our state and condition is involved, concerning either God in himself, or his works or providence. This is the first. And if any anticipate and say, that the scripture reveals enough unto us; I answer it is true, if men would content themselvs to use it to that purpose it was written, for to guid our feet in the practise of solid goodness so­briety and justice upon a hopes of future bliss promised to all such as shall be sound so doing in him that revealed it: for this is both the compendium and end of that holy writ, and it is enough. But if not thinking of this, we use it, as now generally we do, to rais and strengthen us in new opinions, for which it was never intended (tho for aught I can see it is the greatest if not the sole use we make of it) then it rather makes our maze greater then lessens it, and through our abuse of it puts us besides those truths and wayes, which otherwise we should very patiently and constantly pursue. Whence are all these varieties of opinions now in England, and the obstinacy each one hath in his own, but by the confident abuse of that sa­cred book, out of which we throw texts as one another, as the old — Tectour Oliver used in his sports to cast carpets and cushions about the heads of his play mates, and in his feasts apple tarts and custards, which were never made for that purpose tho he was pleased so to abuse [Page 56]them for his pastim. Experience hath now taught us clear enough, that the scriptur is a dangerous edged tool to put into the hands of the rude and boisterous vulgar. A compendi­ous narration of the story and morallity of it, so ordered unto solid practis, that it were suf­fered to be used for nothing else (either for dis­putes or jesting conceits) kept our English Chri­stian nation for a thousand years together, so long as it was catholick, in all unity and peace, and rendered them fruitful in all good works; whereas the whole and very text now in this last age put into vulgar hands, together with a fore apprehension and belief of the unmerito­riousnes and unprofitablenes of good works in order to eternal life, unto which forsooth faith onely suffices (which is contrary to the very genius and end and purpose of Gods word and them that wrote it) hath filled the land with so much wretchlesnes and divisions. And who shall interpret the scripture to us, to the end it may guide our thoughts without errour? It self? so som say; but then, if we may guess at the natur of it by the fruits of the interpre­tation we have from it, what a Chaos of con­fusion would it be thought to be; for such be the contradictory interpretations that are all said to come from it: Shall the Church inter­pret it? no this is Popish: and what Church? those in whose hands we found it, or from [Page 57]whose hands we first had it; if the former, they may be as destitute of power to interpret as our selves; if the other, then must we return unto the obedience of the Roman church; for all the world knows we received the gospel first from Rome. Must neither interpret, but onely the spirit and divine light within our selves; this may be it must teach us to know all things; but what is the thing shall teach us to know it? how shall we be assured that it is a spirit or light divine; if we mistake here our pretended light my prove an ignis fatuus and no less foolish the il­lumination by it. If we do not know even our own soul and spirit within us, what it is, how it informs our bodie, how it works in it all those several operations of thoughts and cor­poreal alterations, or whence it comes, or how it is annexed to us while it stayes, why it departs, or whither it goes (as it is certain we do not) how can we judg assuredly whence such or such a thought arises in it, from God above or sensual causes, tho it never so much pretend a divine mission and be transfigured into a shape angelical, or that any spirit or light within us is truly divine and not phantastical. Do not the corporeal spirits inflamed by often beating upon an object naturally hammer forth such odde phantosms in great abundance with­out either order or measure, invested all of them in such shapes as the artificer forged himself, [Page 58]without any other exteriour aid but objective representations, which ofentimes so vigorously represent themselves that from the objects of thought they stand at length in place of the subject thinking. If any one will not beleev me, let him but take the pains to make a jour­ney into Bedlam here in London, Paris, and other Cities, and convers but a while with the mad men there, and then he will soon finde it true? There he shall meet with countesses, cap­tains, bishops, kings, nor real as themselvs ima­gin, but fantastick and whimsical ones; nay some one there will pretend to be Christ him­self, another the Holy Ghost, a third God the Father of all things; and what not? and the fansy too is so strong and prevalent, that the whip may chance at length to beat it out, but all the reasoning in the world shall not do it.

The second consideration to promote mode­ration, and consequently to make way for a right understanding is the sad precipices men have run themselvs and others by their headi­nes and temerarious obstinacy in their opinions and conceits, even to the utter ruine and depo­pulation of flourishing kingdoms, as ancient histories will copiously witness. And if any say, Alas what do you tell us of those men, they were a self-deluded people; Does not the world say so of you? Oh but we know the contrary. Just so said they. O but we cannot be deceived, the [Page 59]truth, the word, the Lord himself cannot lye, heaven and earth may fail these cannot. This was even their very song. O then if it be so, they were in the right too! Then you are not, for they were in many things of a contrary opi­nion to you all of them, and som in all things. Well well God knows his elect. 'Tis true, but you know them not. No not I, why should I not ex­cept I be reprobate? You may be so, walk then in fear. He that hath the light must he not needs see it. If he have it near him he may, so that he be not hood-winked or blinded with a prejudice: and he may think too he sees it, when he has it not; I have often waked at mid­night, and thought my whole chamber en­lightned, but by and by perceived it was only the glimpses of some natural luminous spirits not in the chamber, but under my own eye-lids which was a vanishing and false light; and not at all in the place I took it to be. You may as well say as much of the apostles and prophets them­selves. I may so, and would do it without any fear at all, if I had no other motives of respect to their words than I have to yours. Com, com if the truth be hid, it is hid to them that be lost. Be it so, yet still the question will be, whether I be lost or you, whether you or all mankind beside.

The third consideration is, the genuin and connaturall excellency of a good Christian [Page 60]man (whether we follow reason or autority in deciphering it) which consists not in finding new wayes to the reformation of other mens thoughts, but putting in practise the old re­ceived well known dictates of sobriety justice and piety in our selvs, with submission unto the direction of such as delivered them unto us from that one Lord we all worship. Oh but men have swarved from those wayes. Let them; they shall bear their own burden, do not you swarv and it shall be well with you: themselvs and such as were set over them (as I know you are not) shall render an account for those lost sheep, whiles you are safe and being innocent have no account to give either for your selvs or others. O but the zeal of the Lords hous doth eat us up. Good, let not that zeal of yours eat the Lords hous up, and all is well. Away away we cannot abide bishops and priests and copes and surplices, they are very beams in our wayes. It is is a sign of a weak and ill-affected eye, not to be able to look upon any thing. You shall not be burdened with the wearing either of the vestments or titles; and the meer seeing should not be methinks so trou­blesom. And yet late experience hath made it evident (whatsoever tendernes you may pre­tend) that you are able to bear upon your selvs even that you pretend you cannot look upon at a distance: which is an odde kind of riddle. [Page 61]The office of a priest and bishop (which you say is onely to preach) together with his state and means; this you have not onely born very tamely these years of our confusion but earnest­ly thrust your selvs into it. And is it not a strange tendernes to sweat under a burden which another man bears, and not to be troubled at all when we bear it our selvs, nay to thrust our selves into it? their copes dislike you in the Church, but in your own houses they make a goodly fine show, and their very surplices pleas you well when they are next to your own skin. What it was that the fox fell out with the lovely grapes, it appeared afterward when they were seen griped so greedily within his teeth; the only caus of his dislike and vehe­ment invectivs against them was (and a shrewd one it was) that himself could not come at them. Nay, nay 'tis the Popery, 'tis that we dislike. If the fox could have spoke, he would have called those grapes popish too; for now adayes all that stands in our way, and all that we would undermine, and cannot immediately reach, we cry out upon as popery; which is a sound so inflames the vulgar ears, that they all flock together at that alarm against father and mother, Prince and neighbour, Church and state without any further consideration, to the assistance of that cunning wag who by that so taking a stratagem raised a publick help for the [Page 62]working of his own design. The Popery you say you dislike: This you may do, without disturbing either your own or other mens peace: there be a thousand thinks I dislike every day, as I walk along through London streets, which no prudence dictates me to check or seek to rectifie. It is not the custom of a traveller (and we are all pilgrims upon earth) to cut up bushes or lop hedges that hang in their eyes as they pass; but peaceably to go beside them, without further nois, or disquiet; and if any should do otherwise, he would be looked upon as a mad man, and haply run himself into jeo­pardy: but what if popery prove at length not to be any evil thing at all, but good and pious, how ever represented to us all this while as odi­ous under the bug bear of that name. I know you will startle at this word; but you would not do so, had you my experience. Christ and his Christianity was long ago by such invectivs and ignominious appellations, made as odious in the world as now it can possibly be under the name of popery: insomuch that of the three, Epicureans, Christians and Atheists (which were generally put together, as a triplicity of abo­mination) the professours of Christianity was ever put in the middle as the most impious of all the three, not only in their lives but in their opinions and beleef; and as such they were dealt with throughout all the Roman empire [Page 63]for three hundred years together whiles that empire was pagan, contemned, pillaged, tortu­red as people of the most wicked profession the earth ever bore: and all Europ wherein there were even then as many great wise heads, and as morally honest persons as ever there were in the pagan world beleeved it; such pow­er hath a popular vogue once raised to the pre­judice of any, especially if autority do con­stantly conspire to their ruin. It is not my pur­pose at this time either to oppugne popery or defend it; for in oppugning it I may chance indeed to pleas som, in defending it I am sure to pleas no body; for the Catholicks although they know in general that by the name of papist and popery their persons and professions are aimed at, yet what their adversary would ex­press by popery when he objects it to them, there is not one catholick in England under­stands. If it be an expression of their religi­gion, they have no rule for that but the gos­pel; if of the superstitions, idolatries, murders, treasons, adulteries, lyes, pride, gluttonies, ge­nerally put upon them under that name, they know no such religion. And if popery should be proved in any part not good, this of epis­copacy and their decent ornaments may be no part of it that is naught: nay whether it be any part of popery at all, not we (who do not know what popery is) but they who profess it, [Page 64]or at least profess a religion that is loaded with this name must judg: and these do not acknow­ledg our Protestant Bishops or any of their rites (if we mean by popery the religion they profess) to be any popery at all. Oh but if it be not popery, 'tis at least foppery, and we will have it taken away. Be it what it will, have you peace within your self; if it be any inven­tion of man, it will moulder away as mans in­ventions do; if it be either instituted or ap­proved of God, who can resist him? Be first assured what it is before you attempt to remove it; and when you are resolved, choose to do it, no by tumult but by wayes of peace. This prudent and honest method of proceeding in such cases as these is well set down by a Scribe or Justice of Peace amongst the Ephesians up­on occasion of the like uproar. There was made a loud cry of all the people saith the sacred text in the Acts of the Apostles, as it were for two hours together crying out, great is Diana of the Ephesians (and every mans opinion is his Diana) and when the clerk of the court, had ap­peased the uproar, he said, Men of Ephesus, what man is there amongst us, that is ignorant that the City of the Ephesians is a worshipper of great Diana and the off-spring of Jove; whereas therefor these things cannot be gain-said, it be­hooves you to be quiet and to do nothing rashly. Ye have brought hither men neither sacriligious [Page 65]nor blasphemers of your gods. But if Demetrius and the artificers with him have aught against any one, the courts are open and proconsuls ready, let them accuse one another there: if ye would any thing further, in a lawful assembly it may be de­cided; for we are in danger to be called in que­stion for this dayes sedition, whereas there is no one man in so great a tumult, of whom we can give an account as authour of this concours. Thus spake that wise pagan, and the counsel is very good in all such cases, whereof this of ours is one. Oh but these bishops do captivate mens con­sciences, and take away our Christian liberty, they would force us to a belief and liking of their wayes. Say you so? then you may shake hands, for you would force them and others to a liking of yours. But we neither can nor will approve of them. They neither can nor will assent to you. They have no reason but their own pride. The alledg pride to be all your reason. The spirit and God that is in us urges us to hate all the works of the devil. So say they, There is no communion with light and darknes, God and Belial: They say so too; you will be friends anon. Blessed is he that hates iniquity from his heart. This is the very subject of their sermons; you are now becom one of their dis­ciples We their disciples? no, we bow not our head to any horned beast. Very good, they like your resolution, and will not therfor bow their heads to you.

§ 6. Obscurity of God.

OF the three abovenamed considerati­ons, which being well imprinted in our hearts I should deem sufficient to put all our animosities to silence, the two last be rather moral then acroamatick to­picks, and therefore to be cast with their fel­lows into the last paragraff of the book. The first which speaks the great ignorance our pre­sent condition is involved, both concerning God and his works and providence, requires a little more explicit discours; and becaus it is a speculation very beneficial not only to the pur­pos I now aim at, but absolutely in it self, and for several uses of mans life, it shall take up the three or four following paragraffs. And if all these things (and religion can be about nothing els but them) both God nature and providence do prove so obscure, as I find them to be, and I think will to all that ponder the matter well, evidently appear; what is then the knowledg [Page 67]we boast of, and of which we are so confi­dent as to prescribe laws every one of us to the whole land, and to bring all into confusion about it.

He that shall think upon God alone, apart from heaven and earth and every what­ever created substance visible or invisible, as in the center of his own all-sufficient eternity, be­fore either earth or heaven was made, must needs be swallowed up, and darkened round about, as if he stood in the center of a world of waters, and for want of a proper idea to fix on melt away in reverence of that all venerable and and sacred being, which is an unmeasurable and boundless ocean of wisdom power and good­ness in himself: And altho he may have much improved himself by the frequent study and meditation of the subtil books Christendom hath brought forth; yet shall he find himself so infinite short of any satisfying knowledg con­cerning God, that he must conclude himself to remain still in the wondring side, and to know nothing. Whensoever I think of that first Esse we call God, both S Thomas and sub­til Scotus and all writings or conceits of men fail and fall short, and help me little or nothing, no nor any scripture whatsoever: they seem all to speak something about God, nothing of him, indeed they cannot. In this our earth and exile we have no words to express him, no [Page 68]notion to conceiv him as he is in himself, no idea to represent him; which perhaps is the reason moved subtil Scotus to teach, that our divinity is not speculative but practical, lest it should be a science that signifies nothing; for love of that divine object makes up all.

Our Lord is verily a hidden God, saith one no less piously than truly; hidden in himself and essence, hidden in his works, hidden in his providence, hidden in his own life and being, and hidden too in all his emanations and the egressions of eternity. Nor can any created being in the highest pitch of all possible excel­lency naturally approach that unaccessible pre­sence in his state of pilgrimage and mutability. The discovery of himself unto them is their bliss; it is their condition supernatural and fe­licity of glory.

What then can poor man a worm and dust, in this his state of sin corruption and darknes presume to know of Him, whom no invisible creatur or the highest angel can pry into even in the highest excellency of his spiritual condi­tion, out of his state of immutability and bea­titude. No man can see God and live, and no angel can see God and dye: for the vision is inconsistent either with our mortality or their state of probation; we must be elevated above our mortal life, they exalted from their condi­tion of mutability by that vision once imparted. [Page 69]God is an abysse of beatitude reserved onely for the infinity of bliss in the state of eternity, where new ravishing wonders and extasies and joyes shall spring up from him without end, to the daily fresh beatifying of all those spirits that shall be thought worthy of that glorious never failing day.

Nor is there any way left for man to reach this infinite abysse but by affection. The will of man is far longer winged than his understand­ing, and love will find access where knowledg cannot approach. For tho it be true that an unknown thing cannot be loved, yet may a man love more of a thing than he knows, and fasten his affection upon that thing in particular; whereof he hath but a general and confused ap­prehension: Thus I may love a mans person whom I never saw and consequently know not, by a report of his goodness or sight of his hand writing, which love will embrace the per­son himself tho it be guided by no more know­ledg then that of his words or gesture or writ­ten conceptions: so God represented unto us under the general and metaphysical notions of an infinite substantial ocean of goodness wis­dom and power, from whom do all things flow, by whom they subsist, and in whom fi­nally they end, the first caus eternal immense omnipotent, the best and greatest, creatour and conserver of all that is or can be, substantial [Page 70]wisdom and sanctity, immutable, hater of ini­quity and lover of good, the beginning and end of things, essential truth and light and life, the very being of all beings, the solace of all spirits, and sole beatifying bliss and the like; tho this and much more said of him as notions adjacent and metaphysical properties of that eternal and ineffable essence suffice us for our knowledg of him in this world, yet is all the while that great essence from whence those pro­perties flow unexprest and utterly hid, and God still in his particular and specifick entity and un­known God to us: and yet notwithstanding God or that unknown essence is supereminent­ly estimated adored and loved even in his very individual being by that spirit who will think of him and love him as he ought, even in this very state of our exile, corruption and darknes. So far extended so ingenious and quick is love, that a very small sparkling of knowledg if it do but show her afar off onely the outward fron­tispiece and battlements where the beloved dwells, will enough suffice her for a guide to throw her self into him bosom.

This great God and immens spring of life and being, if he be compared to the univers and whole creation consisting both of the millions of invisible spirits and the great machin of this visible world, he will be found as the only substance, and all things besides him a thinne [Page 71]shadow; he solid entity, and the great univers in comparison of him but a meer show, far more differing than the body of a hous or tree, and the shadow thereof in the Sun: and there­for high contemplativs have called the world a vanity, a lye, a shadow, a non entity; and so indeed it is, compared with God wherein all being is subsistent in its substantial primogenial perfection: It must needs be so; whereby we may see, how deeply the sensual and carnal men of this world are deceived in their judg­ments; whilst they look upon this world and the things of this world, especially that part of it they use for their pleasur and delight, as things of true real and solid substance, but God the authour of all as an aiery flying fansy, taking the substance for the shadow and the shadow for the substance: so grosly do we de­lude our selves in our conceits of God, and for his good deeds towards us dishonour him in re­quital. But the inveiglement of pleasures brings us below our manhood and makes us think like beasts.

The obscurity of this most high God and his unaccessible light (not to use any further argu­ment than what is vulgar and before our eyes) will be made more than manifest, if we do but cast our eyes upon the sons of men round about this globe of earth our selves inhabit, and their various both inquests after him and conceptions [Page 72]of him. If men could do this one thing ex­actly, all further pains of implanting in us true humility instead of pride, amazement in place of arrogance, fear in the room of presumpti­on, self denial in exchange of that prodigious self-confidence that abounds and rules in us might soon ceas. Who is he that dare presume in any way of his own invention when he con­siders (as very true it is) all mankind so many several wayes in all ages groping after a deity like so many blind men in a vast plane, by the help not of eyes (for who can discover or see him) but of that pittiful reed of weak imagina­tion. And are not all these equally his crea­tures? do they not equally show their love in seeking after him? have they not at their birth equal right to his favour, which before they were born they could no wayes demerit. And how then can infinite goodnes so neglect, infi­nite wisdom so far unheed, infinite power so desert this poor wretched worm, that very fain would love him, would be very glad to find him, would think it a happines to serv him, and for this end seeks after him so incessantly, so variously, and by reason that he is a hidden God so fruitlesly as he does. In this perplexity remains mankind, till there appear a prophet or teacher to each nation who may direct and lead them. But when this happens, how much is poor man the nearer? There be haply as ma­ny [Page 73]several prophets as there be nations upon earth (for though two or three nations may fol­low one, yet some one nation hath two or three) and all these equally pretend to be di­vine, tho their laws and rules and religious rites be not only divers but oftimes opposite. What can we think when we contemplate this? where is truth, and how shall we have it (sith we can­not find it out our selves) if not from the hands of such as pretend to come from God? And yet they cannot all be true: which then is fals, and who is true? is there any way in nature to know it? for all establish their own way and honour by all inventions possible within their reach, somtimes by miracles (which their own disciples believ tho others deride them) often­times by visions and prophecies, generally by a show of sanctity, with a concours of threats and promises both present and future to the vio­latours and observers of their law. And there­for if any be true, as it is but a surmise to think it, so is it a meer chance to hit it; which is ge­nerally done by birth, or casual circumstance of perswasion. Besides a religion once established be it true or fals (when it is once received it is then taken for true) in the space of some suc­ceeding ages is reformed anew by other teach­ers or interpreters, who in time lead men out of the former way into their own; somtimes slowly, gradually and insensibly, that they are [Page 74]brought into another religion before they be aware; sometimes by open hostility to the for­mer, which whether by covin or violence yields at last to the ingres of a new one.

This is the right case and business concerning religion in the world: people still being vehe­mently bent upon that they fasten upon, tho haply it be quite opposite to the former, where­in both themselvs and forefathers lived. Such is the miserable instability of mankind; which is a sign, that God and his truth, (how confi­dent soever men may be) is ever hidden and in-evident; for men do not use to depart from evidence: let Philosophers dispute never so subtilly to prove snow is black, they will get no followers; a contrary evidence detains even them that cannot tell how to answer their ar­guments from a submission unreasonable. Nor is there all this while any one sect upon earth but condemns all other wayes besides his own which he no less admires than he disesteems them; yea separating from a former religion to another either in all things opposite or a part onely, men are apt to inveigh as bitterly against that now, as then they did against this, and with equal confidence of truth in both places. Where then is truth, and who sees it? Is not God indeed hidden? does he appear at all to any; for although all say they see him and his truth with their eyes, it is evident enough by [Page 75]the mutations both personal and national that be made in the world, there is no such matter (from God and from truth no man does wil­lingly depart) as also by the opposite professions of it with such equal confidence, that it is not in the power of any man to say of himself as­suredly where it is. Archimed had an opinion that he could move the whole earth, had he but a place out of the earth to set his foot on; and so must he who shall judg of this contro­versie stand in some place a part, where he may oversee all, not interested in any, in a word he must be out of the earth? nor is the atheist a fit judg, although he may bear himself for one; for as none can judg of men but he that owns such a thing as humanity, so neither can he give any plausible judgment of religions who ac­knowledges none: nor yet is it an easy thing to pluck up the general connatural seeds of religi­on implanted in mans spirit, and sprouting forth rather into the profession of a fals religion than none.

Who dare then presume of his knowledg, and what motives has he in himself to do so which another wants: Be it scriptures, prophe­sies, visions, light, or inward assurance; boast of what you pleas, all the earth will do the like, and with the self-same confidence. For let Phi­losphers speak what they pleas of the certainty of object which som men have over and above [Page 76]the certainty of subject, I am not able to con­ceiv how an objectiv certainty can stand with­out evidence, or how it may consist with that mutability I see to be in the world; for men do depart as well from a good religion (where­in they would have to be certainty of object) as from a bad one wherein they allow only a certainty of subject, which is nothing but a personal self-willed resolution in their wayes.

Since men therefor do thus abound all of them in their own sens, haply without sence (if a thousand voices may be of force against one single one) how does it behoove us if we would be truly wise to walk all our dayes not in dis­putes and disquietness without end, but in hu­mility and fear. But som will say, all this is nothing to us, since Christ our Lord hath re­vealed to us both God himself and all necessary truths concerning him, of all which we may be confident. But stay a while and ponder what I have already spoken; do not all nations say as much for themselvs. What then! should we doubt of our faith in Christ? no in no wise. But I must speak a bold word: these very dis­sentions of ours about that faith in its branches so hot, so various, so extravagant, are apt to inferre a suspicion of it in its very root: are not hundreds in our own countrey become atheists already upon that very motiv? and these men supposing substantial change once made in reli­gion [Page 77]and deliberately admitted are rather to be commended for their wit than blamed: for they do but that sodainly which all the land will will come to by degrees. If the Papist or Ro­man catholick who first brought the news of Christ and his Christianity into the land, as all men must needs know that have either heard or read of Christianities ingress into England or other countreys and kingdoms (for we do no sooner hear news of Christianity than Popery, and his crucifixes, monasteries, reliques, sacri­fice, and the like) I say if the Papist be now be­com so odious as we see he is, and if the faith he brought and maintained a thousand years together, be now rent all asunder by sects and factions which bandy all to the ruin of that mother religion; if all her practical truths wherein chiefest piety consists be already abo­lished as erroneous; does not this justify the pagan whom this catholick Christian displaced to make way for his own law: And must not this be a certain way and means to introduce atheism, which naturally follows that faith once removed even as a carkas succeeds a living body once deceased? for one truth denied is a fair way to question another, which came by the same hand, and this a third, till the very autority of the first revealer be at stake, which can no more defend himself than he can his law; for the same axe and instrument that cut down [Page 78]the branches can cut up the root too; and if his reverence for which all the rest was beleeved defend not their truth, it must needs at length utterly fail in his own. For all the autority they had was purely from him, and he falls in them before he falls in himself? no man can deny this that shall seriously lay his hand upon his heart, and ponder things as he ought. And he that once ceases to beleev in Christ whom before he worshipped, I am sure he will turn atheist if his wit and reason proceed consequently and beleev nothing. A little more to specify my meaning: If the institutions of monasteries to the praise and service of God day and night, be thought as it hath been now these many years a supersti­tious folly; if Christian Priests and sacrifices be things of high idolatry, if the seven sacraments be deemed vain most of them; if it suffice to salvation to beleev, what ever life we lead; if there be no value or merit in good works; if Gods laws be impossible to be kept; if Christ be not our law maker and directour of doing well, as well as redeemer from ill; if there be no sacramental tribunal for our reconciliation ordained for us by Christ upon earth; if the re­al body of our Lord be not bequeathed unto his Spous in his last will and testament; if there be not under Christ a general head of the Church who is chief Priest and Pastour of all Christians upon earth under God, whose Vice­gerent [Page 79]he is in spiritual affairs; all which things are now held forth by us manifestly against the doctrin of the first preachers of Christianity in this land, then say I paganisme was unjustly displaced by these doctrins, and atheism must needs succeed; for if Christ deceived us upon whom shall we rely; and if they that brought us the first news of Christ, brought along with it so many grand lyes, why may not the very story of Christ himself be thought a Romance? And erunt novissima pejora prioribus, the latter condition of this land under atheism (catholick faith once utterly extirpated) must needs be far wors than it was in paganisme before it was planted. Far sweeter is that body, put case a statue of stone that was never animated, than is any carkas of man after the soul is departed. And are not we in a wood now? who shall lead us out? The maze is made greater by the con­sideration of the multitude of sects now reign­ing amongst us; all which as they do unani­mously conspire against that catholick Church they have deserted, so do they wrangle now about every thing wherein they first agreed and conspired against her, hating and execrating one another even unto war and bloodshed, and the utter desolation of our distressed nation. Quid est veritas, and on whose side is God all this while? does he not lie hid, and say nothing, and leav us wholly to our selvs by a judgment [Page 80]unsearchable in these our affairs, even as in other courses of this world: Ith interim all opinions utter fine words, all presume of them­selvs, all are peremptory, and censur not only their neighbours but even the whole earth round about. Where is truth? here saith one; nay not there, but here quoth another; nei­ther there nor there, but here saith a third: but so many heres and theres sounds nothing to a rational man but either every where or no where▪ and which to conclude, is impossible for man of himself stedfastly to resolv. Here is Christ and there is Christ in the judgment of Christ himself signifies neither here nor there. If they say saith our Lord, here is Christ or there is Christ, do not ye go forth or follow them: and the reason is very good, for the true Church wherein Christ really resides, is ever in a posture of quietness and defens. But they that go out of her and set up new wayes of their own are ever in clamour and dissention, which of them should do it best; and the cry is heard aloud and without ceas, Here, Here. Christ is here saith the Protestant, and not amongst the Papists; nay quoth the Presbyterian by your favour, he is Here; nay then sayes the Anabaptist, Here he is; if you be at that, quoth the Quaker. you are all blinded men, if any would find the true light com to us; for here it is and no where but here. But when all is done truth is not in di­vision [Page 81]but unity, not in sedition and clamour but meekness and peace. If ten men stand ga­zing in a street, and all agree that they see a thing there, but disagree all in the description of it, a stranger coming by will rather guess they are all mad, than that they see any thing at all. One thing I am sure of; if all men would be humble minded and sober, and cast out of their hearts the great prejudice they have taken up against one another, they would see the better for it.

To conclude this subject (for I would say no more than what may help to lop the vain and superfluous excrescencies of faction and dissen­tions about religion which perhaps none of us do rightly understand, and would be loth to cut the tree it self to the quick) it may appear suffi­ciently by what I have said, and yet far more if we joyn our own experimental knowledg and ratiocination of further things which I do pur­posely omit, that God is in himself an un­searchable abyss, and his essence and counsels past finding out; nay he is the great primo ge­nial and father-abyss of all others not to be ap­proached by angels or men, but according to such few exteriour conceptions himself hath ei­ther revealed or imprinted in them, which be far from reaching home either to his counsels or proper essence. And who hath been his mate or counsellour that he should tell us news of [Page 82]him never heard before. If any news there be of him, it is surely to be had from Christ, whom we beleev to be his very substantial word and the splendour of his glory; and if Christ hath left any secrets of him to be revealed unto man­kind, we must have them from his Church, which is the pillar and foundation and treasury of all his truth; and if any Church is to be con­sulted, I should think it should be that, and only that which by an uninterrupted succession hath descended from himself, which is that ve­ry same that first brought Christian religion in­to this land, which without all controversy is the Catholick, now by contempt surnamed Pa­pist; and if any one be otherwise minded, etiam & hoc Deus ipsi revelabit. In the mean time let us be peaceable and sober.

§. 7. Obscurity of nature.

THe second abyss is that of Gods works, and the whole creation, which all men that have considered it aright find unfoardable: and if any have not, let me crave his company a while but in a slight survay of this wondrous fabrick, and then tell me what he thinks.

When we confider those myriads of intelli­gencies, angels and spirits, and the whole intel­lectual world, the first exteriour issue of divine [Page 83]brightness; we are not then much nearer ap­prehension of any thing in particular than in the first abyss; what they are, either for sub­stance, or place, or operation, or extent of pre­sence, or knowledg, or power, or motion or order, or any thing els in particular.

In the visible world we begin a little to find our feeling, and know at least where we are; but not much more. Here we see a wonderful face of things, but what els? what is the basis on which all the frame stands, and how is it set­led upon it in its various and stupendious moti­ons? the order of things little or nothing ap­pears; their essences altogether unknown; their properties, dependances, and mutual connexion obscure; their limits and vigour and duration and influences doubtful; their motions uncer­tain; the mode, method and chain of operati­on utterly hidden. And what is it then we know? wherein consists the excellency of our science that we should boast our selves, and contemn the world? and what are we able to determin in the truth of these things without uncertainty and errour.

This our ignorance of nature is sufficiently insinuated and evinced in that solid piece of mo­ral-divinity in sacred writ commonly called Job from ch. 38 to 42. It were worth my pains to insert here all that eloquent discours. But be­caus the Bible is in every mans hand, he that [Page 84]pleases may read it there at leasure? And al­though Doctor Brown say in his Vulgar errours (as I remember) that the difficulties of nature there propounded will now adayes be easily an­swered by every puny scholler; yet those words of his be unwary; both becaus those intricacies of the creation are there propounded by no less a person than almighty God as insoluble and not to be dived into by man: as also be­caus the Doctour if he consider right cannot but know, that he that were able to give a full satsifactory reason even of the smaller things in nature as the winde or rain, would be able to tell what weather it would be or what wind would blow every day in the year in any part of the earth until the worlds end; so sure and fix­ed is the whole frame of nature: But such kind of puny schollers the world never yet saw. And although man sees and knows enough in nature to make him admire and adore the Authour, yet not to contend with him in questions and re­plies about it. The whole world is an immens intangled gordian knot which the wisest of men could never yet untye, or discern the intermin­gled series of the many voluminous causes con­catenated therein.

Even the progress of a poor plant from its seed to its decay, who can declare or conceiv it? so many several seeds both of plants and animals, how do they shoot forth so orderly in­to [Page 85]their parts and organs, peculiar each one to themselvs? where lies that celestial particle in the little seminal origen, which is the spring of life and motion in every thing? In the first pri­mogenial sours how is distinguished either kind from kinde, or part from part in the same kind; and which is that part that is to run forth into the head, and which into the arms, and how is it done? I see wheat and barley, elm and oak, hors and man to shoot up constantly each one from their own seed, in their own proper and pe­culiar mode and method; and perhaps an angel or intelligence may distinctly see the reason of all in the very seeds, (for som reason is certainly there to be seen) but what man can do it? how comes such variety of bulk, parts, odour and colour unto flowers; there is a reason it must needs be so and no otherwis than so; what is it? Be there, put case, a thousand plants upon earth, much mineral and metal within it, huge variety of birds and fish, and beasts about it, what is it we know of all this, from the egge to the apple. If the earths semidiameter be three or four thousand miles, what lies hid in all that vast bosom? Do the seas meet in a cen­ter, as well as close in a surface? what preservs this vast globe of earth in its huge entrails that it rot not, and tumble all into putrefied heaps, and we with it? what rivers run hurrying under ground, to and fro crossing one another in seve­ral [Page 86]depths of earth, like veins in the great massy body, whence com they and whither do they go? Pursue the river of Thames to his first ori­ginal, and tell me how far it creeps under ground before its appearance; and whether it proceed at length from som greater subterrane­ous channel like a small artery from a vein, and whence that underground channel it self pro­ceeds; and if from the ocean, from what part of it, and how and where, and whether all ri­vers that appear in our hemisphere fall to us by som secret passage under earth from the seas of our antipodes.

How comes the crumbling earth to be made to flow in tenacious liquid streams, so rare and yet so strangely compact, that water even in a bottle can hardly be crowded nearer. What is the true nature of air, and the etherial limits: The earth and sun which of them moves about the other? and why within the limits of the zodiaque. What is the order in that camp of glory over our heads? are the stars like the stones in the street, without any rank as they seem to our eye? and what are they? holes in a solid firmament where the glimpses of glory above dart forth unto the eyes of mortals, or solid bodies themselvs, and all suspended in li­quid air as our earth is: and what sustains either our earth or them? what shoves them on so equally in their cours? do they move daily [Page 87]through all that vast expans, so that they must necessarily fly so many thousands of our miles in one hours space as we conceiv; or is that er­rour ingendred in us by our own motion either upon our own or the worlds axletree? what creatures live there: or be there in the univers no other corporal intellectual creature but man in this our earthly system, to serv contemplate and bless that infinite holy one who is the con­server and caus of all things. A man of him­self might easily doubt it: for it makes more to the glory of that great blessed Being, that he should be enjoyed praised and served in worlds innumerable, under innumerable degrees of perfection, by creatures, intellectual of several modes constitutions and excellencies, rather than onely in this one world of ours; a world of known ignorance and darknes, a world of sin and malice, that probably may lie under som unknown malediction (it knows not his own weal, and as little heeds it when it is known) a world of much naughtines, and so far alie­nated from God and true piety and peace, that Origen seems not irrationally to conceit it to be a hous of correction for offendours, delivered up for som space unto the prince of darknes (not much beside the fansy of good S. Paul who was as good a philosopher as divine) to inveigle harrass and plague us for a season.

This book of the creation or volum of [Page 88]Gods works is a noble and most excellent bible, opened to us here on earth altho in part only for our exercise, being intellectual indeed but the most infantile intellect that can be imagi­ned, opened I say to us to look on, as little children upon a primer, whose letters they see but know none of them, nor yet their connexi­on or end; to other more excellent corporeal creatures in the stars above (if any there be) for further understanding and knowledg, and to incorporeal intelligences for a more absolute ap­prehension. But our looking upon the world is not to be meerly sensual and exteriour, as a hors or a cow looks up to the sun, but a sa­vory and affectionate speculation (if we will have it a humane action) our want of know­ledg being supplied by love, in admiring that power whose works we see indeed but cannot comprehend.

Hence it might not irrationally be beleeved, although religion were silent, that the soul of man is surely immortal; and that an intellect such as mans is, being admitted by his creatour to a rational sight of his works (as all know ours is, and the bruits is not) shall at length he translated unto some better state of more per­fect and comprehensiv knowledg both of his works and providence and essence too which here we cannot attain. For so we use to put little books into the hands of our infant chil­dren, [Page 89]when they can make little more use of them than a bruit, to accustom them to the outward sight of that they shall afterward in their riper growth more fully understand: but we do not the like to young whelps or fawns, altho at their birth they seem far more mature than one of our slavering babes, becaus the na­ture of such creaturs will in no state be able to reach the knowledg. Hence I say may pro­ceed a suspicion of our souls immortality, which is afterward strengthened by religion and philosophy. The beasts of the field see nothing but their food; but man sees, that is, considers and admires all things visible and invi­sible; I mean in his human life and operation: for man is so set in the horizon of eternity and corruption, that he may betake himself unto which life he pleases either human or bestial; and it is in his power either to make himself a beast or angel; this, by superiour and intelle­ctual; that, by inferiour and sensual propensi­ons thoughts and operations: but with this dif­ference, that a created angel or intelligence shall still have a greater amplitude of intellect by precedency of nature, and exacter clearnes of thought by segregation from all matter, but a made angel or the spirit of man angelized, may have notwithstanding through the difficul­ty of his combate a greater crown of glory and comfort at the feet of his maker.

§. 8. Item.

NOt to wander from my purpos. The gulf of the creation is indeed but a secondary abyss and nearer to our feeling but far from our comprehension: sith we neither know the nature of those visible bodies we behold both above and below us, nor the manner of their first rise when they started out of their ancient nothing, nor their dependances one upon an­other, nor their motions, nor the limit and extent either of the elements and stars, or of all the univers together.

For is the world finite! where ends it? in the highest stars? who can tell if we were there, but that our eye should still discover other new glittering systems at as great a distance from us then, as these be now; and so forward without end. If we imagin an edge or outward rim of the univers, let us conceiv (as it is not im­possible) that a man were set there and preser­ved in his being; where should his head be? out of the world, and no where? could he there think or speak or put forth his finger or cast a stone, and all this in nothing, and beyond the whole univers; can an imaginary thing be as capable of reall action as naturall place? Is God really there beyond all this univers, or no? [Page 91]if not, then must he be limited to the extension of his works, and his immensity as much confined as they: if he be really there as he is here, I can­not see but that it is as reall a place as this wherin the world stands, namely if we take place not according to the definition of Aristo­tle, ultimum continentis, &c. (which descripti­on provides well for the placeing of a hous or tree, not at all for the univers which according to that description is in no place at all) but ac­cording to the true and genuin nature of place, as it is the immovable basis of a body penetra­ting and penetrated by it; for this is the true reason of primary absolute and essential place; whereas Aristotle describes onely that which is secondary, accidental and relative; essential place is naturally before any body placed in it, accidental described by Aristotle must needs be after some body, being a relation of the con­taining to the contained body. And lastly if the world be finite, as mans understanding is more prone to think (becaus of the incongrui­ties in reason apprehended in a supposal of infi­nity not indeed to be grasped by mans intellect) who can say where the incongruities be greater? about an infinite something, or an infinite no­thing? if the world be finite in its real being, the imaginary or no being must be infinite; where also, it is as possible for Gods unlimited power to place worlds without end, as he hath [Page 92]done this here. Who dare say he cannot do it, who can say he has not done it. This then is absolutely uncertain unto us as we are left to our selves and not to be defined by man. Nor do the reasons produced by philosophers against the worlds infinity inferre any greater absurdi­ty, then a finite world inferrs, perhaps less: and if those reasons be well pried into, we shall finde that generally those philosophers endea­vouring to show the absurdities of a real cate­gorematical infinity which we cannot grasp, do notwithstanding so argue against it as if they had grasped it; which is a great and ordinary fallacy in all their arguments against infinity ei­ther of time or magnitude. I intend not here to maintain any thing but onely this, that our reason left to it self can certainly make out no­thing.

Those innumerable shining lights we behold in the firmament there glittering and twinkling without ceas, S. Austin doubted if they were not beatified bodies wherein glorified creaturs might have their residence in bliss: and we may doubt it still for aught I know. Were those huge bodies of glory in their several stations and magnitudes made onely for us to sleep by? we can mean no other, when we say so confidently, that all the whole univers was made onely for our use? For our use, I doubt not, some part in one kind, som in another; but to say or [Page 93]think only for our use, the use we now make of it is in my mind but a weakish fansy. The sun moon and other planets we know som use of; but of the stars in the firmament, little or none at all, but onely for our wonderment. What needed so many for our use? why of that divers magnitude, sith candles all of a bignes would have been both more handsom and convenient: why in that uncouth scituation, that the great­est wit can make no more of it, than childrens imagination of phantastick shapes in the clouds: why thousands so obscure that hardly discernable, and likely thousand others seldom or never seen by us at all. And what is the use we have of them? do they make our sleeps sounder, or our dreams more or less? do not the beasts of the field, especially those of prey, make more use of them than man, who is com­monly going to bed after the sun, when the wild beasts go forth to their prey by starlight: and amongst men the better any one is, the less use hath he of the stars; for the drunkard theef and adulterer do their works generally by night. The greatest use I know we have of those glorious bodies, is to rais us up to a devout contemplation of that invisible and almighty Being, from whence did issue so many visible glories of himself: for to say those firmament stars serv for the effecting alteration of states and kingdoms, translation of empires, [Page 94]wars and peace, civility and barbarism, religion, deluges and the like, is a meer ungrounded con­jectur; sith all these things might be sufficient­ly promoted by the inferiour planets and con­cours of others causes for aught any one can tell, without any star in the firmament at all: and yet even those uses are but very small and incon­siderable for such vast bodies to be only ordain­ed for, if truly asserted. One use is certain, to rais us to the meditation of things invisible, and to lead us up by degrees, (even as themselvs are seated one above another) like so many greeces in the ethereal expans, unto that hidden Be­ing who is the caus of all. And this is for us who have all our necessities otherwayes sup­plied use enough; but he that therefor thinks they have no other use in themselvs becaus they serv us in this, is but yet in his young thoughts and sees not beyond his own untutoured ima­gination.

For considering that those glorious bodies are even in our demonstrated and uncontrouled reason as exessively more specious and beauti­ful, so also far greater than our whole globe of earth wherein we live, even twenty sold some of them and upwards, why should all those vast capacities be in vain? Why may not we rather think intellectuall substances resident therein with bodies more and less refined, in degrees and modes and fashions to us altogether un­known, [Page 95]who might chant out the praises of the almighty One, in measures answerable to their condition without end? can this seem to any man unreasonable? so the ancient wise men among the Pagans, Democritus, Pythagoras, and several other great Philosphers conceived, for the greater honour and glory of the first caus: and shall they be more zealous of Gods glory than we; or shall we Christians be the onely hidebound Philosophers in the world not able to conceiv any thing beyond the eye and imagination of a child.

The eminent french Philosopher De Cartes conceited the twinkling stars we see and innu­merable others we discover not, to be in their ranks and places, as so many suns in the firma­ment, about which move Planets or bodies unto us here▪ altogether invisible, except we either rise higher or they descend towards us in their motion, warmed and vegetated by their fires as we by our sun; If it be thus, as well it may for aught I can know of my self, what a strange consort of hymnes and praises rise up in the univers, continually and without ceas as in­cens, in several keys of musick unto that great holy One who made us all, to supply the defects of those small pittiful services we poor worms perform unto him, in this our earthly system! This may seem far more rationall thank to think that we gross corporeall creatures and sensuall [Page 96]sinners, are the only people in the univers who serv the almighty, and that all those eminent bright shining systems above us, whose order, method, properties, bulk and nature is so ob­scure, are there set and appointed for nothing else but onely for our use, which we cannot yet say what it is; and when we have imagined our utmost, is not of the value of any one star in the firmament; or that bodies of their vast ca­pacity should be utterly empty and have no creature at all within them.

I should of my self be so far from think­ing that the stars of the firmament are onely for our use; that I should doubt whether the very elements amongst which we live and breath, earth, aier, and water, and the beasts minerals and plants contained in them, are one­ly made to serv us, tho chiefly intended for our benefit. The very gradual perfections of na­ture hath in it self a worth and decency be­seeming the Creatour, tho man had never been? And if all had been onely aimed for our use, would not a less sea have served our turn, and fewer birds beasts fish and plants. What use have we of all the great depth of earth under us to the center, or larg vast aether about us. And if we were such absolute lords of the world as we conceiv our selves to be, how is it that nothing at all in natur is at our command? not the sea, not the aier, not the earth it self, [Page 97]nor any thing upon it or in it, will either come or go, or alter, or stop his course at our plea­sure: which King Canutus observed well, when standing with his nobles by the Thames side, he perceived the tide to rush upon him, altho he had commanded it to com no nearer. What kind of vassails be these inferiour natures under man, that will obey us in just nothing? Besides, when any one is absolute maister of a hous, wholly destined to his use, surely such a one can go and com into any room thereof without controul; but let man walk down either into the bottom of his seas to see his fish there, or into the cel­lars of his earth amongst the mettals, and tell me if he be not stifled as soon as other crea­tures: But if he once attempt to mount the upper rooms of his habitation, tho it be but into the first or second region of the aier, he shall fail at the very first step; for his ethereal greeces will not bear the gross unweildly bulk of their Lord: so ill is the house fitted for the maisters constitution from the very top to the bottom. Can we not honour and bless God for the use he hath lent us of all these things which is great and various, but we must by the vanity of our hearts appropriate and monopo­lise the univers to our selvs, as if it were for no other use at all but ours.

The manifold use and services we have of the stars and elements, beasts, birds, fish and plants, [Page 98]which do all administer unto man in somthing or other, according to the exigence either of his necessities thence to be supplied, or his corporal delight, or mental speculation to be furnished from that great body, which the di­vine goodnes therefor made before man that in the first instant of his being he should want no­thing, ought to make us thankful but not proud. And so the holy prophet, admiring the excellency and perfection of place that mankind by his creators goodnes hath over other visible creatures amongst whom he livs; and the various uses he hath of them, doth in one of his sweet psalms invite man thereupon to magnifie this his great benefactour, who set him in so high a place when he needed not to have put him in any: and if man do so he shall do well. But he must not appropriate more to himself than is given, or instead of being thankful for the dominion he has received, vain­ly conceit a dominion he has not.

Aristotle fansied our earth to be the center of the Univers, and the stars to be a sift essence differing from all the four elements placed in the circumference: but the great wits of the world that lived before him, Pythagoras, Em­pedocles, Anaxagoras, Democritus, Epicure, were of another mind. And although our Christian Schoolmen have now for five of six hundred years explicated and defended the prin­ciples [Page 99]of their religion even in the way of Ari­stotle by which for a thousand years it had been opposed by the pagan, yet do they not intend to mix his philosophy with those principles of their faith: nor does the great Christian Church therefore canonise his philosophy for truth, be­caus she suffers her own truths to be declared and explicated by it. If Christianity be true, it fears no antagonists; but will bear the test of any right philosophy: but yet philosophy that it may be right indeed, must be corrected and or­dered by this divine truth, as well as this explica­ted in som things by it. And if another Christian philosopher should explicate his faith now a­fresh, in the way of Democritus or Pythagoras, as in the first times of the Church it was declared in the way of Plato, and in these latter ages by Aristotle; so he do it piously and warily, and square not his rule of faith by them, but them by it; I cannot see why it may not commenda­bly be done. But then as he does use those ex­plications to satisfy a pythagorean or epicure­an; so must he confidently reject as dissonant to right reason, what he finds unapt to square with the received truths of Jesus Christ, as we do now deal with Aristotle. This if it were done; as Christian religion will be justified, when it is perceived to stand with the right rea­son of any Philosophy: so likewise when an­other Philosophy contrary to Aristotles is once understood, all the whole univers both for num­ber, [Page 100]weight, and measure, its essences, relations, concatenation, origin, life, and qualities would hang as loose, suspence, and doubtful as if no­thing had been ever said of it. Aristotles rea­sons will make Democritus and his disciples doubted: and again, the great learning and subtility of Democritus, Anaxagoras, Epicu­rus, Empedocles will as much disable Aristotle; and the doubt may be as pregnant among Chri­stians as other men, where the catholick Church interposes not the autority of some received tradition to cast the scales. But whether she do this or no, is not to my purpos now in hand, who intend onely to insinuate unto such as mul­tiply opinions about religion both without and against that Church, that even nature it self is vastly obscure and unknown to man who lives in it, and nothing in a manner, but only what enters our senses, can be so certainly known and concluded by any, that he may prudently either swagger or fight for his opinion. And religion and the things of another world must needs be yet more obscure than those of this.

It is observable, that Christ and Moses, and other holy Apostles and Prophets, when in their discours they touch incidentally upon things of nature, (their chief purpos being ever to teach the way of vertue and true piety) they comply oftentimes to the capacity and judge­ment of the hearer, what ever it be. So Christ our Lord told us, that at the finall day, the stars [Page 101]shall fall from heaven, insinuating by that amongst his other expressions, the great distur­bance of nature then to happen; wherein co­mets, which the vulgar calls stars, may shoot indeed, but the Philosophers stars cannot fall upon us out of the firmament, except all return to the old Chaos, and one System mix with another. Moses calls the sun and moon the two greater lights, and the stars of the firma­ment the lesser, altho contrary to philosophi­call truth, when he intended to declare un­to the people that have vulgarly such concepti­ons of them, that sun and moon and all the other stars and planets were created by that God he revealed. The Psalmist under the si­militude of an Eagle which renews his youth, expresses moral renovation; which he might well do, sith men had so fansied of the eagle, whether indeed he do so or not. The like com­pliance was used by him, who told the people that the stars in their ranks fought against their enemies, in which phrase he insinuated Gods providence in battles, condescending to the peoples imagination, who looked upon the stars as a pitched field of champions under the Lord of those hosts of heaven to defend the inno­cent. Thus leaving us in the same imagination about things of nature they found us in, they endeavoured all of them onely to chalk us out the right way unto that felicity, whereof the [Page 102]knowledg of these and other wonderments of Gods power shall be the least part; by serving him as we ought from whom have issued pro­digies we shall never know in this life, and who is himself the wonder of all wonders onely to be seen and known in the other.

Having seriously perused the Schools and learning of the ancient Pagan Philosophers, this I finde, that their disciples however conceit­ed of their demonstration and knowledg, did ra­ther beleev than know any thing: and the first maister invented himself (properly speaking) not so much a philosophy as faith. Take Ari­stotle and his School on one side; Democritus and Epicure on the other: these two schools were mainly opposite both in their principles and whole body of learning. And yet none that understand them well can tell by any strength of nature or force of their arguments, which of them is with truth. According to learned Democritus and Epicure, all things began in time by a fortuite concours of atomes, which in all eternity filled the immensity of space; and as these made the world, so do they by their incessant mobility work continually insensible alterations, till after long time they fly all asun­der again, and make casually another world ei­ther here again, or in som other part of the immens space, quite of another mode and fa­shion unto this; so that matter upon this ac­count [Page 103]is all and does all. According to Aristo­tle the world had no beginning, but partiall ge­nerations daily, wherin form gives the act and essence, and matter is so far from being all, that it is but a pure potentiallity and prope nihil, al­most just nothing. These were the opposite principles of two differing Philosophies. But were they known or evident to either of the maisters? If they had sought for an argument to prove them, they had laboured in vain: one therfor conceited that matter was all things, the other that matter was nothing, &c. and upon this conceit which nothing but the auto­rity of the maister to whom they would ad­here, fastened upon the disciples, they raised a Philosophy, which being thus founded upon a human faith or fansy, all their follow­ing ratiocinations could never effect that it should be rather called knowledg than beleef or fantosme.

And this is the reason why the ancient Chri­stian Priests grave and learned men, who had entertained an esteem of their maister above all mortall men, would never give way that the articles of Christian faith should be tried by the principles either of Aristotelian or Epicurean beleef; and since the disciples of those men would adhere so firmly to fals and indemonstra­ted principles of human teachers, they thought it much more reasonable that they should hold [Page 104]constantly what they had received from a di­vine maister, and not submit to the test of such ungrounded inevident and contradicting prin­ciples of men as much opposite one to another, as all perhaps to Christian faith, even Aristo­tles philosophy as well as the rest. What more assured pillars be there in Aristotles school than these. Ex nihilo nihil fit,

• 2. quod incipit esse, desinit esse.
• 3 quae conveniunt in aliquo tertio, conveniunt inter se.
• 4 accidentis esse est inesse.
• 5. ex duobus entibus in actu non fit unum.
• 6. à privatione ad habitum non datur regressus, not to mention others.

And yet those catholik priests perceived well enough, that Christian princi­ples were contrary unto these, and these to them; the first to creation; the second to the souls immortality; the third to the Trinity; fourth to the Eucharist, fifth to the Incarnati­on, sixth to the resurrection.

Some ages after rose our Christian philoso­phers (whom we commonly call Schoolmen) and raised a fine piece of art upon Christian principles defended and made good even in Aristotles way. And these, becaus the fore­named and such other Aristotelian axioms car­ried a plausible appearance of truth in the ear, they did accept them indeed, but in a sens of their own; so that they do not in this Christian school make out that sens they did in the others, though they bear the same sound. And it is [Page 105]pretty to see, how one and the same axiom is made in several schools to butteres up waies that be destructive to one another. God made the world in time saith the Christian, and none but he could do it; for it is not in the power of any creature no not of the highest intelligence to make a thing of nothing, for ex nihilo nihil fit, of nothing is nothing made, namely by the power and force of nature, though it may by God the first caus; so speaks he. The world is eternal saith Aristotle and could not be made in time, either by the meeting of atomes, for their concours is disorderly and casuall, and opus naturae opus intelligentiae, nor yet by the first caus himself out of pure nothing, for ex nihilo nihil fit, of nothing can nothing be made, ei­ther by God or nature, The world is not eter­nal saith Epicure, but made in time without the assistance of any deity; which if any there be must be ever at rest, out of the eternall matter of ever moving atomes; it must be made ei­ther of them or of nothing, and ex nihilo nihil fit, of nothing can nothing be made; and the same atomes by their own connaturall mobility do make and marre, do and undo all things. In these and a thousand such like contests that employ the world, does not a credulity once fix­ed fill up both the pages of the book? and all consequent ratiocination, disputes and argu­ments, are they any thing els but colourable ex­plications [Page 106]of this fore-conceived inevident cre­dulity? Since then all sciences stand upon som one or other basis of beleef, (which is a postu­latum not to be examined) this world may in­deed be esteemed credulous but not knowing: and all maisters of any whatever schools have equall need to set this motto over their school doors, Oportet discentem credere. He that will learn must beleeve; and when he has learned all truths can be taught him, he does but only beleev that he had learned any. And so I take my leav of this second great abyss of nature.

§. 9. Obscurity of providence.

THe third and last abyss, is the great gulf of Gods Providence in the government of the world, equally as deep and unfoardable by man as the former, (tho we may sometimes perceiv some little glimmerings of it as an owl of the sun, but even these are uncertain and doubtful) and it is so much the more perillous, than either of the rest; for that in the other, and in particular that of his works we follow Gods power wisdom and goodness, so much the more admiring all things by how much the less we understand; but in this we are apt to call every thing in question, and our thoughts if they be not well bridled ready at every turn to [Page 107]accuse God and plead against him and cite him to judgment, to the peril of his heavy displea­sure. And therefor he did very cautiously and wisely, who finding a doubt to rise within him­self concerning providence, subscribed before­hand to Gods inerrable justice, before he would enter into any parly about his proceedings, Ju­stus es Domine saith he, Just art thou O Lord, but why doth the way of the wicked prosper.

Is there any man lives upon earth from the lowest hinde to the highest philosopher, that hath not perceived the depth of providence, and the absolute inscrutability of Gods wayes in the government of the whole creation, as a gulf without bottom where resignation adores and presumption drowns. My thoughts have frequently hovered upon the shore of this ocean, but I durst never pass further on, than so far as I saw ground, there dipping my hands and feet (to follow God and pray) but no fur­ther: nor did I ever receiv from any writings of discours of man any satisfaction therein: and none I expect.

For what are those immortal laws God hath fixedly prescribed, either to the earth elements or stars, which they never transgress, who is it can tell? They are many no doubt, and vari­ous; in order to him the first caus, in order to the several things contained within them, and in order to one another; for they must all make [Page 108]up one great Pan or univers, be it never so big. And all things doubtles within the whole body of this univers, are don regularly truly and just­ly, according to the prescribed idea rule and measure, the will order and law of the first caus disposer and governour, who is the way truth and life to all the whole creation.

What the angels know hereof cannot be cer­tainly conjectured, nor whether any one be ab­solute and universal overseer under God of the whole visible creation It may seem not improba­ble that if any intelligence stand limited to the oversight and guidance of any one place, put case our earth or a star, that he may not know the laws of another no further than they con­cern his own system; nay perhaps not all the laws of his own, but such onely as himself is to mannage; for even some of these which con­cern him not to use, may lye covert in that great will on whose revelation every intellect de­pends: and thus a miracle may be wrought by God almighty, even beside or contrary to the cours of nature which is administred by angels. But man, he knows none of these laws, no not any; let him exalt himself never so much in his own vanity, he knows not, I say, any of those rules by which either the whole univers or our own earth and elements are governed.

Man is of a certain the highest creature visi­ble upon earth, and the most excellent species [Page 109]known to our eyes; but who can therefor say there be not others above him, more knowing and more powerful than he, and more conver­sant in the government even of this our visible world, tho they appear not to our sight. We have indeed a preheminence of perfection but not of operation over any thing in nature; which is a superiority natural not moral. And therefor in all probability there must be som creatur over us with both the precedencies, far more perfect then any under them, and guid­ing also the motions of all well known to him­self; if namely God have committed the ad­ministration of this present world unto any other under his own influence and ordination. St. Paul seems to conceit that these spirits are evil ones, whom he calls rectores tenebrarum harum, but there must be good ones too, to moderate the ill influence of those malign agents, or els man that lives upon earth is in a sad condition.

But as for us, what do we know of all this for certain, or what can we do? we can neither rais a wind nor any other meteor, nor asswage the sea, nor still an earthquake, &c. not only destitute of power to do it, but also of know­ledg how it should be done. There be many creaturs under us, that is to say, inferiour in perfection of nature, as birds beasts and plants, but they are not under us at all either in directi­on [Page 110]or subordination of motion. We neither teach the birds to build their nest, or to ingen­der or provide for their young, or put forth the wing to flight, or to appear and hide themselvs in their season; nor the fish to swim, to get food and defence against annoiances, or to choose their resort and stations in the liquid main, or those several wayes they have for multiplication and livelihood; nor do we put the fansy into the bee or little ant to work their tasks in season, with the art and industry they show in it; nor do we move the plants to their growth and ripenes, nor do we know our selves how these or any other things in nature are wrought: Thus destitute are we of any rules of providence whereby this world is either set or kept in order; that we neither prescribe them, nor see them observed, or do our selves understand them: we are neither called to ad­vise for the ordering of the being of things un­der us, or is our help required for their conser­ving, or our suffrage demanded for the putting a period to their existences.

And are not we in the mean time goodly ru­lers and disposers of the world, that have nei­ther hand in the making or guiding of it. I knew once an innocent that took a fansy in his brain, that he was master and disposer of all the bur­dens that came up in barges and lighters by a river that ran through the town, and would [Page 111]constantly be upon the bridg at the hour they were to unload, where standing very serious and attentive, as soon as he saw the porters to carry forth out of any barge a burden of coal or corn or other provision, he still bad them aloud and with autority to take it, and carry it that way which he saw them inclined to go, and all the day long he was never disobeyed. Such masters and governours are we of this world, with power to bid a bird to fly, or ant to creep, or wolf to run, or heavens to move even as we see they do; and so we are obeyed and no otherwayes; nor no otherwayes do we know either what they will or ought to do. We do indeed feed upon som creatures, we either en­snare or which stand tame to our hands, and tirannize over som others, subjugating them either by subtilty or force will they nill they to our yoke: but this is no more than the beast fish and birds do to one another.

And as for the ebbing and flowing of those several events and accidents that be proper only unto man, as peace and war, wealth and pover­ty, arts, policy, religion and the like; what a labyrinth is he in, that enters into considerati­tion of their varieties and causes, the ends and motives of them. If religion be a thing so ne­cessary to our salvation, how is it that our good God left the gentiles for so many hundred years all over the face of the earth, to walk after the [Page 112]errours of their mind, in the blindnes and darknes of their understanding? what had they done before they were born to deserv it; and if they be so dealt withal without desert, how does Gods justice appear. And again, if a par­ticular religion be not necessary, for example the Christian; why did Christ our Lord put those poor harmles men his apostles to so many labours, necessities, and dangers of death, to plant it in the world. And how comes it, that even this religion now revealed and preacht in the world makes so small progres, and brings forth so little fruit among us. Why should the Turk and his alcoran cast forth the only true re­ligion out of all his Territories, where it did once so gloriously triumph and fructifie, Syria, Egypt, Africa, Greece, and heresies and schisms out of other places.

The assurance of our own souls immortali­ty would conduce not a little to the exciting of our dull and drowsy spirits, unto a more quick and lively care of our future bliss; and so dull we are and doubtfull of all things, that it were almost necessary we had it, and yet we are, God wot, so far from that, that we even doubt our selves, whether we our selves have any thing immortal in us: nor is there left an argument in reason to convince us of it? Is it not a strang thing that man the most excellent of creatures upon earth should be so left to his own dispo­sition, [Page 113]to turn and swarve as he pleases, either to right hand or left, and by that means to fill the earth with injurious disorders and enormi­ties of sin, which might as well have ever re­mained innocent and peaceable, and all other creatures both above and below us, go on order­ly in their cours prescribed by their maker with­out any irregularity or deviation. Does not every good maister of a hous, keep his whole family in order if he can and know how to do it? And God wants neither wisdom power or goodnes, that he should be either not desirous or ignorant or not able to make all actually good: What chain of causes known to man may unriddle these things

Are not all things in daily change both to Kingdoms in general. and each mans particular person, both in matter of fame, wealth, power, and other accidents? But how do all these things happen as they do: what is the immedi­ate caus efficient, what the final, where doth the justice appear? Histories tell us of little else but warres, battles, desolations, deluges, tran­slation of empires, the rise and downfall of kingdoms in their power, renown, and civility; alteration of states and lawes, succession of deepest barbarisme to most high civility, and a­gain of most exquisite civility unto horridest barbarisme, mutation of languages, pestilen­ces, oppression and liberties of people, &c. By [Page 114]what lawes of the almighty are all these things ordered, and what justice infers such heaps of misery upon feeble mankind; especially since we see even with our eyes that all invasion which sets afoot the greatest and most oecumenick changes is generally unjust?

If we do but only consider the horrid turmoils, that have been at times in our own countrey by the Romans and Brittons, Brittons and Saxes, Saxes and Normans, Scotch and English, the two houses of York and Lancaster; nay but the meer troubles of these last twenty years from 1640. to 1660. whereof we have been specta­tors and sufferers, (nor will there any pen be able to set down the miseries we have undergone) wherein rebellion prevailed over loialty, dissi­mulation over truth, tenant over Lord, subject over King, even to the murdering of that sa­cred person by a pretended form of justice, in the face of the world, without any caus exhibi­ted against him, but only his own defence a­gainst their rebellion, and the depriving his loi­all subjects of their estates, liberties and lives, souldiers all the land over hovering daily over our heads, like ravens over sick and dying bo­dies, &c. What justice, what providence ap­pears to us in all these things: Are we not as blind as beetles to discern it? The iniquity of man we understand well enough, but Gods ju­stice in so ordering or permitting it, who can [Page 115]discern? and yet there is doubtles a reason in heaven for all.

What distinction appears in this world be­twixt the just man and unjust? save that up­rightnes and honesty for the most part goes to the worst. Is it not a mystery, that so many innocent souls, persons of most exact vertue and good conscience, both towards God and man, should walk up and down many of them hungry and half starved, traduced and comfortles, of whom the world is not worthy; whereas the slightest of men, even vanity and sensuality it self vaunts it in silks and fulnes of all plenty.

I should be infinite, if I should specify the in­numerable uncouth changes and chances in this world; all which carry no reason or equity at all in their forehead. The stories of empires and kingdoms from the beginning of time to this day, the records of all provinces, the lives of all particular persons in the world, are all but little draughts and epitomies of this great amazement; all whose causes since they be so utterly unknown to us, that we can discern no reason or right for them, it appears that we know of our selvs as little of this great abyss as of the former. And it concerns us, I should think, not to be puffed up as generally we are in our opinions, but to humble our selves (wherein consists our greatest wisdom) before the great creatour and governour of the world, [Page 116]as well in this as other secrets altogether un­searchable, and say; Surely thou O Lord art just and wise and entirely upright in all thy wayes, altho we worms understand it not; for shall not the judg of all the world do right. Shall not he do right himself that judges and pu­nishes every creature for their iniquity and wrong. This is an abyss that hath in it not on­ly amazement but danger; and therefor I leave it more willingly.

Thus God both in himself, and works and providence is a triple great abyss, altogether un­searchable by man; as we may in a manner see by all has been hitherto said, and much more to that purpose reserved to thoughts and medi­tation. But the more to strengthen my asser­tion, I will conclude this matter with the addi­tion of autority, which coming now into my mind I cannot totally omit. To the unsearch­ableness of the first abyss, which is God in himself, that great prophet attests, who pro­claims him to be a hidden God, a God that hides and conceals himself, God saviour of Israel; and no less that grave Apostle; who professes of this great God, that he inhabites light unac­cessible: though it be light, yet whiles it is in­accessible light, we are never the near to see it. To the unfoardablenes of the second he sub­scribes that was esteemed the wisest of men; to the other one of the holiest: The wise man [Page 117]speaks thus. Vide afflictionem quam dedit Deus filiis hominum, &c. I saw an affliction which God hath laid upon the sons of men, that they should be rackt in it; he made all things good in their time, and gave up the world to the dis­putation of men, that man might not find out the work which God hath wrought from the beginning even to the end. Men talk and dis­pute of Gods works: but what is the event? to find out somthing surely, tho it be but little; nay, nay, if we may beleev wise Salomon to find out nothing even just nothing from the be­ginning to the end: and who would not wran­gle and disturb the whole univers, about such disputes as these, where opponent and respon­dent conclude nothing: And that the world might not think this speech of his to be hasty or less considered, he repeats it again after­wards: Intellexi saith he quod omnium operum Dei nullam possit homo invenire rationem eorum quae fiunt sub sole, & quanto plus laboraverit ad quaerendum, tanto minus inveniat▪ etiamsi dixerit sapiens se nosse, non poterit. reperire. The holy man of the third abyss, which is of God pro­vidence and ordination of things, speaks thus: O altitudo divitiarum, &c. O the height and depth of the riches of the sapience and science of God, how incomprehensible are his judg­ments and his wayes unsearchable! Who hath known the sens of our Lord, or who hath been [Page 118]his counsellour, or who first gave unto him, and retribution shall be made: for out of him, and by him, and in him be all things, to him be glory unto endles ages. Amen.

And all that I have hitherto said about our ignorance both of nature and providence is but in explication of our B. Saviours antecedent in his argument to Nicodemus: and to close up my whole discours I finish all with his syllo­gisme: If you conceiv not saith he terrestrial things when they are spoken, or propounded to you, how can you think of your selves to comprehend celestial: and so say I.

§. 10. Help.

NOr are we much helped either by Plato, or Aristotle himself and many hundreds of his disciples and our masters, who have fil­led the world with their philosophical discour­ses, in this our speculation. After a thousand questions and disputes wittily raised, nimbly handled, prolixly discussed, resolutely deter­mined, and strongly guarded against all opposi­tion of argument; after our whole courses of logick, physick, and metaphysick well penetra­ted and understood, our heads indeed we find a little stuft with strang and uncouth words, which is the outward rind and bark of know­ledg, [Page 119]but real science where is it? what do we yet truly and certainly know of the many things God hath made or done amongst us? Even so little, and in so small a manner that without of­fence we may call it nothing: And so must every one acknowledg, except he will pretend himself to be wiser than Salomon. And the business of religion must needs concern either God in his own nature and properties, or his works, or providence; in all which things we are of our selves equally ignorant, as well he that advances his way with passion, as he that defends himself; as well the opponent as re­spondent; and the advantage, if any there be, is precisely on his side that exceeds in humility and resigns himself to some greater autority than any private mans can be.

Let us therefor be sure we are in the right, before we whet our indignation about it against our innocent neighbour: and since we can ne­ver find that out of our selves, let us never strive against him with passion, but either discours with a sweet charity and moderation, or els leav him altogether as he is in his own thoughts, which for aught I can know of my self may be true and good; his reasons tho not to me yet to an indifferent arbiter may be equally per­swasive with mine own, and perhaps more ef­ficacious, and on both sides but topical places at the best, if both opinions be personal and [Page 120]stand alone separated from all autority extrinse­cal, whence they should receive a further and more prevailing power: for no demonstration or uncontroulable science is to be expected in this world by such poor worms as we, about ei­ther God or his works or constitutions: and whatsoever is said, be it asserted never so pe­remptorily, may by the same or semblable grounds be as stoutly contradicted. What then can we do better or more consonant to the darknes of our present condition, than to have peace with all men, to judg none, to suspect our selves and commend the innocent intention both of our selves and others, unto that al­mighty goodnes, who having placed us in this world of darknes will expect no more from us than lies within our reach and power; and if any thing be such 'tis a rational resignation and quietnes.

As several opinions have been advanced and maintained in the world, maugre all opposition of word or pen, without any the least totter­ing or fear of yielding on the defendents side, so am I assured that any whatever opinion ei­ther old or new and hitherto unheard of, may be defended against the reason of all mankind joined together against it, if but resolution and contempt of the opponent go along as ge­nerally it does with him that is respondent and defender of it; whether he guide himself [Page 121]by reason, authority or other light: if he go by the first, no reason but his own shall be ad­mitted for reason; if by the second, his own autority shall be cast in to counterballance to any autority brought against him, and his own be it what it will shall be of force, all others against him either not genuine, or impertinent or corrupted; if by the third, what should any one go about to talk with him that will be jud­ged by nothing but a light which is onely with­in himself; who as soon as he is opposed pitties the ignorance and darknes of his antagonist; for such he peremptorily concludes all men to be, that gainsay his judgment which only he deems light. And well then may any one defend any thing when nothing can convincingly be pro­ved against him; either through the inevidence of the matter, or self-conceit and obstinacy of the authour. In the interim every opinion con­temns and is contemned; and in that state will it remain, till long time and that mutability which laies hold on all things make it to expire, if there be not som speaking oracle unto which both parties will submit.

I need not for proof of this invincible perti­nacy appeal unto the antient Philosophers, none of whom could ever be brought to yield unto the others, though they were all great ma­sters of reason. Our present controversies in England, which proceed for the most part upon [Page 122]autority, and yet by no autority will be laid down, may sufficiently justifie my words. And all this happens by the unnaturall coupling together of darknes and passion, little knowing ignorance and all presuming pride, self-conceit and folly, which though they be as dissonantly put together as the ox and ass in a plow team, yet are they, so unhappy is our condition, sel­dom or never asunder.

Indeed he that is truly learned in theologicall affairs, who hath read all histories greek and la­tin that may concern Christianity from its first beginning to this day, perused the councels tho­roughly, well understood the ancient fathers, maistered the subtile schoolmen, and so pene­trated all the books of the Bible that he is able to resolve logically every treatis and discours thereof into its final scope: such a man may haply discern, where the truth lies in a dispute between two sects or men grounded only up­on tradition or autority, if it be in one or per­haps in neither of them, although for default of learning or excess of passion they may nei­ther of them discern it. But yet notwithstand­ing if he, even that knowing person shall let his mind walk on yet further, and call that ve­ry autority to account, as in natural reason well he may; how it came hither, where it resided in every age since its first being, who first autho­rised it, and what sufficient ground he could [Page 123]have so to do, what marks it may exhibite that it is indeed the off-spring of such a father un­der whose name it goes, or that he erred not whoever he was in that particular who either first wrote or afterwards transcribed it, (and the transcribers may have been some thousands of indifferent affections and capacities) whe­ther nothing in reason or other autority may gainsay it; whether the words in the original character by some art or other, (whereof there be tricks good store) may not speak another meaning, or at least by some trope or scheme of rhetorick be otherwaies interpreted, &c. then I say even that knowing person shall find himself in a mist, and so thick a one too, as that except he rely upon the autority of some li­ving oracle, whom in these and whatever such like things without further question or doubt he may beleev, he shall never be able to get out of it. Especially if he dive yet further into the secrets of providence concerning such things; and question first how divine goodnes should permit the world to wander in darkness and in the errour of their waies, so many hun­dred years without that truth so necessary as it is reported unto mans salvation; how a com­pany of ignorant men who are ordinarily trans­ported with their own fansies as oraculous visi­ons should be chosen to be our maisters in it: how these should be so particularly inspired, [Page 124]and never any since them though of the same profession; nor yet they till their maister was departed, if ever they did presume or give out any such thing, for in their writings we do not find they did; one indeed saies of the old Pro­phets that they were inspired, but speaks not any such thing either of himself or coevange­lists; and although the maister promised after his departure to send them his Spirit to teach them in his place all things they were to know, yet does it not thence follow that they wrote no more nor otherwaies than they should; be­sides many appearing contradictions and other humane infirmities that seem ever and anon to occurr unto a critick judgment, as well in their writings as other mens, might easily move one to think that those illiterate men might as well fail in somthing, as all holy fathers greek and latin, and Senatours of all sacred Councells since Christs time, professours of the same Christianity and pretenders to the same Spi­rit have in some mens opinions erred and failed in many, namely all things wherein we finde them to gainsay us. And indeed we do in effect deal little otherwise with the apostles writings, when we give a pe­remptory interpretation to such places as gain­say our opinions, quite contrary to the express words and the natural sens they be apt to make out unto us, according to which all antiquity [Page 125]understood them, adjoyning withal our own natural reasons why the text cannot otherwayes be true, but only in som trope or figur though we cannot our selves tell what; for example the places in gospel that plainly speak forth the the real presence of Christs body in the Eucha­rist; which is no other but to say plainly thus much: If that writer let him be Evangelist or what he will really meant as he spake in his story, he is not to be beleeved against the plain expe­rience both of our eyes touch and tast, and so many improbabilities if not impossibilities of reason; and Christ himself either spake not in that manner the Evangelist uses, or if he did he could not intend to affirm that which neither he nor God himself can make good. Nor will we grant any thing to Christ but what we can do our selves or understand at least how it may be don. If there were upon earth any speaking oracle unto whom all parties would submit in these affairs, disputes would soon end; if such a one be excluded or denied, the very rising of them is as ominous as the blazing of a comet or coming of a whale into a river and portends great disturbance and desolation. The world had that fearful apprehension, when they first beard that Luther would shine with his own light and defy the stars of heaven: But they were more than assured of much approaching mischief when they once understood that Cal­vin [Page 126]had left the Roman Sea to show himself and domineer and sport in the fresh waters of Geneva.

§. II. Reason.

WHo shall then set up himself for a guide to his neighbour in affairs of religion, which must needs carry an obscurity far above all that is in nature; and how and which way will he do it, that a good disinterested judg­ment may approve of his pretensions! There can no other way, whereby any should now afresh, after Christian religion has been above sixteen hundred years profest in the world, set up himself a new extraordinary directour, be thought of or imagined; but either som high inconfutable reason, internal special light, or purer interpretation of formerly received Scri­pture? And what man is there in the world can now wisely begin to pretend any of these things to the disparagement of the rest of the Chri­stian world.

Reason carries the fairest show, and seems most civil and manly; and if it lean upon prin­ciples of faith formerly received, it may do much good for the strengthning or securing of religion in weak beleevers; but then it makes not saith but supposes it, and must know with­al, [Page 127]and if it be right reason cannot but know, that all argumentations are answerable, which if they rely upon obscure suppositions, may ac­cording to the height of the maisters conceit pretend much, but can prove nothing irrefra­gably. Did religion com at first by reason? or must it only begin now? A good beleever can­not but think, that Christ the great maister had a reason for what he taught; but he must be­leeve first, before he can think so. and altho he had a reason himself, yet since he taught us none, we can have from him no other reason but his autority, and this may be beleeved but not evidently proved: for his miracles record­ed and not seen, are as pure an object of faith as his autority and person: nay if I had seen them I could not have told my self unto whom the intricacies of whole nature are so much un­known, whether nature and art might compas them or no; and so might I conclude him to be some ingenious person or great naturallist, but not a god. Nor is it likely that Christ ever meant, that reason should frame our religion, both becaus he constituted such men to plant faith, as were not any maisters of arts; and if reason had been the business it had been fitter to send them about the world to learn than to teach; as also becaus himself, though he did oftentimes with subtil and most rational argu­mentations confute the Pharisees errours, yet [Page 128]did he never by any reason that I can remember establish his own doctrin nor answer to any Quomodo though he was often put to it; but still when the Jews demanded How can this or that be, How can man forgiv sins, How can this man give us his flesh to eat, he repeated again his own assertion and doctrin, and might perhaps confirm it by miracle but he proved it not by rea­son. And it was very fitting, if so be he were such a person as we beleev him to be, that he should be taken upon his word, and not stand to give his vassails a reason of his will. If Christ our Lord had been no more than an ordinary wise legislatour, yet could he not rationally intend at once both the unity of his Church upon earth, and the guidance of all men in it onely by reason of their own; for my reason is not his, and may well prove contrary as well to it as that of my neighbours; whence will result together not onely not one religion, but also no religion▪ whiles one neighbours reason differs from another, and perhaps both from Gods. Wherfore wise and holy Church hath in all ages both forbid her children to dispute their principles of religion in the sense they had re­ceived them, and also refused to be tried before any Senate by the philosophy of any pure man, to stand or fall by his axioms: This is appa­rent not only by ancient writings of Christian doctours, but by a fact of Emperour Julian, [Page 129]who falling from Christian religion, amongst other oppressions he deprived Christians of their schools of literature throughout the Ro­man Empire, telling them by way of jeer, that Christians need not any learning unto whom this one word Credo is sufficient. And indeed it is sufficient for faith, and must needs be both the sufficient and only means of conserving a Church in uniformity: for religion must be somthing which may be common to all persons that profess it, and equally proportioned to all capacities and conditions, and such a thing is to Beleeve, but not to ratiocinate: all men both rich and poor, wise and unlearned, prince and peasant, may equally beleev one and the same thing, and so hold it uniformly from time to time: but if that very thing were to be set up unto each one by his own proper reason, the se­veral kinds of beings in sensitiv or vegetative na­ture, even from the oak to the mustard seed would not more differ, than that one judgment in se­veral men: have there not been fifty or three­score several interpretations of these few words, Hoc est corpus meum, &c. and almost a hundred opinions amongst the masters of reason about their summum bonum.

And if any say, that it is enough for som great master in these times by the strength of his reason to rais a religion that is onely to be accepted; and others of weaker abilities may [Page 130]either take all that from him, or only follow and hold what themselvs are able by their own rea­son to reach: This cannot satisfie at all; for first if I must take a religion upon the credit of some great masters reason, which my self can­not judg or comprehend, I had as good take it from the first master and beleev as I do, and not suffer another in these dayes to make himself lord over me, and lead me another way of his own: and he indeed that does so, does not on­ly by this slight put himself into the place of Him who conveighes faith, but of Christ him­self who made it; for the sense is the life and spirit of all words, and Christ then should but only administer matter for this great new rising Sun to quicken: On the other side if I be not to follow anothers reason but my own, what variety would there be in the world about the same thing, not only betwixt man and man, but betwixt one man to day, and the self same man to morrow; for the opinions which be totally from our selves we change continually upon the variety either of our own intrinsick dispositions or casual alterations from without; and in each seaven years resolution we find a whole volum of new thoughts and judgments within us, contrary to former ones we had of the same things, diet, clothing, pastimes, com­pany, nature, providence, books, and yet all must ever be true, for generally in all the ages [Page 131]of our life, we are equally obstinate in that we set upon: so that whiles reason is licensed to create a religion, not only all the religions which any particular man shall run through in his life time, but those also what ever they be which whole kingdoms and nations shall at any time accept of, in a word, all the religions of the whole earth must needs be justified: And he can mean no less who would have that to be re­ligion and only that which reason makes forth: Both heretick and catholick, both Jew and Christian, pagan and Mahometan do all and every one stifly defend, that his religion is ra­tional, that his best reason is with it and for it, and that no right reason can be against it?

If reason that should follow, once go before and lead religion it will sodainly thrust Christ out of his chair, and separate at once all his Church from him: For if I hold nothing but what reason dictates, then is not Christ my ma­ster; nor will there be any Church that may any more belong to Christ than to Democritus, Aristotle, or at least dame Nature. If any re­ply, that we must take the words from Christ and his gospel, but the proper sense which words of themselves cannot carry with them our own reason must make out. This indeed is true thus far, that as we do understand langua­ges and human words, so are we accordingly to conceiv of their meaning, as we know those [Page 132]words were either at first imposed, or by long use have got the power to make out: and if those words speak faith, the same Church gives both words and sens together, expounding them by her very practis which we daily con­vers withal: but if any will further by his pre­tens of reason give power to any or all men, to make out at his pleasur a particular sense of his own, differing from the ancient meaning con­veighed together with those words, this must needs justifie Calvins private interpretation, from which this new doctrin differs but in words, whiles that is here called reason which he calls spirit, and both do equally exclude the guidance of any Church besides the temple of their own heads, in both wayes every one is in deed and reality chief byshop to himself; and equally will religion be as various and mutable as our thoughts, and answerable to the natur either of our reason or spirit, here wide, there narrow, there none at all. Nay what is there in christianity that one reason or other as well as peculiarity of spirit may not deprave and frustrate; the gospel may be made to speak Mahometisme with one reason & the Alcoran to Evangelise by another.

S. Paul had no doubt a very sublime intel­lect, and yet he declares that his own and every understanding in the world is to be captivated unto the obedience of Christ and his faith, and that all Christians walk by faith and not by spe­cies [Page 133]or evidence; which is a quite contrary way to this, that would have no religion but what coms from reason: According to this, all are to walk by sight and not by faith; but in St. Pauls judgment all Christians are to walk by faith and not by sight: this would have faith captivated to the obedience of the understand­ing, St. Paul would have the understanding cap­tivated to the obedience of faith: And good reason it should be so; for are not most part of the things our Lord revealed contingent and hid from our eyes? And if there can be made no demonstration in nature of the things we do see and touch and convers withall, as is suffi­ciently insinuated, how can things invisible be reached and confined and concluded by reason; and this indeed is the very ratiocination of Je­sus Christ to Nicodemus, whose word I should beleev, although I did not my self know either the antecedent to be true, or the inference cer­tain and necessary. In my mind it is a poor ima­gination to think, that doctrinal words deliver­ed beleeved and practised in the world for al­most two thousand years, should now at length be to receiv their true sens from a new doctour in our times which hitherto the whole Christian world wanted, and through the universall igno­rance of mankind could not till now finde it out: and to adde for further countenance of the way, that the Church hath three times, [Page 134]('tis pitty she is not allowed her quatuor tempo­ra) in the first she walked by credulity, in the second by probability, and in the third which be­gins in these daies of ours by scientifical demon­stration, is as weak a fansy as the other: for one and the same Church must have the same mo­tives and grounds and practise and articles of religion, which must needs be all of them ex­cessively divers, if that were true? The same conclusions and articles can never issue from a dark credulity, a purblind probability, and a staring demonstration.

I know that in the second and all ages of the Church preachers and doctours explicated and declared their faith by congruous similitudes and reasons, but neither then nor in any time of Christianity, did they frame their faith either by reason or probability, nor yet allowed it either to stand or fall by those means. St. Austin, Eusebius and St. Bernard lived in that which is by our new Rationalists called the age of probability; and yet the first in his book de utilitate credendi confutes the Mani­chees for saying that faith is not to be admitted till a clear reason of every thing be given, Eu­sebius in the fifth book of his history condemns the Arthemonites for straitning faith within the limits of human wit, St. Bernard in his epistles confutes Abailard for the same fault: And they were all three backt with that great apostle [Page 135]who speaks confidently that fides est rerum non apparentium, Heb. 11. And again by another, if not the same as great as he, who said, we preach Christ crucified to the Jews a scandal, to the Gentiles folly, for the Jews ask a sign, and the Gentiles require wisdom, 1 Cor. 1. So that in St. Pauls divinity as 'tis Judaisme not to be­leev without a sign, so likewise to suspend our faith upon philosophicall reason is pure paga­nisme. I will not burden my paper with the testimonies of those ancient heroes who profes­sedly affirm that they all rely wholly upon ob­scure faith, and not upon any reason either to­picall or demonstrative for their religion. St. Gregory and Theodoret shall serv for all; Fides non habet meritum, saith the first in his homilies upon the Gospel, ubi humana ratio praebet ex­perimentum, speaking of human reason that should precede faith: Theodoret in his graecani­cis affectibus speaks thus, Cur nostrum creduli­tatis & fidei titulum accusatis? quodque nostris sententiis tradendis nullam demonstrationem prae­tendamus, solam vero illis fidem at (que) credulitatem insinuare conemur quos rebus divinis imbuendos suscepimus? Annon ratione plenum est quod Deo absque demonstratione credamus. Which made St. Gregory Nazianzen tell Emperour Julian when he objected to the Christians their rustici­ty and ignorance, that the one word Credere was the same to Christians that Ipse dixit to the Py­thagorians.

But this way of setting up and holding that only to be religion, which right reason will make forth and justifie, is a rare and untrodden path, and which ordinary spirits dare not ven­ture upon; and 'tis held forth only by some wits here in London, I suppose to dash out of countenance that grosser way of maintaining all by Scriptures texts; and it will serv well enough for exercise and discours, when good wits meet together, as Cicero showed his elo­quence in defending Paradoxes: but it must needs be dangerous, if it be once believed and reduced to practis: nor is it easie to say whe­ther solitary reason, or a text privately inter­preted would caus more and greater inconveni­ences: this makes the skirts of the Church too narrow, that inlarges them too wide; even so wide, that all Jewes Turks and Pagans would by this reckoning be in the truth; which in ef­fect is onely to say, there is no religion at all; quod ubique est nusquam est: and so much is easily collected by the generall axiom joined with our own particular experience to the con­trary; for if nothing is to be beleeved but what can be demonstrativly proved, and we find by experience that nothing can be demon­strativly proved either about Gods will, his pro­vidence or nature, it will thence necessarily fol­low that nothing at all is to be believed: and he that holding the axiom endeavours withall [Page 137]himself to demonstrate the whole body of reli­gion, creates the like conclusion in mens minds without further words, when they find he has demonstrated nothing.

The power of reason then will not suffice to set up a new guide: and he that pretends this for his own preheminence before others, must either actually in words or at least vertually in effect disable the whole reason of mankind be­sides his own; which to sober men will not ex­alt his caus, but rather render him and all his reason contemptible.

Some will object; how can our faith then be rational, or how can we give a reason for our faith if indeed we have none for it. I answer, that faith has his reason, as science hath his; and both be good reasons but very much differ­ing: the reason of science is drawn from the very intrinsick bowels of the truths that be known, but faith draws his reason from the autority of him who delivered it; this serves one and the same for the stability of all articles be they never so many and diverse, as the Tri­nity for example, and sacraments, creation and the life to come; whereas every several conclu­sion in science must have his own proper rea­son. And one of these must not have, nor can it admit of the reason that is peculiar to the other, for then it should not be it self: if sci­ence should have an extrinsecal reason from au­tority, [Page 138]it would then not be species but fides, not evidence but faith; and if faith should have an intrinsical one, it would not be faith but evidence. He gives the best reason in the world for his faith, that resolves it into an autority which is the best can be had: and he that re­solves it into his own reason, as he cannot but run himself into danger, considering the won­drous frailty and darkness of mans judgment in all things; so likewise considering that the very essence and quiddity of faith requires to rely ul­timately upon the credit of a revealer, instead of defending faith he destroyes it. To beleev no more then we see is indeed to beleev no­thing.

Let wise Salomon and Christ our Lord make up the concluding argument. Man saith Salo­mon can find out nothing of the works which God hath wrought from the beginning to the end, nor of all the works of God almighty can he find out any reason, of the things that are done under the sun, and the more he la­bours to seek the less he finds, although the wise man, or philosopher, should say he knows them, he cannot do it. Thus speaks Salomon, arming us aforehand against the temptations of any who might endeavour to mislead us by a pre­tens of demonstration into erroneous wayes to our own prejudice. Then comes Christ our Lord in his discours with Nicodemus, wherein [Page 139]he teaches him the regenerating power of Ba­ptisme which Nicodemus could not understand and makes up the argument, to this effect; If you cannot comprehend even the things you see and feel and convers with here on earth, this is Salomons antecedent, as the wind for exam­ple, which you do not know either whence it comes or whither it goes, much less must you expect to comprehend the invisible and celestial secrets of religion, this is Christs consequence; as if he had said, these things are sublime and forreign and brought to you, from another su­periour place you know not, and therefor to be submitted unto by faith, and not to be measu­red with your poor reason, which does not so much as know the things that be at home. And it is an argument à minore ad majus.

And as for the two other pretenses of interi­our light and pure sens of Gods word, which be held forth more generally for the victory and preheminence in the contest, somthing I have said already, and somthing more shall speak in the following paragraff.

§. 12. Light and spirit.

BY reason of this great obscurity of things (whereby we are led into so ma­ny petty differences where otherwise there would be none) we are so with­held from diving into weightier affairs, that not one of a thousand does so much as think of them: so that greater things we take hand over head and boggle at lesser, which in reason must needs follow upon the admittance of the for­mer. The caus of all this is, the narrow re­straint of our judgments and considerations, which seldom look forth out of our own doors. And hence it is, that if any one by casualty of birth, society, books, or personal fansy, adjoin himself once to any one opinion here in Eng­land, he sodainly entertains such a prejudice against all the rest, that there is left in him no further place for counsel: for all other wayes besides his own are condemned, as soon as his own is accepted; and he does no sooner think himself sure, but all others must in the same [Page 141]time be lost. And yet he hath but his own judgment for it neither, supported only with the appearances of I know not what spirit or inter­nal light, which he and his enjoy and all others want. And if a man press him once to further difficulties than himself hath thought on, though without the reflection upon them he could never be able to settle any firm judgment about these things in particular, one shall soon find that he heeds not any of those things, without which the other could not be judici­ously concluded; nor is able even by the help of that light or spirit of his, to satisfy therein either himself or other man: which argues plainly that the spirit and light he pretends is nothing but his own private resolution not suf­ficiently amplified, and yet irrationally fixed against all autority and counsel.

The Christians in antient times especially for the first four hundred years after Christ, had many serious and grave disputes with the Jew and pagan; which being rational and weighty, and about the foundations of Christianity whereon the other articles were built, did pusle even the wisest of their clergy to answer: but after all the ratiocination ended, whether it sufficed or no, they still concluded with this one word Credo, which the love of Christ had fast­ned upon them; as emperour Julian comonly surnamed the Apostate testifies of them. And [Page 142]this, although in philosophy and logick it had been a weak answer, yet in religion it was the best and only one to be made; so that all the burden fell at length upon the autority of Jesus Christ, who being both a man, and one too that was crucified as a malefactor undertook to send forth religion into the world under the ti­tle of a divine Prophet, and the onely Son of God almighty maker of heaven and earth, which could not but at first make a disturbance both among the Jewes and Gentiles where it should be preached. And the great mystery begins here, and here it must end; for this au­tority being once admitted from the Church that brings it, all other catholick truths will fol­low by a kind of consequence from the same hands: and therefor this autority of his which can never be demonstratively proved unto us that live now but only by vertue of the Church that derives it us, Christ must maintain himself by signs and wonders, and such signall proofs of his divine providence over his Church from time to time, that his deity may somewhat ap­pear in his Churches progres and defence; and all other doctrins must be made good by it, and the Church that first preached it to us.

In any age of the Christian Church a Jew might say thus to the Christians then living: ‘Your Lord and maister was born a Jew, and under the jurisdiction of the high Priests; [Page 143]these he opposed, and taught a religion con­trary to Moses, (otherwise how coms there to be a faction) but how could he justly do it? no human power is of force against Gods, who spake (as you also grant) by Moses and the Prophets; and divine power it could not be, for God is not contrary to himself. And although your Lord might say, as indeed he did, that Moses spake of him as of a Pro­phet to com greater than himself, yet who shall judg that such a thing was meant of his person? for since that Prophet is neither specified by his name or characteristicall pro­perties who could say it was he more than any other to come. And if there were a greater to com than Moses were; surely born a Jew he would being com into the world, rather exalt that law to more ample glory, than diminish it. And if you will further contest that such a Prophet was to abrogate the first law, and bring in a new one, who shall judge in this case? the whole Church of the Hebrews, who never dreamed of any such thing, or one member thereof who was born a subject to their judgments.’

This is the great oecumenicall difficulty: and he that in any age of Christianity could either answer it, or find any bullwark to set against it, so that it should do no harm, would easily ei­ther solv or prevent all other difficulties should [Page 144]arise by the same autority by which it was cleared. For if Christ were not only a lawfull Teacher, but even one that was greater than Moses as Christians beleev him to be; and both the one and the other pretended this great work of establishing a Church, surely Christ must do it in as great an excellency as Moses and with some advantage; the doctrin and dis­ciplin must be as sublime and stated as perma­nently as his: and Christ, who wrote no law, must so provide notwithstanding, that his Church might otherwise have one from him and keep it as uniformly as the Hebrew Church did theirs. Wherefore as Moses after he had done all things which belonged to himself to do, constituted Aaron and his Suc­cessours to be guides, rulers, overseers, and judges of all Controversies that might arise in the tribes about any points of their religion he had written them. So must St. Peter and his Successours be inabled by some equall if not more speciall means, sith they also were consti­tuted by Christ to govern his flock, to capti­vate all men to the obedience of Christs will: otherwise his Church could not go on so uni­formly in all ages, which uniformity is the glo­ry and indeed the very life and conservation of a Church, as that of the Hebrewes did. Nor may any body prudently imagin that the Spirit of Jesus in his Church, and all the members [Page 145]thereof cooperates in every one immediately unto truth; as it does to grace; for then why should he constitute doctours and pastours and bishops over us, as the good apostle learnedly asserts in his epistle to the Ephesians: Ipse de dit quosdam quidem apostolos, quosdam autem prophe­tas, alios vero Evangelistas, alios autem pastores & doctores, ad consummationem sanctorum, in opus ministerij, in aedificationem corporis Christi. donec occurramus omnes in unitatem fidei & ag­nitionem filii dei, in virum perfectum, in mensu­ram aetatis plenitudinis Christi; ut jam non simus parvuli fluctuantes; & circumferamur omni vento doctrinae, in nequit â hominum, in astutia ad circumventionem erroris: Most excellent pa­thetical words; where we have first the doctrin; that pastours are set over us in the Church to guide us: then the end of that constitution; which he declares first positively; then nega­tively: the positive end is a perfect unity of faith which by that means must vegetate and fructify and grow up in one body, even as Christs natural body under one spirit and head, united and compacted together, and that with­out ceas even so long as that mystick body last­eth upon earth, in mensuram aetatis plenitudinis Christi, till it receiv its final consummation: negatively, to prevent schismes and herefies, which might otherwise render the Church in her members both contemptuous and liable to [Page 146]continual ruin, whiles every particular person left to himself would be carried up and down like children with puffes of novelty blowing se­veral wayes, by the cunning subtilty of men, pretending new light, spirits, reasons, and such like stratagems, in astutia in their knavery and pride of heart to bring people into a circum­vention of errour; all which inconveniences are avoided by following the guidance of the Church and the Pastours therein appointed over us. A general spirit of truth in those that are set over the flock keeps them together and safe; whereas particular lights in the sheep that are to be ruled would divide them from their pa­stour and from one another; and division in­fers destruction.

Nor could that great Jewish argument be any way warded or put by, but by recours to the Churches infallibility, which can be no other but what Christ gave her; and his own autority and truth revealed by this Church is the utmost foundation that supports the whole fabrick; nor can there be any thing further as­signed to support it but God with whom it is be­leeved to be united: for as all material buildings and their connexion are beheld with the eye, but their foundation is not seen but is beleeved by the influence it hath in supporting the fabrick, which it self is ultimately sustained by the cen­ter: So may we discern some consequences of [Page 147]the points of religion upon a supposal of a great fundamental truth upon which they all depend as this is, that Christ is a true and di­vine teacher: but this cannot be seen or main­tained otherwise than by a pure belief yielded unto that Church that first taught him; and His truth sustains all his doctrin, and the for­mal fabrick of the Church built upon him; and it can be grounded upon nothing but God him­self the center of all subsistence and verity. This connexion of us to the apostles, of the apostles to Christ, and Christ to God St. Paul insinuates when he saith to the Christians of Corinth; Omnia vestra sunt, sive Paulus sive Apollo, sive Kephas, vos autem Christi, Christus autem Dei.

The Christians might indeed reply to the Jew and say; that Christ our Lord was a holy and sacred person, divine, innocent, miraculous, and unblamable in his whole life and conversa­tion; that he came from heaven by the mission of his eternal father and his own great benig­nity, to plant upon earth an universal catholick Church amongst all nations, which in the fulnes of time God was pleased to do, whereas Mo­ses had confined his Church by Gods command, till that hour of general salvation was come, unto the one family of Abraham; and that he had received autority from God so to do, which not only his own evangelists but even Moses and [Page 148]the prophets sufficiently attest, who all do so speak forth the birth and life passion and re­surrection of this our great Messias, and the glory of his Church amongst the gentiles ac­cordingly as himself promised and it hath now appeared to be; and that nothing but rancour and prejudice and the scandal of his humility and the Jews mistake of the Messias his first and second coming did incens them against their own lord when he appeared amongst them; who also looked even then for a Messias sodain­ly to come whom they were to obey and follow; and cannot probably, being then the onely se­lect people of God ascribe their immense deso­lations, exiles from their own homes, and mi­series these sixteen hundred years, than to the guilt they have contracted upon themselvs by shedding the blood of that sacred person. Nor are they to be excused, sith all the ancient Rab­bies before Christs coming did openly profess throughout all the Hebrew Church that they understood not the end and meaning of Moses law nor ever should, till the great Messias came to teach them, which was so beaten into their minds that all the Hebrewes beleeved it, as ap­pears by the saying of the woman of Samaria, When the Messias comes he will teach as all things: although through the hatred they bore to Jesus Christ they began after his com­ing to sing another song.

This I say and such like words they might re­ply and prove all by some autority or other: but yet whatsoever they could alledge, the Jewish Rabbies would give another interpreta­tion to it, or if it were their own gospel flatly deny it; and so having no other further auto­rity to rely upon but the truth of that Church that stands upon this foundation of Christs di­vinity, there they must rest. For there can be no hope either of satisfying a querent or con­convincing an opponent in any point of Chri­stianity unles he will submit to the splendour of Christs autority in his own person and the Church descended from him; which I take to be the reason, why som of the Jews in Rome, when S. Paul laboured so much to perswade Christ out of Moses and the prophets, beleeved in him and some did not.

So then, the great resolv of all doubts must be immediately upon the autority of the pre­sent Church, which derived from the Church foregoing must by several concatenations bring us at length to the autority of Christ, which is the root and firmitude and life of all: and if this be once acknowledged and firm, and firm it cannot otherwaies be than by captivating our wills and understanding to his love and obe­dience under that notion the Church hath re­vealed him; it must equally support all future generations of Christians be they never so ma­ny [Page 150]in any temptation or difficulty that should afterwards happen, and the whole Church and all her doctrin built upon it. Nor can any at any time pretend rightfully and justly other motive of his beleef, than what the apostles had for theirs; the first age from the apostles; the se­cond age from the first, &c. and still the fore­going Church does but derive the faith and pra­ctise received unto its successour, and both must equally stand upon the same foundation of one and the same autority, which all generati­ons take by the like resignation and faith-sub­mission unto the worlds end. So that he that departs in any age from the waies of the fore­going Church, upon what pretence soever it be done, of knowledge, interiour light, reason, spirit or other discovery, he leavs the foundati­on on which his faith was built and vertually forsakes Christ, and would have had the same argument against him, if he had lived in his time: for if the Church, the visible Church prove not to be even in that particular age a just keeper and deliverer of faith received, then was the Church deceived not so much in that age as in the first, when she took her faith from him that did manifestly so comport himself as if he would be taken for a God, and promised his Church by the general spirit he would send her, to teach her all truth and strengthen her therein against all opposition even to the con­summation [Page 151]of the world: which none but God or one exceeding near unto him could make good: and if this were not performed, the im­posture was in the first beginning. That build­ing must needs stand firm that rests upon a Dei­ty, which hath influence upon the whole fa­brick to keep it up; and if it be not so kept up and conserved, the Church doth but vainly flat­ter her self when she boasts of the divinity of her support; if she fail in her doctrin and faith, Christ is not God.

Whensoever therfor we read either in the Acts of the apostles, or other ancient story of the conversion of a Kingdom or people unto the right religion of Christianity, we still find it was done not by any private illumination of any one, who living before in darknes with the rest was now secretly called to teach others; but by a resignation unto a former do­ctrin brought from Christ by his missioners and preachers; by submission to a truth delivered to them from without, not rising up within them. Faith comes by hearing; and eve­ry man upon earth, that hath ever been appro­ved Christian received it that way, and was made thereby not a maister but disciple to the Church. Wheras on the other side this spirit and light and such like discoveries we so frequently talk of, makes us not schollers but maisters ipso facto; and urges not to submit to foregoers but [Page 152]to condemn them; not to resign our own but to captivate others understandings, not to go to the Church, but to go out of it; and that upon the single motive of a new illumination which none had before us, and we from no body.

I know well enough that a man cannot be converted and becom a good Christian without the assistance of Gods grace exciting and coo­perating with us to our good, when the truth is taught and revealed to us: But this I suppose is not the Light men talk of; for this is rather in the affection and will than in the understand­ing, and bids us hearken to another not to our selves; to join with a Church already planted, not to begin a new one of our own heads: It sayes not to us make a vineyard of your own, but go into mine. And the intellectuall Light men speak of, if we have any we receiv it after­wards as a reward of our humility in that Church, where we did not kindle it but found it already burning, to guide our feet by it in the wayes of peace; Crede & intelliges said a great Prophet, Beleev and you shall understand: but we must beleev first, and by that obscure step of beleef, which is as a duksy twi-light be­tween the darknes of infidelity we lived in be­fore and the light of truth we go to, arrive we to all future happines.

But we in England that pretend this new [Page 153]Light and secret Spirit, are separated by it from a former Church but brought to none; nor are we made disciples by it but maisters on the sud­den, and enabled to teach all men that which we never received from any: which is absolute­ly against the whole cours of Christianity, and will if it be admitted set open a gap unto all fa­natick fansies.

St. Paul professes he was apostle not of men nor by men but by God; and the reason is, be­caus his first call was extraordinary from hea­ven, as was likewise the suggestion he had to his mission; and yet that God that called him, although he showed him so singular a favour, yet would he not dispense with his own orders and constitutions even in him, but sent him to the good Priest Ananias to be by him instructed and catechised and admitted into his Church; and with those people St. Paul found in the profession of that faith did he often conferre, even he that was so strangly called from hea­ven conferred the Gospel which afterwards he preached, as himself speaks in his epistle to the Galatians, with those people and with that Church he found in actuall possession and pro­fession of that faith, least, saith he, I should have run in vain; that is least he should do or think or preach any thing amiss contrary to the truth received unto which he was called; which he could no otherwaies by the constitutions Jesus [Page 154]himself had made be assured of, but by com­paring his doctrin with that which was believed and practised in the Church before him; into which he was now incorporated as a member in that body by the assistance of the grace he had received, to be first a disciple and then after­wards a maister and teacher; and when he did become a doctour, he did not make himself one, no nor his calling by Christ sufficed to do it, but he was made such a one under the hands of the apostles, and by their approbation, autority and sacred ordination, as may be seen in the book of the Acts ch. 13. Nor was he to teach without that Churches leav or contrary to her faith, but by her direction and in subjection to her.

This is a faithful speech and worthy of all con­sideration, which seriously pondered would dissi­pate in a moment all whatsoever pretences of light, spirit, reason, or other thing that shall mov any to a new way by himself, contrary to what he hath received & seen practised in the Church before him. And if any would seriously peruse the Acts of the apostles, wherein the footsteps of primitive Christianity fufficiently appear, he shall find that all that were called unto Christs religion, were brought to the feet of the apo­stles and priests who received them at the door, and brought them into the hous of God by the laver of Baptisme, and imposition of hands and [Page 155]confession of sins, and it was not onely the or­dinary but sole ingress into that Church; and none were ever esteemed to be of that body but only by those means, which also the pastours of the Church were only to mannage. He that comes not in at the door, saith Christ, is neither sheep nor shepheard but a theef and a robber. And true Christian religion consists not in go­ing out of a Church but coming in, there to submit to the ancient dictates of piety which Christ revealed.

§. 13. Independent and Presbyterians Plea.

TO a judicious man whom a word sufficeth it will already appear that no opinion or way here in England can have any advantage over the other, by vertue of discoveries made by any light, spirit or reason: since there can no such be legally pretended to set up any new reli­gion apart from the former, but to join rather with the old, which if it be not absolutely true, Christ is not God, and all Christianity but a human invention. But yet for the further sa­tisfaction of my reader I will look a little more particularly into the waies and pretensions of all parties, and as brlefly too as may be.

The Quaker (for I have both read their books and conversed frequently with their per­sons) [Page 156]is in appearance very just and honest, his open pretenses good and plausible, and books spiritual enough to one of our vulgar readers, unto whose judgment they be well proportioned; for good words are put toge­ther to promote solid and sincere honesty, and to evacuate that empty show of piety which has now generally taken place in the world in lieu of the real substance that is in a manner quite vanished out of our hearts and hands: But these words are so strangly jumbled together, that every line has good sens in it, but all toge­ther none; for as they carry no reference to any one supreme scope, to which as the utmost object of the whole discours all those phrases may be applied; so being well examined and compared together they will be found very fre­quently to gainsay one another; and he that looks for connexion and correspondence either of sens or sentence, will lose his labour. I have never seen any thing, that for the stile and con­text of the speech doth more nearly resemble Mahomets Alcoran than a good Quakers book; for in both be handsom words, som dreaming conceits interlarded with undeniable truths, much imperious censur of all mankind that will not submit to that way, endles tautologies, and no connexion; and it would even amaze a man to see how pathetically the good Quaker decries all mortal men and tramples them under his [Page 157]feet, with pious words most uncouthly put together; in a manner, as far as I am able to imitate it, to this purpos.

‘The Lord hath begun a good work upon earth, and he will finish it, men shall see it with their eyes, and all darknes shall be confounded before his feet, a little thing within thee shall lay thy shame open, and strike thee hip and thigh, his goings are mighty, and nothing can resist the breath of his nostrils, when he shall make the moun­tains to smoak and the hills to tremble before the arm of his power, when he begins to make his Saints glorious he will do it, all that has exalted it self shall fall, root and branch, and the proud cedar must down, thou shalt see it in that day, for it will come upon thee, even as pangs upon a woman in travel, Baby­lon shall fall, and all the glory of men be laid in the dust, when Christ shall reign in his lit­tle ones, and they in him, for there must be an end, an end to adulteries and darknes, an end to pride, to tiranny, to all the sons of men, that the Lord may be all in all, woe, woe, woe, is it not told thee, is not the truth preached, is not the light already com, and yet men hate it, the sons of men hate it, they persecute that light, but light cannot be hurt, it cannot be prevailed over, they may show their spleen to the truth, but all [Page 158]their spight it must end, it must yield at last, nothing is stronger than truth, not wit, not strength, not policy, not wealth, not pride, not falshood, the horns of the beast must fall off, as well the little as the great one, when the beast is slain and cast out into the wilder­nes, to the fouls of the air, to be devoured by the beasts of the field, does not the Pres­byterian preach for hire, does he not walk in black, the colour of the whore, does he not frequent steeplehouses or bellhouses built by Papists, and prophaned with adulteries and fornications with idols, does he not set open his wares in his shop, commonly called a pulpet, a popish name, does he not court and cap and cringe for lucre, filthy lucre, ac­cording to men, is there any power of god­lines in him, truth and the word of God does not consist in words, it is not written in paper, 'tis here within thee, hearken to it, yield obedience there, attend what it sayes there, Protestant what is protestant, a meer carnal idol, a cheat, abomination, an imp of po­pery, the eldest brat of the whore, thou canst not, thou canst not, thou canst not stand, thou art assuredly to fall before the arm of the lord which is bared against thee, and all thy cheat­ing lies shall be laid open in the dust, for men to trample, and go over, and tread under their feet, O popery, idolatry, sin, lies, [Page 159]thefts, tyrannies, wickedness, darknes, hear­ken unto me, come to the light and heart it speak, it will guide thee, it will guide thee to the truth, it is a sweet thing within thee, it speaks comfort, it makes thee see and hate all kind of corruption, if thou wilt heed it, and hearken to it, and follow it, it will make thee contemn thy self, contemn all mortal men, contemn pride and the glory of this world, and all popish superstitions, and all that ex­alts it self, popes, cardinals, principalities, steeplehouses, to lye in the dirt and dust of the earth, which will be sweeter to thee with that light within thee, than the silks and gold and earthly pelf of this world, ministery and magistracy and wordly power, the two horns of the beast is invented only by Antichrist to oppress Christ, the Pope is the old serpent, the grand seducer, he it is that shows the ap­ple that is fair to the eye and sweet to the taste, but poison in the stomach, the Saints and little ones must rule, and all iniquity shall be don away, the light will dissolv all the beasts ten horns, &c.’

Well good neighbour, it is enough: When Christ comes we will worship him, and beg to be admitted into his kingdom; till then let us have peace, which is I am sure some part of it. We cannot answer you, if that will satisfy you whom I know no answer will. Every good [Page 160]man in the world wishes with you that all iniqui­ty were done away; and well may you I should think content your selves with them to wish it so to all, and see it done in your own persons Why do you trouble the world with your use­les clamours, and put it so out of tune, that Christ when he coms can find no quiet entertain­ment in the land, for the wars and broils his great Saints have made in it? If you talk a little longer of Christs coming, and make way for him as the fanaticks did last January with bright steel armour and shining head pieces, sharp cimiters, pistols and harquebusses, stout­ly fighting and severely declaring against the whole earth whom they condemned to ruin, we have reason to fear that the sirname of this your Christ will be Oliver, and your golden dayes but the slaughter and bloudshed of your innocent neighbours. If your meaning be good, show it by your peaceable conversation; and speak no more to us, for we need it not and heed it as little, but say your prayers in your closets, and prepare your selves for his coming, whom you judge so near: Nothing is so sus­picious as tumultuous piety. And I do earnest­ly request you would seriously peruse two short stories related by wise Gamaliel in the fifth cha­pter of the Acts, and make them a part of your primmer. Men Israelites, saith he, look to these men what you are to do. Before these dayes there [Page 161]was one Theodas professing himself to be some body unto whom consented a number of men about four hundred, who was slain and all that beleeved him was dissipated and brought to nothing. After him there was Judas Galileus in the dayes of pro­fession, and he drew people after him; and he perished himself, and so many as consented to him were disperst. And both these rose up under a pretens of piety; and, if I be not mistaken, for Christ too; whose reign they would have set up in Palestine before his first coming, or thereabouts, even as you would now before his second, to the disturbance of the kingdom you live in.

So then, good friends, setting aside your vio­lent exclamations against all that adhere not to you, which you cannot your selves justify, for humility and peace is the great and inseparable property of piety if it be true and real, our agreement with you is already made: for the true light you magnify we praise it too and hope we enjoy it; the vice you deplore we do equally detest; the coming and reign of Christ we hope and wish for with all Christian resigna­tion; and the two horns of ministery and ma­gistracy, as soon as the world is grown so good and peaceable as there shall be no further use of them, will be taken away; but till all iniquity and the wild beasts you speak of be rid out of the earth, I hope you will be so rational as not [Page 162]to think we will throw away the onely horns of our safety; and if you do well, you need not fear the sword either of spiritual or temporal power. The apostles were never rebellious to any autority they found established in the world. Nor is there any power upon earth can justly disturb a Prince or Kingdom by pretens of any light truth or religion, which be it ne­ver so true is to be humbly offered not violent­ly intruded upon any.

The Anabaptist walks with the Quaker and makes up with him a pair of Independents; his books carry the like pious strain, but have somewhat a clearer colour of art and less of zeal. The particular controversy of Infant­baptisme, which becaus he allows not of it, gives him his special name, I will not meddle with. But his great argument why children should not be baptised, namely becaus they can­not either know what is done to them or con­curr themselvs to the effect, if it were of force, might in my mind equally hinder their corporal nurs to wash or make them clean, unto which they are so far from concurring that as much as they are able they resist it and struggle and kick and cry amain when 'tis done, not knowing what good is done to them; and as there is as much need of the spiritual washing as of that, so can God as easily with his laver make their souls clean without their help, as we their bo­dies. [Page 163]However, gentlemen Anabaptists, if you will not wash your children, you will give us leav I hope to baptise ours, which if it should not do them good, yet will it for certain do you no harm: custom is a tirant, and we can­not but keep it; it you like it not, unusquis (que) in suo sensu abundet.

Even as the Papist is defensiv against Prote­stant, Presbyterian and Independent, who all hate and persecute him, so is the Independent offensiv against them all: but the intermediat Presbyterian and Protestant are in an offensiv postur against their foregoers, and defensiv against their revolting successors.

But the Presbyterian very much renowned in these dayes for his zealous prayer and preach­ing, does not so much heed the bitings of his junior Independent weaker than himself both in learning and repute; as he does endeavour to disable the Prelate-Protestant his foregoer, whose gravity and long continuance in the land with much estimation and applaus cannot with­out great hostility and force of wit be as he could wish utterly disparaged. And so the Presbyterians caus in this great contest bears in a manner this scheme of plea against the Pro­testant episcopacy.

Whiles the Presbyterian is hotly busied in this his plea against the Prelate-Protestant, the Independent touches his elbow and advises him [Page 170]to bethink himself least with the same weapon he wound his adversary and kill himself. For if such reasonings, saith he, be of value, what will then becom of the clerical Presbyterian black coat, which being derived from popery, finds no more grounds in scripture than episco­pacy hath. Are not all men equally subject to Christ, and capable alike of his divine influen­ces? and so indeed it is said of the times of Christianity. And they shall be all taught of God. How then com other teachers to intrude betwixt us and God, to obstruct and taint and variously infect his light; those upon whom the Holy Ghost descended were all lay men, as we be, and som of them women too. But as soon as the Presbyterian turning upon him called him fanatick; the protestant cried, In neither barrel better herring, ye are both so. It was present­ly replied by them both, when did the spirit leav us to speak unto you? by what light or scripture can you make that good, you that are blinded in your own errours. The Catho­lick coming by, When theeves fall out, quoth he, honest men may hope to come to their own goods again.

§. 14. Protestant pro and con.

WHat advantage then can the pious Qua­ker have against the zealous Presby­terian, [Page 171]or both of them against the honest Pro­testant, whiles all of them find words enough out of scripture and reasons thence deduced, to throw at one another, and each side is both dis­putant and moderatour, both opponent and maister of the chair, both interpreter and judg. The Roman catholick I do not here mention; for the taking Him for his guide and judg from whom he first received his scriptur and faith, and expecting all resolutions of doubts only from his lips, can never stagger or fall into per­plexity. But with Protestant Presbyterian and Independent, whose utmost resolv is in their own hands, the case is otherwayes. And the com­bat that is amongst them is the most desperate imaginable; whiles any visible speaking judg being excluded by them all, each one fights against all the rest with the same topick ratioci­nations, that none but he that uses them must judg, Scripture is for us, scripture is easy and we have it, the spirit that is in us teaches all truth, the light from above us is only to direct us, and not men who are lyers, &c. And these if they prevail, overthrow him that uses them; so that to the same combatant must needs happen by the same means both death and victory; and the same autorities and argumen­tations if any of them obtain his desire, must bear both a probility for him and a prejudice against him. Thus the Protestant, if he do or [Page 172]will pretend to convince the Presbyterian, then must he at the same time and for the same rea­sons yield to the Roman catholick with whose discourse and arguments he flourishes and triumphs against him; and yet being uttered from the mouths and pens of Catholicks against himself, he contemned and jeered them. And if the Presbyterian texts and reasons be of force against the Protestant, then must the Protestant fall by that instrument by which himself stands and subsists against the Papist; against whom he hath ever used those very assertions and ar­guments; and the Presbyterian too must stand and fall upon the same account, the same wea­pon laying him dead before the Independent which against the Protestant supports him. The Independent, if he be able by strength of his light and spirit, to maintain himself against all his foregoers, Presbyterian, Protestant and Papist; then by the same reasons must he needs fall when a new fansy rises by any succeding ge­neration.

A strang case and indeed a meer riddle, but a certain truth. And the Catholick all this while to a disinterested understanding, whiles all his enemies condemn one another, stands uncontroulably justified in his oppositions to them. The Independent is in the wrong saith the Presbyterian and Protestant; the Presbyte­rian erres, saith the Protestant and Independent; [Page 173]the Protestant is deceived, saith the Indepen­dent and Presbyterian; you are all mad men quoth the Roman Catholick, you first abused and supplanted me, and now by the same wayes and means you do supplant and abuse one another. But if I may interpose my judgment, the Protestant, although I honour his gravity above all the rest, seems to be in a wors case than either Presbyterian or Independent: for these in maintaining themselvs and their wayes, do but strike home the first principles of prote­stant reformation; whereas the Prelate-prote­stant, to defend himself against them, is forced to make use of those very principles which him­self aforetime when he first contested against po­pery destroyed; as be the difference betwixt clargy and laiety, the efficacy of episcopal or­dination, the autority of a visible Church unto whom all are to obey, and the like: so that upon him falls most heavily even like thunder and lightning from heaven, utterly to kill and cut him asunder, that great oracle delivered by S. Paul in his letter he wrote to the Christians of Galatia, Sī quae destruxi iterum haec aedifico, praevaricatorem me constituo. If I build up again the things I formerly destroyed, I make my self a prevaricatour, an impostour, a reprobate. A heavy sentence. But truth will out, and wis­dom will be justified at long running even by her greatest adversaries. It seems that those [Page 174]pieces of popery we so desperately inveighed against for our own interest, were indeed not evil but good.

The Protestant may indeed with some plau­sible show excuse himself; and say, that the first Reformers though sent from God, yet might they notwithstanding have some little mixture of humane passion and infirmity, and so out do their work, and decry more then in truth they ought to have don; as he that would straighten a crooked wand, bends it as much the other way, to the end that by that over force it may at length recover its mediocrity and straightnes: and what ever is done amiss by earnestnes of passion, may by a second thought be mended. And this excuse would find place in any busines of humane concern­ment, but whether it may be of any weight in affairs of religion and divine faith I leav others to judg; for what may be pretended by all un­to endles changes, can never be rightly said by any: and S. Paul having assigned that proper­ty as a signal mark of a prevaricatour, I should think we may beleeve it without further dis­pute.

However by the reassuming of this episco­pacy, be it the substance or shadow of Popery or what you pleas, our English Protestant Church became by that means the very best and choisest flower of all the Reforma­tion: [Page 175]no order, no decency, no peace, no uniformity in all the world where Prote­stancy was received, like unto that we here enjoyed under our bishops in England: nor could any man by the force of nature sus­pect any the least rottennes in the foundation of such a handsom fabrick; I am sure I had not, but by a strang chance that happened to me in my childhood.

And although our Prelate-Protestant is not able to answer the Presbyterian objection, standing upon his own first principles of refor­mation, which do indeed and ever will justify all revolts to the worlds end; yet by the prin­ciples of his Recovery, those I mean by which he reassumed Episcopacy too precipitously de­cried by the first reformers, which principles be firm and good and right Christianity he will ea­sily frustrate and dissolv all opposition; but then he must creep into the bosom of Roman catholicks and beg the assistance of their ar­guments which before he foolishly contemned. For every Body be it what it will, natural, po­litick or spiritual must so long as it remains en­tire and sound, have the same principal parts and organs it was born withal, and cannot en­dure long even in a contrary posture of them without dissolution and ruin. Take any kingdom that is settled in monarchy, and if you endeavour once the subversion of that Polity, [Page 176]you do at the same time take away the life of all her laws and rights, and utterly disturb her hap­pines and peace, which are so mixed and intan­gled in the very nerves and sinews of her laws, and these again so settled upon the polity, as upon the prime innate influent Calid and radi­call primogeneal Humid, that all goes together, and take part alike either in weal or woe. This truth we have had a sad experience of in the time of our late civil warres, wherein our Mo­narchy once subverted we all perished with it, and our rights and welfare at such a loss, that no man could say that aught he had remaining was his own. It must needs be so; for the government what ever it be, is before the laws; and the laws receiv all their strength and vigour from the acknowledged autority of that power from whence they are derived.

Now that the Christian Church was first mo­narchicall under one Sovereign Byshop, when Christ who founded it was upon earth, no man will deny; for aristocracy or democracy it could not be, sith all his twelve apostles were un­der him as his disciples, and not fellow do­ctours or legislatours with him: nor did he ever pretend to receiv his autority from men but im­mediately from God above, unto whom he was personally united; and this autority of his must first be accepted before his word can be belie­ved or his law acknowledged: and these must [Page 177]have all their force from that power which ac­cording to its firmitude of truth gives them all their life and vigour, which remains and dies with it and with the government under which the laws and doctrin began. It appears then that all the laws and rules and promises and whole doctrin of Christianity and founded up­on the spiritual monarchy of Jesus who was Man-God; that he might be both unto human kind a fit and proportioned head as man; and uncontroulable, independent, and infallible as God. And hence it must needs follow, that the subversion of episcopacy which is the spirituall monarchy in which our Lord founded his Chri­stianity must needs weaken and by degrees ut­terly destroy all faith; for the ruin of the poli­ty is the death of all its laws founded in it.

Nor will it suffice, if an Independent or Pres­byterian say, that they are still under their head Christ, who being in heaven hath his spirituall influences over them. I say this suffices not: for the true Church of Christ whersoever it is, must have the very same head she had at first, or else she cannot be the same body, and that head was man-God personally present in both his na­tures with the body of his Church here on earth; and although Christ may and does supply the invisible part of his God-head influence upon his mystick body, yet a visible head or byshop if the Church hath not now over her, as at first she [Page 178]had, she is not the same she was, and conse­quently in the way to ruin. What then, you will say, cannot God preserv his Church with­out the help of man? I answer we must not here dispute what God can do, but what he will do. God can warm the earth and make fruits to grow and us to see without the sun; but if he have otherwise ordained we must ex­pect those effects from the caus he hath set and no other wayes. And that all truths are to be expected from his Church, and from him he hath substituted in his place to govern us as our only visible Pastour, is manifestly ap­parent both by his own law and practise and our experience: By his law, when he sayes, that he who will not hear his Church must be as a publican and reprobate; by his practise, when he would not have his own supernatural vo­cation and endowment and light from hea­ven to suffice St. Paul either to make him a Christian, or a Teacher, till he had received both from the hands of his Church and pastors; by our experience, while we see from age to age, that all those that withdraw themselves from the Catholick Church and from her chief Byshop and pastour, let the occasion be what it will or never so little, do run themselves rest­lesly into endles schisms, denying one thing after another, still from less to more, till at length all Christianity be cancelled; and begin­ning [Page 179]with schisme they end with atheisme; all truth unity and peace being to be had onely from and in that one Church, which as St. Paul does well and wisely call it Christs Body, so is it only animated with his spirit of truth, and from the government there appointed which is epis­copal, and in a special manner from the chief pastour there presiding ruling and directing in place of Jesus Christ, unto whom all obey in yielding obeysance unto him in spiritual affairs, according to his own order and appointment. Nor is there any more certain rule of discern­ing the approaching ruin of Christianity in any person or people, than when we see them either secretly to undermine or openly to oppugn pa­pal autority. No pope no byshop, no byshop no Church, no Church no salvation.

This being once well pondered, as a thing of such weighty concernment deservs, we shall begin both to suspect that the first reformers Luther and Calvin, who being Priests under that Papal hierarchy flew out against the Church whereof they had been members, and furiously cryed down both Pope and all episco­pacy, were not sent from God; and likewise conclude, that the counsel of Queen Eliza­beth did wisely reassume that ancient form of Church government, though it were opposite to the principles of reformation and judgment of all the first reformers; becaus it was both [Page 180]most conformable to times of primitive Chri­stianity, and in all reason most likely to con­serve the land in unity. And if we were once by Gods grace freed from preconceived preju­dice, we should all of us as clearly see and love the beauty of papal doctrin, as now some of us allow of papal government: nor is there any thing commendable in any reformation, but that and only that, which it hath in it of Po­pery: And lastly we shall easily discern that the the Presbyterian plea and all its arguments, or whatever else they can have to say against epis­copacy, are of no value, and indeed too slight for me to insist upon their solution.

I had a mind here to decipher the Protestants plea against the Papist; but I finde that there cannot be made any one scheme of it, as of the Independent and Presbyterians; becaus these, the first of them speaks so generally of all things, that he seldom touches upon any one particular; the other so insists upon one parti­cular, that he troubles himself with nothing else; and a man may know what both of them would have. But all these, and several other reformations when they set their face against the Roman Catholick, go all under the generall name of Protestants, and yet speak several and contradictory things, one accusing them for that which the other approves. And generally they do neglect their doctrin, and inveigh [Page 181]against the vices and follies which either they put upon them, or are indeed found amongst som people or persons that do profess that faith in France, Spain, Italy or other parts; as pride, tyranny, drunkennes, leachery, foolish gam­bols, and usages of Countreys; with which Pro­testant books against popery are lustily stuft up; or if they do indeed speak to their do­ctrin, it is either done onely with some witty jest and jeer, and so having given it a flap with a fox tail they pass on soberly to other matters in hand, as is commonly done in the pulpits of witty preachers; or if they handle it more se­riously, they do either for their own advantage mistake the doctrin, or the proofs they bring against it, whether through fraud or ignorance 'tis hard to say: and the foundations of catho­lick religion which be tradition and scripture they do so variously expound in severall times and places, that one text shall have twenty se­veral interpretations, which if they be not ca­tholick pass all for good; here and at one time an autority of a father or councel shall be ac­cepted and diversly interpreted, in another time and place quite rejected; now one piece of ca­tholick doctrine shall be vehemently cryed down and at another time taken up again and maintained; and at one and the same time in several parts of the world twenty points for example of catholick faith shall all of them [Page 182]be somewhere received and somewhere rejected amongst Protestants: for they being still their own maisters, may choos and throw away what they pleas, and as long as they list, without controul; wheras the Romans keeping still one and the same treasury of religion and faith af­ford matter for them all either to take or leave, either to approve or laugh at as they l [...]st; as a well furnished table affords wanton children both what they may feed upon themselves, and what being full they may spoil and play with, and cast to the dogs.

§. 15. Scripture.

ANd whence com all these divisions? only from this, that every man hath a reason, an interpretation, a light, a spirit of his own by which the bible which is now in all mens hands is made to speak what we pleas, and our thoughts and tongues are our own, what lord shall us controul. This is a sad case: while all of us, upon those only motives which all men may take up at any time to abuse his innocent neighbour, proceed to mutual hostility without end. The very books that have been written against Roman catholick this last hundred years, as they be furious and virulent, so be they also so many and various that they would if they [Page 183]were all brought together fill up the Tower of London; and by them have people been infla­med to such a height against the Romans that their bodies, dignities, honours, fame, houses and goods have been ineffably harrassed to this day. And yet no body can say what ill that religion ever did in the world, until Henry the eights dayes when it was first rejected and per­secuted: and when we have laid them in the dust, we fly upon one another and pull and tear upon the same motiv all that stands in our light. Reflect countrimen upon your selves; shall we continue in a contest, that can never possibly be ended; and being prosecuted to the utmost must needs infer a general ruin upon all? for whatsoever we say against any one, may be said by any other against our selves, and proved by the same argument; and the same thing may be done to us upon the same account we do it to another.

All appellation to a visible judg is by anti­catholicks jointly excluded; and to the Roman catholick with whom unity hath ever dwelt we will not return; nor can it be yet expected, for the general disrepute unto that way hath so fil­led our ears and hearts, that hating the very name of Papist, we have not power to consider soberly what their religion may be. Nay we are verily perswaded even from our nurses milk, that Protestants are the only professors, and [Page 184]Papists enemies to the gospel; although to all the world besides, the gospel is well enough known to be the Roman catholicks own and sole religion, by which they walked and lived here in England many hundred years unto a fruitfulnes of all good works, before Prote­stancy appeared: and we pretend to fight against them only for the gospel, and with the gospel, whiles they forsooth are beleeved to have nothing at all to defend themselvs, but a little traditional trumpery of mans inventions, with a greater heap of vices of their own. And upon this account proceed all our books that are written against Papists and popery; in ef­fect like unto that picture that was carried not long ago up and down the Protestant world, wherein was drawn a fair ballance as a type of the two religions, in whose left hand scale hanged beads, girdles, cardinals caps, monks hoods, fryars cowles, disciplines, crosses, to signifie Popery; in the other a fair great Bible to signifie Protestancy; which hanging up­on the ground quite weighed up the other scale into the air as light as very vanity. And so credulous is the generallity of mankind, that by such toies as these we are carried away unto not onely a dislike but even the highest detesta­tion and contempt of a sacred religion, with­out further examination. But what do I speak of the generallity of the vulgar! Even our so­ber [Page 185]and most judicious men, who in other things speak and think like oracles, in this bu­sines of popery are not abashed to speak like children that talk of hobgoblings in the dark; so prevalent is a prejudice brought upon us by the virulent impression of often iterated calum­nies. Nor are we able by the restraint of this great prejudice either to read the books, or ponder seriously the reasons of our catholick neighbours for their faith. Yea I have heard som Protestants in other things most wise and judicious to say openly, that as for Papists he loved their persons, but their religion he hated in his heart: the reason is clear, he knew the one and not the other.

And as we do all of us by this old imbibed prejudice detest Popery though we know not what it is; so by any new-received dislike, when we have once bodied with any one faction we revile all the rest; and none will yield to an­other, although in all reason that religion that hath precedency of time with all the other helps any juniour way can pretend unto, might one would think have so much if not precedency yet equallity of respect, as not to be by a way that is new in the world so bitterly reviled; es­pecially when all that venemous bitterness which by any junior sect is cast upon his fore­goer, may and is as heavily thrown upon him­self by his successour. But thus rancour and [Page 186]malice spreads abroad in our hearts and whole kingdom against his rule and doubtles to his great displeasure who carefully obliged us to the contrary rules of love; and, which is to be la­mented, the first sours and origin of all these defamations is the Pulpit, where both by word and example we are taught to defame and hate even those we do not know. We may fear som great curs lies upon our poor nation for these our unnatural disorders, even so far as to blind us, that we cannot see the truth. Unto his dogs set upon their devouring sport even Acteon the maister may seem a stag and be torn a pie­ces by them. Wrath puts a new shape upon an adversary, who through such a black medium, though he be never so innocent in himself, will appear all odious; especially when the wrath is unjust and the occasion of it taken but not gi­ven; for then 'tis cursed, and works marvellous dark effects in the heart of him that bears it. And by this we may suspect our selves to be blasted with such an unwarrantable passion, when upon a conceived prejudice of our own we do more hate those have don us good, than such as really hurt us. I cannot but take no­tice, that our learned protestant, all these ma­ny years he hath by the Puritan been outed of his ecclesiastical possessions, he wrote little or nothing against him and with no considerable violence; but most virulent books he put forth [Page 187]continually against the Papist who did him no harm and meddled not at all with him, and then hanged with him upon the same cross of perse­cution and might justly reply unto him as the good thief to the evil one, Nunquid tu non De­um times qui in eadem damnatione es. And what evil hath the Protestant ever received from the Roman catholick that he should treat him thus? even none at all, but all good imaginable: The Protestant hath been instructed in his Uni­versities (for Oxford and Cambridg were both of them built by Catholicks as well as the ca­thedrals and parish Churches) he hath lived all his life upon their benefices, studies their books, preaches in their pulpits even that gospel which he had from catholick archives; this is the harm the catholick ever did, or the Prote­stant received from him; and yet, Lord what volumes of invectives do we powre forth even to this day against him who hath done us all good and never any harm at all, neglecting in a manner the true adversary who hath utterly undon us. Is not this a piece of phrensy? what can one think it els, when any nips us behinde to fly into the face and scratch him that inno­cently stands before us, our maister and bene­factour. But the Protestant seeing that out­rage done unto him, which he had done to Ca­tholicks before, upon the very same motives, and with the like words and deeds, might fear [Page 188]perhaps that himself should now appear justly punished, and the catholick at length be ju­stified.

But let us see a little further, if our hot con­testing combatants can find any rational me­dium to conclude demonstrativly, or maintain infallibly, or know certainly any thing at all concerning points of religion. If they cannot, they have som reason to be silent, none to quar­rel; either one with another, or all of them against the Roman catholick.

The wayes and practis of a visible foregoing Church is concluded by a general consent of all, the Catholick only excepted, to be erroneous; antiquity of former ages overwhelmed with Egyptian darknes; conciliary meetings of by­shops and pastours a conspiracy against purity of gospel; and the Pope who was anciently be­leeved sole judg and general pastour over all, a grand seducer: and now scripture though it be wrested out of the hands of Papists, that somthing might be held by us which is plausible, must be not the truth only, but the sole judg of it too. This is it we all pretend to stand upon. Be it then admitted for truth, who has the right meaning of it? the Roman catholick who hath lived by it now above sixteen hundred years in all unanimity, or the Protestants who wresting it out of catholick hands about one hundred year ago hath ever since been contesting and quarrel­ling [Page 189]about it, not only with the catholick but amongst themselvs even to this present day. The gospel is no doubt a good rule, but if we for our own ends to avoid the judgment of any tribu­nal upon earth do constitute our selves, each one the sole speaking judg by that rule, we do thereby make our selves both judg and rule too; for it is all one, to arbitrate with a mans own words, or to do it with another bodies words which he without controul will inter­pret: and thus excluding one judg whom we found in actual possession of the chair we set up a thousand, who will determin more rashly and yet as resolutely as he, and we still further off from any final conclusion than before. Do we not see this to be true by the daily fresh uprise of so many several sects, which do all promote themselvs by vertue of the same pretens. These twenty years last past the zelots who preached so vehemently against our innocent good King all the land over, did they not all find a text in scripture for their purpos; and not only one text to preach upon, but hundred others to elucidate and confirm their doctrin; which not­withstanding all wise men knew were not taken in their own genuin sens and meaning, and yet who could convince them of that, who had as much light within, and without too, as all Pro­testancy ever taught sufficient for judgment even against him who first sent us the scriptur [Page 190]and was then found in actual possession of the chair: and a Protestant that should have gone about to confute them, must have denied the principles by which he was himself first consti­tuted. Com, com, 'tis more than manifest by all our proceedings this hundred year, that our bitter invectives against the Pope who swayed Christianity had no other end but only this, that we might all sway and none of us be con­trouled.

I would fain know if I should deny the great fundamental upon which all religion is built; namely that the soul of man is an immortal sub­stance and distinct not only from the grosser tangible parts, but even from the very best and purest both animal and vital spirits, which with­out doubt be mortal, and that there is any other world for men to pass into after this life of mu­tability; whether I could not sufficiently prove my negative out of scripture, making use of all the advantages of semisentences, parables, fi­gures, stories, tropes, with as much reason, light and spirit, and as equal plausibility, as any sect deduces their tenets: and so another likewise, who should hold that heaven and the world to com, is nothing but a condition of serenity in this life; a fourth that there is no hell angels or divels, &c. sith there is no tribunal to judg, who can outbrave any such defendant when he faces his antagonist with the light of a text, [Page 191]which none but himself must understand.

Scripture must do all, by that light all walk, how many soever several gainsaying paths they tread. I will no further contest about the mean­ing of it: What is this Scripture? It is Gods word. But you had it not immediately from God, but found it in other mens hands, all whom from one series to another till you come to the Pope who first sent it us, we have all aforetime concluded to be liars; so that you must take it then upon the credit of those who by your own principles may as well deceive you as you me. Can you tell who wrote that book? O yes, you name me presently twenty several persons, which you can no more prove to be authours of the books, than any thing contained in the writings, although their names may be there prefixed Those persons at least as they were men of several conditions, priests, kings, lawyers, poets, historians, fishermen, doctours, so did they live in several times and places of the world, and differ both in these things and also in their very stile and manner of writing as much as any can do. A brachman in India teacher of morality two thousand years ago, William the conqueror King of Eng­land six hundred years ago dictatour of our law; and our Sir Kenelm Digby Knight and Phi­losopher, lately author of a Natural Philosophy. Do these three differ any more then St. John, [Page 192]Moses and Salomon, either for time, place, con­dition, or stile of writing? I trow not: how then came all those with so much diversity of their own to write the word of God more than these; and how they and no other? Who first gave them their autority? or was it given or onely declared, and by what power and vertue could it be declared by any that knew them not, and lived so long after them? How com laws, poems, sermons, histories, letters, visions, so many several fansies in such diversity of com­posure to be dictated from one divine hand? and how do they conspire together in such va­riety of times to make at length one vlume of faith? And yet too, they must not all be either of signification or validity, just as they lye and sound; but some in this manner some in that. Moses law must not bind in its judicial or cere­monial part, which makes up in a manner all the whole Pentateuch, but onely in the truth of story and morality: some books must be taken according to the literal sense, and not in any mystical one, some in the mystery and not the letter, and som again according to both. What shall guide us in these things? a parable must not be looked on as a story, nor yet morallised in all its pars, but onely in the capital intention; no words must be culled forth to prove any thing out of the road of his mind and purpose who spake them; no axiom of holy writ is to [Page 193]be taken by halves, nor yet in any sense was not thought of by the authour; an objection is not to be proposed for a conclusion, nor any trope or metaphor perverted, all words must speak to the writers scope not against it, as he made them to do who brought texts against ve­neration of Saints out of St. Jo. Chrysostoms speeches made expresly in honour of them, and others against monarchy drawn out of the book of Kings: and many such like cautions there be, I cannot now think of. What autority or rule shall conduct us in all these uncertainties? The Catholick indeed has one by which he passes on uniformly and quietly in the course of his reli­gion, as the sun in the firmament without noise or trouble, but others jumble and justle one against another like coaches in a street. O the Scripture, and truth therein contained will disco­ver it self. Does it not very fairly? whiles we are all of us together by the ears not for the Bible but with it. You must beleeve. What should I beleev and why? I expect a perswa­sion to beleev not a command, and to hear not that I must beleev but what; and not onely what to credit, but why and wherefore. O but you may discern in these writings the very marks of Gods hand appearing. Though there be such marks, yet it seems by our many divisions we cannot read of our selves what those marks would have, or what Church and doctrin they [Page 194]would establish: and to whom can those marks appear to be Gods, but to them only who have seen Gods hand aforetime or stood by him when he wrote. Porphirius was as good a marks­man and understanding Philosopher as perhaps ever was, and yet he deserted Christianity and all the whole Bible for want of the marks of divinity in it, as others for the same reason have at times rejected many particular books; I ju­stifie neither him nor them, but only speak thus much to show how instable a thing man is, when he relyes upon his own judgment. Have not we known wicked hypocrites to speak as fine words as any be in scriptur, and by those their marks to deceiv many? and I doubt not but Antichrist when he appears will do so.

But how came this book into England? for it was not it seems any part of it written here? It was brought hither, you will say, at the lands first conversion all of it together in one volume. If this be true, as true indeed it is, then we had it from the Pope of Rome, whether we speak of the conversion of Englishmen or Brittons. And shall I build my beleef upon the autority of a book, if indeed it could make it out, sent us from him whom our own ministers do pub­lickly proclaim to be an impostour and anti­christ? or can I in reason so condemn him and not suspect it? If he did not onely present it us, but made his catholick beleevers with so [Page 195]much labour and industry to transcribe it all the world over before printing was invented, as a sacred and venerable thing; a man might think in reason there were somthing in it to favour him and his religion, which being once accept­ed under the notion of divine writings men would not easily dare to contradict, and no­thing at all against him. O but the Pope did not make the book, nor any of his predecessors. This is more than either you or I can prove, sith that book so much of it as belongs to Christi­anity, was never found in our countrey but as taken and sent from him; and it is no hard mat­ter to make a book for my own ends, and for its ampler autority to father it upon some re­nowned person, the better to promote my de­sign. Truly such places as speak so plainly the Churches autority, the real presence, absolution of sins by man, episcopal government, and the like papal doctrin, are apt enough to suggest such thoughts; and some of our first reformers upon that very account did shrewdly suspect, and were not afraid to say it, that the Pope had at least a finger in many such like places, which he might in their opinion easily do, when he had once overwhelmed the earth with his mists of errour, and made the people so credulous, that he might do what he pleased. And if I do indeed think the Pope to be Antichrist and a se­ducer, I cannot rationally beleev or trust unto [Page 196]any book he sends me, more than I do to his doctrin which he sayes is there grounded, sith I have indeed but his word for the autority of both; and let me once give a freedom to my thoughts, I shall as soon question one as the other, and if I do reject one proceeding ratio­nally I must cashier the other also. Surely the Pope canot but smile, to see his book which is the ground and guide of the catholick faith he delivered with it, to be made by the Protestant to speak protestantisme, presbyterisme by the Presbyterian, anabaptisme by the Anabaptist, and quakerisme by the Quaker; even as doubt­les it would be a sport to Virgil, if he were alive, to see his Arma virumque cano turned epi­thalamist by one, a prophetist by another, an evangelist by a third, whereas the poem it self intends none of these things, but only the tra­vels and wars of Eneas; and doubtles our scri­pture it self might be made by these tricks of wit to speak forth the passions of Queen Dido. Without all doubt and controul, it is a most high inconsequence, so passionately as we do to plaspheme a byshop, who is and ever was ac­knowledged in the world for Pape or Father of Christianity as the most wicked man alive and a grand seducer; and yet to hugge a book in our bosomes which we took at first upon his credit as an oracle of truth; and then again first to fall out with him, and then with one another [Page 197]amongst our selves, about the meaning of that book, wherein his own catholick beleevers all the while unanimously agree, without any end pelting one another with texts and verses unto the utter ruin of charity, not understanding for the most part either the uncertainty of our own reasonings or the dangerous consequence of our wayes.

I will utter a bold word, but what I know to be true both by experience and irrefragable reason. As the gospel cannot prove any thing being separated from the Church and the living and speaking oracle of him that sent it, unto whose judgment both defendant and disputant must submit; so neither without the help of that autority can it prove it self, either by any argu­ment, which it uses none, or by vertue of mi­racle recorded in it: sith those signs and won­ders there related are now as far from my know­ledg, as be the truths of any doctrins to be ra­tified by them: so that I shall have as much ado to beleev them as any piece of doctrin they may confirm; being all of them equally either motives or objects of beleef as I pleas my self. And it is all one to me that am born in these dayes, so long after those signs were wrought, to beleev the miracles by Gods incarnation, or Gods incarnation by the miracles: since I may beleev both, but can evidently know neither of them to be true; so far as that I may use one of [Page 198]them as a medium to demonstrate the other. If the gospel laid before me should work of it self any strang wonder in my sight, then I might haply have some motive to beleev it; but we in England inveigh bitterly against the present miracles, that are shown in the catholick Church, ascribing them all, if they be true, un­to the operations of Satan; so that according to this way I should not know what to think neither, if the bible should do som strang thing before me, and as little conclude of the past miracles there recorded.

§. 16. Appeal.

AS it is impossible to be assured that the bi­ble is the word of God, if we condemn him from whom it first came of imposture; so is it certain, that upon that book wrested out of the hands of catholicks against him and his who first presented it, we ground all the several wayes of religion here in England whereof each body and faction does so far presume as to con­demn all to death who will not approve them. And yet, if we did but proceed like rational men, we could not but remain all of us in great humility and fear, upon these surmises. Does not the Pope pretend the spirit of Christ as well as we? do not all catholicks so? had we not [Page 199]the bible from them? do they not ratiocinate out of it and show their religion thence as well as we? only they do it uniformly, we different­ly; and upon their principles they build up Church and State, we pull down all. Put case we were all at this instant in our antient state of paganisme, and a Priest or two should com to us from Rome to convert us now as then they did to Christianity with the gospel in their hands, which they should tell us to be pure truth and Gods word, which we never heard before: if we should reject and disesteem them as cheating seducers, could we rationally accept and beleev the book? or would we not there­for cast into the fire that volum of theirs where­in were contained the summe of all their missi­on and news, if we looked upon the men that brought it as impostours. Consider seriously, and think not to pull the snail out of her shell, and then to keep one apart and crush the other without which it cannot liv. Church and Gospel were both born together, but the Church first, at least in a priority of nature, and must both liv together. Christ the head must be autho­rised before he could teach, and the Church established before any of her children could write a gospel: nor can they with authentick autority write any thing, but what the mother Church constituted by her espous the sours of all heavenly truths that earth can expect, shall [Page 200]set her seal unto. So that in any age to deny the Church and to accept of her writings, to profess Christ and condemn her that brought us the first news of him, is at one and the same time to take her autority and reject it; to say she is fals and yet true in the same affairs. As she gave testimony to Christ so did Christ un­to her. The same gospel ratifies both Christ and his Church, the same Church both Christ and the gospel, the same Christ both gospel and the Church too which himself established. So then; reason, light, scripture, power of inter­pretation being equally to be found at least pre­tended in all anticatholick wayes; and the Ro­man catholick although he have withal a sur­plusage of true and right autority from the Church and her pastour whom he ever follows, yet since he never denied, but strongly and ef­fectuoussy maintained, that he hath with him as much of true interpretation, light and rea­son, as any can pretend; and so far more pecu­liar and excelling, as the judgment of the uni­versal Church in all ages from whence he drew that reason and light of his, is in matters of religion that are not invented but derived, to be preferred before the conceit of any one per­son, who contrary to the very essence and na­ture of antient Christianity shall go out of the Church wherein he found himself; it may most manifestly appear, that as the catholick hath all [Page 201]the right and preheminence that any other may pretend for himself, and yet a far greater too, even that autority which can onely constitute religion; so likewise all anticatholicks both In­dependent Presbyterian and Protestant have the same power and advantage each one against an­other which any other may pretend against him; scripture, easy scripture, interiour light and spirit; whiles none of them will in the in­terim admit of any living judg, nor of the au­tority of a foregoing Church wherein they found themselvs when they first went out and changed. And I have already said and truly said, that no man ever yet was impowred even from heaven to go out of the general flock, but to have recours unto it, nor considering the order God hath set ever can be. Nor is there any su­rer rule of discerning a fals pretension than that of the Apostle Exierunt ex nobis, which if it held good in the Church when that apostle was alive, it must needs do so unto all generations so long as the Church remains by vertue of him who promised to confirm it, and therein his deity must chiefly appear, even vnto the con­summation of the world. And if we consider the first ingress of all these religions, we shall find that the catholick faith entred our land first, and chased hence our antient paganisme; after it had been here existent a thousand years the Protestant went forth out of it, the Puritan by [Page 202]and by out of the Protestant, not to mention any further subdivision; and the catholick reli­gion entered by vertue of her own powerful in­tegrity, all the others by force either of Parlia­ment or Sword: that Church as she entered peaceably so she remained quietly all the time of her stay in the Kingdom, but the others neither stay nor enter without disturbance; she hath a rule to go by and a judg to submit unto in all affairs; others as they will be their own judg, so must the rule speak as they list and no other­wise; which manner of proceeding if it have its free cours must needs work much disorder in a kingdom.

I have often marvelled that these various wayes of religion here in England which mul­tiply without end or any hope of reconciliation, have not all this while appealed to the sacred majesty of the King who hath been acknow­ledged by all the parties, to be supreme in all his kingdoms as well in spirituals as temporals, and head as well of the Church as State: Cer­tainly had this been don, and that all had rested upon his verdict as they ought by reason of their own acknowledgment to do, much mischief had been prevented. But we were so far all of us from doing so, that on the contrary first we secretly murmured against both Queen Eliza­beth and King James, and then broke forth in­to open hostility against his son. Indeed that [Page 203]private swelling of the murmuring waters were an ill boding omen of the vast tempest which followed afterwards in the reign of our good King Charls; with so dismal and violent a rage, that it both split the ship and drowned our pilot. We did not appeal then with sub­mission to his judgment, as by our own law and agreement upon our revolt from Popery we ought to have don, but forced him imperi­ously to our own; and when in right reason he could not consent unto it, we made no consci­ence to destroy and cut off not so much his head as our own: which being a singular unpa­rallel'd piece of insolent cruelty never yet acted before upon earth, it will remain an eternal blemish both upon the men and religion too so long as the world lasteth. Did we sincerely think our King to be head as well of Church as of State? how then durst we subjugate him to our selves in the affairs of both; and under pretens of purity of religion oppress him, from whom under God all our religion should be de­rived as the head and sours of it.

The body may prepare blood and vital spi­rits to be presented to the head; but of these are not made animal spirits, till the head re­ceivs and makes them such for the good of the whole; and from the head com down all those influences that be fitted and proportioned unto that life which the animal lives. So may and [Page 204]ought every kingdom, either apart or in Par­liament assemblies, to propose affairs unto their head, but can take none as authentick till he have determined and derived them to us whe­ther civil or spiritual, if so be he be head of both, resting quiet within our selves both before and after he hath don it: for what hand or foot ever questioned the spirits which the head deri­ved it or pretended either to mend or make them. But we have by these our proceedings condemned our selves if we do not indeed think him our spiritual head as we profess in words, of vise hypocrisie; if we do beleev him so, of in­consequent madnes. But to remove the Pope, the King is head with us, and to remove the King the people is head, and to remove one another each particular person is his own head. So arbitrary a thing it is with us, to set up and pull down power at our pleasur.

It would seem very strang to a rational man, that the Pope who is in our esteem the worst of men should keep together the people of many kingdoms, which as they be not at all subject to him in civil affairs, so are they very divers among themselves, both in habits, manners, language, lawes, and other weighty respects and inclinations, in a constant unity of religion from age to age: and yet a noble vertuous prudent King should not be able to do so much among his own subjects all of one guarb, one [Page 205]law, one language, for one age together: the Pope all the while we beleev to be a fals and onely pretended Head, the King an acknow­ledged and true one. This is a greater secret: and yet greater too upon this account, that if any should fall away from the Popes religion, the apostate runs himself into no more danger upon that account than what he willingly brings upon himself, the loss of further communion with him and his Church; for the Popes ex­communication signifies no more, and all the Pope can do is but to excommunicate him, who before by his own voluntary act put himself out of his communion. But the King hath a temporal sword in his hand to take corporal reveng upon rebellion and apostacy, and the people subject to him in faith are likewise sub­ject in other temporal respects, and by their re­bellion against him hazzard their estates and lives.

I know well enough that Popes are generally as civil and accomplished gentlemen as be in Europe, and for the most part very learned; yet can I never beleev but that there be others in the Christian world, both priests doctours, and byshops as learned as the pope himself, and as wise too and accomplisht persons in any per­fections either natural or moral; and yet can none but He, hit upon this feat of guiding the Christian flock in unity and peace: Nay, which [Page 206]yet augments the wonder, take any one king­dom under his spiritual jurisdiction, and they shall remain a hundred yea thousand years in all peace and unity upon religions account: But let that kingdom once divide and separate from him; and presently all those very self same byshops who before in their subordination to the Pope easily mannaged the peoples conscien­ces and kept them in a most orderly peaceable­nes, not know in their separation from him, which way to turn themselves, but that heresies and schismes will rise and augment themselves without end in despight of all their power and endeavours, as if unity and truth and peace were tied to the Popes chair. Those that un­derstand not catholick religion have stood ma­ny of them exceedingly amazed at this consi­deration, and not without caus: for whence can this happen? It is not becaus Popes are all saints and only they; for the venerable and renowned priests under him, and great multi­tudes of people about him in all nations, which shine like stars in the firmament, may be with­out controul as good and holy many of them as himself: and although Popes be for the most part very good, civil and discreet men, yet if it should happen that som one be no better than he should, yet even that man shall be as zealous of unity in religion and preserv it as exactly as the best; which exalts our wonderment unto [Page 207]such a height, that we are even forced to acknow­ledg that there is some great secret in this busi­ness not easily to be resolved: for all other by­shops and princes the more worldly and sensual they be, the less care have they of their flock and people. If we shall say that these be the great powers of God upon him, the doubt is at an end, and a reason appears why people do fear so much to be excluded his communion: if this be not admitted, I am at a loss, and can find no reason, why a good king and true head of his Church, if himself or the people can make him so, should not be able by his acknow­ledged autority and sword to keep his own sub­jects in an unity of faith and peace, as well as a bad Pope, for so we beleev them all to be, and pretended head keeps together other mens sub­jects of different manners and languages with­out sword or axe or corporal rods, only by the meer love of his communion and fear they have to lose it.

Nor can we say that new opinions about reli­gion are never broacht among catholiks: for this as it cannot be expected amongst so many mil­lions of great wits and spirits that be amongst them up and down the world; so is it so far from being true, that all the heresies that have rose in Christianity were invented ever by some catholick, I mean that had been formerly such, for his opposition to and apostacy from his ge­neral [Page 208]Pastour makes him ceas to be catholick any longer, and generally by priests, who pre­ferring their own judgments before their pa­stours and the tradition they had hitherto walk­ed by, in the pride of their hearts led people after them out of the fold of the Church. And whoever does so, puts himself by his own auto­rity in locum Petri, and is to be looked upon by all good Catholicks who have care of their own salvation as a dangerous guide. Thus did first begin our own Protestancy by Martin Lu­ther, Calvin, and other fallen priests; and the fall of murmuring Judas from the colledg of apostles, of contesting Adam and Eve from the bliss of paradise, of dissenting Lucifer and his angels from heaven, who are said to dispute with Michael and his angels, as Luther did with Eckius and his fellow Catholicks, signifie nothing else.

But what does the Pape or Christian pastour do in this case. When the tumult is once rai­sed and a disorder begun in any part of his flock by som proud turbulent spirit amongst them, the Pape first whistles him and his fellow petul­cous rams into order by charitable admonition, which still increases lowder by degrees: and if this will not serv, but that they will still be refractory, he casts in his shepheards crook amongst them, and divides the turbulent from the peaceful, and so the infection stayes. The [Page 209]disquiet ones being driven out, depart in a rout together; but within a while they separate, and walk by sixes and seavens, and subdivide at length so often, that at last they go single, whiles every sheep amongst them will be a ram, and every ram a shepheard. But the other quiet ones that hear the voice of their sheap­herd and follow him in peace as becoms sheep to do, enjoy all happines and spiritual content amongst themselvs to the unspeakable comfort of their souls, under him whom Christ the great Messias hath set over them: and this is called the Catholick flock, which for the love they bear to their honoured pastour and [...] we com­monly call Papists; and somtimes, becaus they will not forsake either their sheapheard or di­vine pastures of truth and sacraments wherein they have been brought up, when we would speak more civilly, we call them Recusants.

If any one shall think I speak too much in favour of catholick religion, let such know that I favour nothing but truth and peace: and it is the part of an ingenuous and well bred na­ture to support what he can the weaker side; especially if he know it to be innocent and inju­riously opprest, as it often happens in this world that the stronger in right may be the weaker in repute. Nor can any fewd amongst us ever be ended, which is the thing I aim at, so long as errour and injustice are maintained. [Page 210]And although we quarrel furiously one with an­other, yet considering that our strifes amongst our selves proceed upon the very same grounds and motives we pretend all of us to have against the general adversary we all hate, till this capi­tal dislike of Popery be diminished our other fewds must needs be kept alive. No peace amongst our selves; till we revoke our words and ill deeds against our innocent neighbours, and at last comply charitably with them against whom our first dissention sprang up in this land. Ephraim is against Manasses and Manasses against Ephraim, but both against Juda; and becaus they are both against Juda their lawful superiour, therefor are they so furiously bent against one another, whiles Ephraim to be in Juda's place, who is thrust out by both parties, labours to depress Manasses, and Manasses for the same reason to trample upon Ephraim. Thus is Presbyterian against Independent, and Independent against Presbyterian, but both against the Papist: Protestant against Puritan, and Puritan against Protestant but both against the Catholick. And as soon as the Protestant had by violence supplanted and cast his Roman-neighbours out of all their dignities honour and livelihood; the rancour had utterly ceased, had not the Puritan rose up out of the Prote­stant bowels and subverted him by the same means he had used to his catholick foregoers: [Page 211]and when this was don it had ceased again, had not Presbyterian, Anabaptist and Independent sprung out of the Puritan disturbed one an­other, and all the land by the same stra­tagems.

Thus Haslerig and Vane two grand Puritans, antient and mortal enemies both of them unto Roman catholicks, when at length they fell out and jarred in this last Rump. Parliament, they did both in publick and private with the utmost rage imaginable object Popery to one another, which they judged both of them to be both the extremest vilification could be cast upon any one, and also most advantageous to him that objects it: every mouth and book in the long Parliaments time said no less of the Kings army wherewith he defended himself, that they were all Papists and Popishly affe­cted: all the adherents of — Tectour Oliver after he had broken and shamefully dismist the long Parliament, said the like of it: the friends of the dissolved long Parliament, which were a considerable part of the land asserted the like of Oliver and his souldiers; and so did great store of good Protestants otherwise grave men say confidently that the red coat souldiers were all Jesuites and Papists: and the same red coat soldiers both swindged and pillaged all the land upon the same account, laying popery to us all, and made us smart for it over and over; as if [Page 212]the very notion and name of Popery had even turned our brains and made us all mad. If we do but hear any one say of his neighbour that he is a Papist, our blood rises presently against him whom we never saw; and if we know him one, we shall beleev any evil that is spoken of him be it never so incredible or even impossible; and are apt to imagin and speak it our selves in any place. A rational man would hardly beleev that som English men should report confi­dently even in Rome to the citisens there, that the Parliament men and judges who murdered our good King here in England were most of them papists, who indeed were all of them more profest enemies to the Papist or Catholick than to the King himself. So that the malice of po­pery once taken away, and as it expresses ca­tholick religion it deserves none, we should not know in our religious feudes what to object to one another for disparagement. It would seem a strang thing, if after all our warres and the mischiefs we have either done or intended one another upon the account of popery, it should prove at last so good and sincere a religion, that we can never more truly commend our neigh­bour than when we lay popery to his charg de­servedly, nor ever act greater iniquity than when we persecute him upon that account. But indeed if popery be taken as it is now concei­ved for a fardel of iniquity fraud and treachery, [Page 213]then it will least agree to them it is most put upon and is indeed proper only unto them who impose it upon others.

Hitherto I have endeavoured to take all men off from any basis of private interpretation, reason, or light within themselvs, whereupon they may raise a new religion, and wars and broils to maintain it against the Church out of which they sallied. And by this the Indepen­dent loses his conceived advantage against the Presbyterian, this his against the Protestant, and the Protestant his against the Roman Catho­lick. What we are to fix upon I have here and there intermingled, although very sparingly; and he told us it long ago who said. If any will be my disciple, let him deny himself.

§. 17. History of religion.

I Have proceeded hitherto with a kind of negligent carefulnes, as I may so call it, not lapping up my discours with pithy ar­gumentations and a formal order, but let­ting [Page 214]it flow loose and intermingled, that it may delight all; and withall profit any that will read seriously; but now that these contents of my fourth chapter may connaturally appear unto the sight of every one, I will to refresh my rea­ders appetite, a little leave even that method too; and that he may discern of himself without any further discours of mine, both how all the several wayes of religion here in England are equally innocent, and withall that the Roman catholick is absolutely unblamable, I will make a brief narration of the ingress and progress of Christianity in this land unto these present times and leav the concluding inference unto every mans own judgment. Truth needs not the help of art, and its very natural appearance is the best argument can be made for it. I know there be many eaglesighted men, that are able to trace the proceedings of states and policy and religion from far, yet becaus generally men live at home and see no further than the pre­sent, which suffices nothing at all for judgment in these our turbulent affairs, I must crave leav of those great heroes very briefly to run over that story, which although they do well enough know already, yet to the generality of English­men whom in this my discours I serv and labour for, is so utterly unknown that they do not so much as dream of any such thing.

In the thirty fifth year of our Lord when Sulpitius Galba and Cornelius Sylla were con­suls, all the Christians in Jerusalem except only the apostles being disperst abroad upon that great persecution which cut off St. Stephen, the Church of God did spread and propagate upon that occasion into several countries, not only of Judea and Samaria, but Phaenicia, Cy­prus, Antioch, Damascus, and round about be­yond the borders of Palestin. At that time Lazarus, Mary Magdalen, Martha with Mar­cella her handmaid, Maximin a disciple, and Joseph of Arimathea that noble decurion, against whom the Jews were more vehemently incen­sed, were after much pillaging and many inju­rious affronts put together into a ship without sail; in which notwithstanding by the conduct of that providence they worshiped, they arri­ved safe at last in Marselles in France; where Jo­seph of Arimathea so far companion of the com­mon danger with them left them to divine pro­tection, and is said, haply by means of some Brittish merchant in those coasts, to have sail­ed thence into this our isle of Britanny, where by the power of his words and holy life ha­ving converted many of our Brittons unto faith, he ended his dayes; the testimony of whose sanctity that strange thorn of Glasenbury abbey which grew green and flourished every Christmas day remained even to our times. [Page 216]This story of a fact so long ago atchieved, al­though it be obscured by that vicissitude of time which at length buries all things; yet it servs so much as we have of it, to shew that the religion he brought was catholick, since the same antiquities that speak his arrival here, and his conversion of people, mention their erecti­on of crosses, shrines, oratories, altars, mona­steries and the like things of catholick professi­on don by him and the people he converted.

But partly by the great succeeding persecu­tions raised by the Roman emperours against Christianity, partly by the unwearied endea­vours of the Pagan priests here in the land a­gainst it, about the time of Marcus Aurelius the Roman emperour, and year of our Lord 190. there were hardly any remnants of it left in this island. Wherefore our noble Brittish King Lucius moved by the fame of that holy faith sent to Eleutherius then Pope in Rome, to entreat he would destin into our countrey some of his special pastours to teach us his Christian faith. The Pope sent him two good priests, Fu­gatius and Damian, who arriving here with some few others who were pleased to accompa­ny them, made both the King himself and his Queen and very many of his subjects Chri­stian.

And this Christianity of the Brittons no man I think will doubt it to be catholick; since the [Page 217]whole profession of it both while the Brittons lived in this land, and after that they were ex­pelled by the Pagan Saxes into the mountains of Wales, doth clearly manifest it; if Priests living together in monasteries, some hundreds of them many times together, and exercising in Churches their priestly functions upon the reall and mysticall body of Christ, if praying before crucifixes, erecting of crosses, solemnizing of feasts, keeping of Lent, vigils and embers, ho­nouring of Saints, making oblations and ori­sons for the dead, may as it needs must signifie so much: Nor can it be imagined that Pope Eleutherius sent to us by his Priests any other religion than his own. And this is called Eng­lands second conversion, as that by Joseph of Arimathea the first: and both of them equally to one and the same catholik faith and no other; which however now by a strange judgment of heaven it be for a time traduced, yet in primi­tive ages it was looked upon as a most sacred and blessed religion, and then persecuted by none but such as were profest enemies to Christ himself; as I could show at large; but I must make haste.

After two or three hundred years this Reli­gion all that while profest in the land was again banished by the utter overthrow and flight of the Brittons professors of it into our english Alps in Wales, where Christian and [Page 218]Christianity lay hid together: and the pagan Saxes who had driven them out equally hated both their faith and them. Wherefor about the year of our Lord 596 the time of empe­rour Mauritius, Pope Gregory the great, of his own proper motion and good will towards us destined unto the conversion of the Saxes or Englishmen, who being then pagans had possest themselvs of all the English territories, S. Austin byshop and abbot, who with forty other Priests his companions all good children of blessed S. Bennet preached here so power­fully, that upon one Christmas day he baptised more then ten thousand souls: for which good work of our conversion the Kingdom of Eng­land ever owned that good Pope for their spiri­tual patron and apostle. And the children of S. Bennet are indeed our very fathers who first begat us in Christ, and regenerated our English nation to the life of future bliss.

This Christian religion brought in by S. Au­stin, the Brittons could not deny it to be con­formable unto their own catholick faith recei­ved formerly from Pope Eleutherius in all mat­ter of doctrin; although they were so trans­ported with passion against the Saxons their antient adversaries, that they would neither let their own priests, whereof they had more store then they had use of, go forth to their conver­sion; nor yet forbear to disturb good S. Austin [Page 219]in his so pious a work. But such good Christi­ans did our forefathers the Saxons after their conversion prove, that they yielded nothing to the antient Brittons before them, yea rather they exceeded them; so that all the land was stored by them with goodly monasteries of S. Bennets order, brave cathedral Churches, fair colledges and libraries manuscript, crosses, shrines, oratories, sufficient and wholsom laws for all occasions, hospitals, corporations, and all that might be necessary either to our tem­poral or spiritual welfar. And all our people were wholly attentive to their devout contem­plations of a life to com in Christ our great re­deemer, Church and State being now most piously and prudently provided for, when William the Conquerour in the year of our Lord 1066, Constantine Duca being Emperour of the East came in upon us from France and con­quered us.

This valiant captain finding our catholick religion conformable to his own Christiani­ty, although he abrogated much of our ci­vil law, and used in temporal affairs too too much of violence, thereby to subjugate the land more perfectly to himself; yet he medled not at all with any alteration in religion, nor once excepted against it, but lived himself with the rest of his subjects both saxes and normans and died contentedly therein, building of his [Page 220]own devotion som fair monasteries to S. Ben­net before his death, wherein God might night and day be served and praised, for his souls greater expiation from that tinctur of blood­shed it might have contracted in his wars and vehement proceedings with the saxon nobility after his victory. And in this same catholick religion did both Norman and Saxon live peace­ably together and without any the least distur­bance upon that account, though for civil re­spects York and Lancaster raised broils enough, untill the end of King Henry the eighths reign, about six hundred years together after the Con­querours ingress into the land, the people of­fering daily their prayers and orisons before the altar and sacred crucifix, together with their priests and prelats all Roman catholicks, with­out any schisme or disturbance.

From whence we may note, first, that all the three conversions of our Kingdom where­in we lived unanimously so long together, were all of them to one and the same catholick Ro­man faith: secondly that this faith as it repre­sents Christ its divine sours in purity, which all men might see if they would have but patience to examine it, so likewise both in unity and un­changeablenes: as there is but one God and he immutable, so is there but one faith and it un­changeable. Thirdly that catholick religion is so far from being an enemy to the state-politick, [Page 221]as som reformers to its greater dispa­ragement would pretend, that it is the great founder and maintainer of it. Nor ever had this land for so many hundred years it was catholick upon the account of religion any disturbance at all, whereas after the exile of that catholick be­leef in our land, from the period of K. Hen­ries reign to these dayes we have ever been ei­ther in actual disquiet or at least in fears; vul­gar heads uncontroulable in their fansies, since they were by the reformation constituted in ef­fect both judges and contrivers of controver­sies; ever raising som new fangled way or other to disturb or at least to threaten and indanger our peace. And it is a thing of much won­der, that a nation such as England is, so wise and serious in all other things, so judicious and grave, should be perswaded by any mans words against the dictamen of their own reason if they would but consult it, to beleev any such thing of this innocent faith, when they cannot but clearly see in all histories both our own and others, that amongst all the pretended wayes of Christianity, only catholick religion both sets up and preservs the Crown, which giddy headed sects indanger. Som of our english clergy tell us of a thousand I know not what dangers of the Pope, thereby to get the assi­stance of secular power to their own ends; but what is indeed the occasion? they know assu­redly [Page 222]that the Pope if he were once admitted would both separate them from the secular life they lead, and bring into order their exorbi­tant opinions. And what harm if both these things were done? If we do but search antiqui­ties, we shall find that none of our ecclesiasti­astical benefices were given by princes and peo­ple to maintain a wife and children, but only such single abstracted contemplative men as had consecrated themselvs and all their whole affe­ctions to God, to serv him in all singlenes of heart, in prayer and fasting and perfect charity and in the sacrifice of the altar all the dayes of their life, without any solicitude after this world; as priests of antient Christianity did: and not for women and children, unto whose generation against ecclesiastical custom and con­stitutions our ministers give as much attendance as any secular man whatsoever, and generate children which after their death unles they show in their life time more of wordly solici­tude than their spiritual state permits, must lie upon the parish: and as for ordering our dissentions in points of faith I should think not only the Pope who would assuredly do it, but any whatsoever thing in the world, though it were but an owl in an ivy bush should deserv thanks if he effected it. But I return to my story.

§. 18. Item.

NOt only the kingdoms of the continent, Germany, Hungary, Italy, France, Spain; but all the Northern coasts and islands, Denmark, Norway, England, Ireland and the isles about them were now in a full and quiet possession and profession of their catholick re­ligion; when upon a little occasion, heaven so willing it for some great sin or neglect of mankind, the whole scene was changed on the sodain; and catholick faith in our northern coasts to the grief and amazement of all that were then alive utterly abolished, even by the discontent of one person, and he but a private one neither; upon this occasion.

The Pastour of Christianity upon some soli­citation of Christian Princes for a general com­pliance throughout all Christendom to their de­sign, sent forth in the year 1517. a plenary in­dulgence throughout the world in favour of the Cruciata against the Turk. Albertus by­shop of Mentz delegated by the Pope to see it executed in Germany committed the preaching and promulgation of it unto the Dominican friars; which the hermits of St. Austin within the same place took ill; but especially Mar­tin Luther a preacher and professour in that or­der, [Page 224]esteeming himself the best deserving man in the town, grew exceeding wroth that any should be chosen before himself, to execute that work which was likely to have as great an audi­tory and confluence of people as might happen in a mans life time, to the no small repute of him, who should be thought worthy before an­other to divulge the bull and make the exhor­tation sermon, in the behalf as it were of the whole Christian world. Vexed therfore that he was thus neglected and as he thought underva­liewed, not only by words but books and papers secretly thrown about he diminished first the dominicans, then the byshop, then indulgences themselvs. Catholick superiours and princes bla­med this misdemeanour of Luther as a practis of much danger and sedition; but he grew not any thing better thereby, but rather more head­strong and furious, as unlawful passion increases by the very means of mitigation, inveighing now with more boldness as far as he durst, both against Prince and Prelate too. Insomuch that the duke of Saxony after a year or two invited friar Luther to his court, where by dispute and colloquy with the eminent doctour Eckius if he could not make his caus good, he might grow better principled, at least for Gods sake and his own good condescend to moderation and peace. But Luther after much tiresom talk told at last very boldly both the duke and his doctour too, [Page 225]that the quarrel was not begun for God, nor for God should it be ended. And so departing thence he proceeded now with more virulent words to incens the people, unto whom he pro­mised liberty from their vowes and fastings and other penitential observances; whereby he per­verted much of the laity, clergy and religious people both men and women, who, 'tis strange to consider it, violating their vowes deserted that Catholick Church, besides which they had never known nor heard of other, to follow the serpentine enticements of one private person; and he if not the worst, yet at least none of the best that ever were.

Thus when one ram has leapt over a hedg, all the other poor sheep so many as be within ken of the fact are apt to follow. So prone is man to go astray like sheep, and do amiss to our own ruin without any other reason for it, than the sight of a president acting before us what our own naturall inclination is apt of it self without the curb of religion or law of its own natur to embrace. And so much was the world disposed at that ill hour to a dissolute loosnes, that Luther was still gaining upon people even from his first apostacy: But when he had once married himself unto Catherine Bore a Nun by him seduced out of the monastery of Mymick contrary to both the [...]r vowes, so that he was now become a sure and fast enemy as well to [Page 226]continence as before he had shown himself to abstinence; 'tis wonder how fast they flocked to him on all sides, not only from the vulgar laiety, but even from all instutes and professi­on and countries, even the priests and votaries of chastity, Oecolampadius a monk of S. Briger, Jacobus Praepositi an Augustine, Andreas Carol­stadius an archdeacon in Wittenberg, Suinglius a cannon of Constance, Martin Bucer a domi­nican fryar, Lismanin a Franciscan, Richerius a Carmelite, John Calvin a curate priest: Philip Melanchton out of Germany, Michael Serve­tus out of Spain, Bernardin Ochyn and Peter Martyr out of Florence, John Alasco out of Poland, Sebastian Castalio out of France, Beza out of Burgundy, Stancar and Valentine Gen­tile out of Italy, Blandrate, Alciate and David Georg out of Transylvania, &c. who being all hitherto catholicks took occasion now by the example of Luther to fall away; whereby as the body of holy Church was purged of some unquiet spirits, so was Luthers retinue in a short space hugely augmented Insomuch that this new clergy made up of fallen priests and votaries fell to writing stifly against their eccle­siastical pastour, and the laiety drew themselvs into bodies against their temporal superiours in every place, those in Germany against the em­perour, those in Holland against their King, they in France against theirs: nay the contagion [Page 227]flew so swiftly about Europe like wild fire in dry stubble, that ere King Philip could get into Spain, his subjects there were cor­rupted many of them and hissing hot unto bat­tle: but he was a wise prince and well un­derstood the unquiet genius of heresie, and therfore took a speedy cours with som for an ensample and terrour to the rest, and so pre­served his kingdom: but the wars in France were long and dangerous, those of Germany and Holland hardly yet ended.

It was almost twelv years before this strang confluence of people could agree together by what name to be owned till a chance gave it them thus: There was congregated, for the catholick Churches peace, a solemn diet at Spire in Germany; against which and the articles there agreed upon, Luthers new troop made a joint unanimous Protestation, appealing from the diet to the emperour, although their after comportment shewed that they did indeed no more respect the emperour than his diet, upon which general and hearty Protestation of their own, they were pleased ever after to call one an­other Pretestants. Yet sooner than they had well agreed in the name they so much disagreed in doctrine; ambitious heads, as all of them were, emulating each one as great a name and fame as Luther had, whom they both equalled in renown and place whilst they all remained [Page 228]priests in the catholick Church, and now sepa­rated injoyed as great fulnes of the spirit as himself; that they did not only set up several wayes and sects amongst themselvs; but in­veighed and wrote bitterly one against another, even with more virulency than they had afore­time used against the Church in the beginning of their discession: And now there was up and down amongst the Protestants, here Osianders church, there Stancars, there Melanchthons; here a body of rigid Lutherans, there soft ones, here Calvinists enemies to both: here Illyri­cans, there Valentine-gentilists: here Plenilu­therans, there Semilutherans, there Antiluthe­rans: here the disciples of Oecolampadius, there of Suinglius, &c. all which did so eager­ly quarrel about the matters of Reformation, that a sober man could not have the patience ei­ther to hear their sermons or read their books.

Since that first division of Luther, which is now above a hundred years, there have been se­veral times both in Germany and other places many great meetings by Protestant divines of all sorts and sides, to bring all parties to an union; but it could never be effected to this day: which is a shrewd sign, as Luther spake ingenuously before the duke of Saxony, that the concertation was not begun for God, nor yet for God shall ever be ended. An ambition they have by their very discession and novelties [Page 229]to advance their name and worldly contents, being so opposite as it is unto yielding or sub­mission to anothers judgment, will both make schisms and maintain them without controul: nor can it be expected he should yield to his fel­low servant or condisciple, who contemns the maister and doctour and chief pastour of Chri­stianity.

§. 19. Item.

INto our Kingdom of England this new in­vented protestancy had found access exceed­ing difficil if not altogether impossible; all our Kings even from the Conquerour to that day being ever most vigilant that no innovation should arise to the endangering, as those wise princes apprehended, not only the spiritual but politick state, under what ever pretens it should begin; and the whole land carrying through­out the world so eminent a renown both for their piety and learning and zealous long con­tinued affection to the catholick religion above all other nations; when an odde accident set the doors wider open here than either in Ger­many France or Netherlands, for its more free and copious ingress, and it was this: King Henry the eight a valorous and noble prince, who had also set forth a book against Luther [Page 230]and his new coined protestancy, for which zea­lous and Christian act of his the Pope conferred upon him the title of Defensor fidei, wherein our Kings glory to this day, even this so great a prince stood at that time so vehemently af­fected unto one of his subjects Anne Bullen, that for her he ran himself into a hundred trou­bles and his whole kingdom into irreparable miseries. To the end he might marry with her, he endeavoured a divorce from his good wife Queen Catharine, with whom he had lived ho­nourably and peaceably twenty years toge­ther; which with most earnest importunity for six whole years together when he could not ob­tain of the Pope, he renounced him; and by the insinuation of some Lutherans who by this time had crept into the land he made himself Pope and head of the Church within the terri­tories of England: and so he dispensed with himself, and made that divorce by his own au­tority which the Pope could not do with his, and married Anne: whom a while after by the same autority he divorced again, and cut off as King and Pope, both Anne from his bed and Annes head from her shoulders.

Upon this strang act of the Kings declaring himself head of the Church never before known or heard of since Christianity first en­tered England, for though Kings were ever honoured as nursing fathers of the Church yet [Page 231]head of influence to this mystical body of Christ is onely Jesus himself, and head of government under him only that person who first begot us in Christ and in whom all the sacred hierarchy ends, I say upon that strang act of his both King Henry and his whole kingdom was over­thrown at one blow and laid prostrate under the feet of those men whom he had so gloriously triumphed of late, and obtained thereby to the no small ornament of his crown the additi­on of a new title: for now came flocking in out of Germany Geneva and the Netherlands whole swarms of reformers, as thick as grashoppers, by whom in a small time, the Kings countenance being now set against catho­licks who could never be brought to like of his divorce, the land was so universally corrupted, defaced and spoiled, that within few years all the goodly monasteries, nunneries abbeyes and their Churches were utterly dispeopled, pillaged and ruined: and millions of people of both sexes, a sad sight to behold, who had served God night and day in those their angelical re­tirements cast forth into the wide world to be­gin a secular worldly life, many of them in their feeble old age, when all their whole live­lihood was taken from them.

The prey indeed was very great, but it pro­ved aurum Tolosanum, neither King nor peo­ple was ever the richer for it; general granaries, [Page 232]as the monasteries then were, making provi­sion for all children to be born in the land, which was infinite eas both for rich and poor, even unto all eternity; but these once pillaged and destroyed, vanishing in particular mens hands like water through the fingers whereof nothing at all considerable is kept. Nay he that was before the richest and noblest king in En­rop; after this vast spoil which a man would think were enough to set up any Prince that was never so low, became so very poor before his death, that he was forced to make adulterate and leather-coin to supply his wants: and of all the great families that were enriched with that spoil, there is not one in twenty that keeps up his head at this day.

Queen Mary stopped this torrent for a while, but it burst forth again in Queen Elisabeths reign, who also found it so impetuous, that she with all her subtle counsel could not tell how to wield or rule a people of so many heads and factions, as had then flown together in the land out of several nations, and endeavoured to per­swade the people every one to their own way of reformation as the onely pure one. Yet the Queen notwithstanding being declared illegiti­mate in her fathers daies, thought it safer all things considered, to leav off her ancient reli­gion in which she had by catholick byshops re­ceived the Crown, than to disgust the resolute [Page 233]Protestants. All the difficulty was how to con­tent even them, being so severally, biassed that no one thing could do it. French Protestants the Calvinists and Suinglians, were mo in num­ber; but German Protestants of greater re­pute; and both these and those so subdivided into parties as there appeared no hopes to pleas any one without the offence of all the rest. She concluded therefore by the advice of her counsel, which saw a necessity of it, to recall episcopacy which had been now some years banished, by whose awe and power the rabble might be brought to som order. And becaus the catho­lick byshops who were now all of them so ma­ny as remained alive imprisoned, would not be induced either by promis or threats to ordain her any, and Protestant byshops there were none upon earth, she appointed her own di­vines by her autority and power to create one another; which kind of ordination though it were not onely ridiculous to catholicks, but hateful also to the greater part of Protestants who in all their reformations that were ever yet made, jointly execrated episcopacy as the main badg of popery; yet the Queen provided by an Act that none upon pain of her displeasure and further penalties should laugh at it.

Thus was settled and English Protestant Church neither according to Luther, Melanch­thon, Calvin, or any of those first Protestant teach­ers, [Page 234]much less the Roman catholick; and yet too a part of every thing, as it were on purpos to pleas all, at least to stop their mouths. The name of Protestants we assumed from Luther as the most ancient and honourable of the re­formation; the doctrin for the most part from Calvin as most pure; and our episcopacy in imitation of the Catholick, as most safe: and so we were neither one nor the other, and yet in some sens all. We pulled down altars which Luther kept up, and set up episcopacy which Luther pulled down. We joyned with Calvin in his doctrin, but not his government; we joyned with Catholicks in their form of govern­ment but not in their doctrin. We cast off the Priests albe and vestment to pleas Calvinists: we keep still the surplice to comply with Lu­ther; and a sacrament or two in condescention to the Catholick who delivered them with the addition of more. Our ministers mourned in black to imitate the Papist priests that were then only in repute; and yet they did it with a wife in their hand that Luther might not take exception; whether the wife were virgin or wid­dow, to satisfie Calvin who without scruple of irregularity married a tailors widow. For Luthers sake we defied the Pope; for Calvins satisfacti­on we bore our selvs towards the King as if he were little concerned in spiritual affairs; and yet to affront the Catholicks we called him head [Page 235]of our Church. We preached the word becaus Catholicks amongst other things used to do it; we made no sacrifice becaus Calvin abhorred it, and yet we kneeled in communion becaus Lu­ther liked it. The mass we cashiered to sa­tisfie Calvin, for Luthers sake we drew a com­pendious Common-prayer book out of it and the breviary, and to content the Catholicks we kept all the gospel entire. The real presence with Calvin we cried down, yet we kept an al­tar-table covered with linnen in some compli­ance to Luther, and we bowed our knee as we past by, though it were a meer naked board, in imitation of Catholicks who used to do so to their inshrined Messias. We kept up the pul­pit, that Catholicks who built them for that use might not except against us for pulling down all; we removed the altar-table to pleas Cal­vin and instead of the crucifix upon the rood loft we placed a naked unicorn to content Lu­ther and Catharin Bore. To affront Catholicks we preached down good works and charity, we cried up faith for Luthers sake, and hope be­caus we could not see how it could stand with Calvins certainty of salvation we left to his disposal, &c.

§. 20. Item.

I Cannot see why a wise counsel and Parlia­ment may not with as much autority form [Page 236]a Church both for doctrin and government as either Luther or Calvin; their judgments are moe in number, more versed in weighty affairs, more clear and free from that passion which transported those good birds to their reforma­tion. And this mixture of things by the dis­cretion of so many grave men, if a Church as well as other polities be of human institution, is so far from derogating that it augments the splendour. I am sure this Church of ours marched forward with a very handsome show and some tranquility of progress even until the reign of our good King Charls the first, when it was with a violent wild rage miserably defa­ced. In all which time of its flourish the di­stressed Catholick was with all exact care per­secuted all the land over both in their livelihood and dignities and liberty and somtimes life too; although their imprisonments and loss of their estates did not so much afflict them as two other vexations, the one to their fame the other to conscience, both of them unto good and upright men almost insupportable. For the press and pulpit were ever sweating out somthing against the honour of Roman catholicks, which hath rendered them at length as black as ingenious calumny can make them. The conscience tor­ture was a double edged Oath drawn on purpos to entangle those catholicks whom threats pu­nishment, or promises could not move to de­sert [Page 237]their former way of faith: and it could not but take; for going under the specious name of Allegiance and Supremacy, and withall implicitely involving, as the letter sounded, an abnegation of ancient Christianity, it would if they refused them render Catholicks extreamly odious to their neighbours, and perjured if they took them. And here I cannot but commend the conscientiousnes of Pagan emperors our an­cient persecutors, who though they ceased not to deprive the poor Christians of their digni­ties state and lives, yet did they never offer them an oath concerning religion, which they knew beforehand to be against the articles of their beleef, those great heroes knowing full well, that as perjury is a deviation from the right reason of humanity, so can it be no other to drive any one upon it. Nay emperour Julian, sirnamed Apostate, openly protested in one of his epistles, that he would have no manner of violence offered to the conscience of the Gali­leans: [...]. I know that to pacify the Puritans who except­ed as highly as any catholick against them, al­though upon other grounds, the Oaths were by roial interpretation both of Queen Elizabeth and King James much mollified; but that their [Page 238]exposition was private, incompleat, and un­known to Catholicks, and which the words as they sounded would hardly and very hardly bear.

However catholicks as they did ever offer themselvs to take any oath of allegiance which were purely such, and involved not an abnega­tion of their antient Christianity, so likewise have they ever shewed in deed and fact, that they would keep the allegiance tho they took not the oath, whereas others took the oath and broke the allegiance. And which of these two is most honest and Christian like our B. Saviour has in the like case long agoe decided. A certain man said he, had two sons, and coming to the former he said, son go to day and work in my vineyard, and he answering said, I will not, but after repenting himself he did it. Now coming to the other he said in the like manner, but he answering said, I go my Lord: and went not. Which of the two did the will of his father. They said unto him, the first: Jesus said unto them; Amen, I say unto you that publicans and harlots shall go before you into the kingdom of God: the reason of this application is, becaus the Jew had entered an oath or covenant with God, but did contrary; the publicans took no such oath, but yet when time served fulfilled it.

But whiles we thus armed our selvs against the Roman catholicks, the disgusted part of Pro­testants [Page 239]who deeply disliked this new episcopa­cy, whereby they might be as much curbed as by the catholick one before, did multiply amain; and were oftentimes ready to make head both in the dayes of queen Elizabeth and king James; insomuch that the byshops and state were often in great perplexity, and utter­ly to seek what they were best to do; if they should favour the puritan, so the antepiscopal protestant began then to be called, or let them alone, they would increas unto publick danger; if they should resist them, as it could not be done without scandal and hazzard, so neither could they tell how plausibly to effect it, either by word or sword: for this, there was no suf­ficient colour; for that no reason: sith they did but only press home the first principles of reformation; which if they were fals, by what right was the Roman catholick so persecuted and undon; if true, why should english pro­testant-episcopacy against those principles be permitted to stand.

Yet at length our state concluded still pub­lickly to persecute the Catholick, thereby to give some little content to the Puritan, and private­ly with all vigilant care to suppress the puritan, thereby to be more inabled to maintain our selves against the Catholick whose state and dig­nities we had entered upon. And our English byshops they chose rather to side with their [Page 240]younger foe the Puritan, than with the Catho­lick their elder antagonist: becaus unto him in so doing they might seem free benefactours, to the other but just restorers of their due: be­sides, the novel levity of the Puritan could not, if it were a little countenanced or connived at, in any probability do so much prejudice to our prelate-protestant, as would the antient renown of Catholicks, if the religion should com again into favour with that land that had not yet ut­terly forgot its former glory. And although the danger to protestancy might be equal on both sides if the power were alike, yet the Ca­tholick would with a more uncontroulable ju­stice enter upon his own means and dignities of which he had been deprived by violence, than could the puritan invade anothers which yet he never had; although indeed he might pretend as much right to undermine the new establish­ed protestant-episcopacy, as protestants the an­tient catholick faith and clergy; which al­though in truth it signified no right at all, yet ad hominem it was good enough: and the puri­tan if he did it must be justified, or the prote­stant if he judged him must condemn himself.

In the interim these waters of puritanisme increased and swelled so high, that about three­score years after this our english reformation, they brake out into effect in the reign of good K. Charls the first and overflowed all: and the [Page 241]of these twenty years civil wars, where­in the rage of sword bore down all before it, is not yet out of our minds. Whence we may see how vain the policies and consultations of men, sometimes be; God sits in heaven and laughs at them. Our favouring of the puri­tan, which we chose for our safety when we studied the Catholicks overthrow, hath brought upon us a speedy ruin. And yet we are still but where we were, and in the like fears of that generation which knows not the things of peace; whereas the grave and sober Catho­lick if he had been countenanced, had by this time morally speaking much innobled and strengthened the land, and reduced it to the former splendour it had in antient times.

As soon as the puritan had got the victory and overthrown both our ecclesiastick and civil state, he fell himself into many subdivisions of presbyterian, anabaptist and quaker, which struggled and contested one with another not only in pulpits towns and cities of the land, but in our parliaments too, those very parliaments that had overthrown popery, as they called it, namely our protestant religion and monarchy; with the few Roman catholicks that were in the land, when they had once subdued all to their-will: And how zealously every one of these ca­nonises his own way to the disparagement of all others: what biting books and sermons are [Page 242]darted forth by this latter progeny against one another as well as against the papist and pro­testant is so evident I need not speak it. The Puritan seems now to have yielded up his place and title, this his great battle being ended, un­to the new and later off-spring of Presbyterian and Independent; who are now grown old enough to begin a new battle and sight, if they want a common adversary, with one another: for all the brood is able and strong enough at ten years old to go forth to battle, which will still be renewed so long as heresies are suffered to sport and spawn: they only stay so long, that their number may sufficiently increas; for as for every individual person he is furnished strong enough in his very first being to skirmish, and comes forth even out of the womb with an alarm and open defiance; as the progeny, that rose out of Cadmus his serpents teeth that were sowen in the earth, came up all of them with nodding crests and shaking spears, and as soon as they got their foot above ground fell a fighting.

And this is the state of things in our king­dom when lo most happily returns our glori­ous son to dissipate these mists King Charls the second to his own home, after his too too long absence and retirement from the hands of our violent rage; whom God inspire and strengthen that he may be able, if possibly it may be, ac­cording [Page 243]to his own hearts desire to pacify, quiet, and content us all. But this I am sure can ne­ver be done, had he ten times the wisdom of Salomon and the excellency of all the worthies of the world couched up together in his prince­ly breast (and his own worth is reported with­out any help of other title to deserv an empire) whiles we desire contradictory things, and will not rest if we have them not, nor yet will sub­mit unto his autority and reason who studies only our good, and makes use of all the wis­dom in the land to effect it. Let there be but only two men whereof the one will have serene weather, the other rain in one and the same time and place, and I do not see how God him­self except he chang their minds can pleas them both.

By this narration we may see when these di­visions about religion came first into England, what fruits they have had, how they have grown and increased, and what to judg of books and sermons that cast so much odium up­on another: It is very brief indeed considering the amplitude of the matter, but I only intend­ed to set it before my countrimen as a small plate of anchovies or cavearr to sharpen the appetite unto a further inquest after truth, which all these several wayes pretend to exhibit.

And if my reader be cautious he may easily [Page 244]discern a reason, why all these sects are so boi­sterous one against another; and every one of them against the Roman catholick. Ismael disturbed the whole hous, and was ever quar­relling and bustling against Isaac: The reason is the same both here and there. Ismael was a natural son, and Isaac the legitimate heir: and natural sons be generally seditious, violent and clamorous. As Ismael therefor was Isaack his natural brother, so is a protestant minister but the bi-blow of a legitimate catholick priest: the Presbyterian likewise to him: and so forward, till you come to the Quaker, who was begot by a delusion and brought into the world by a fright; his hand is against every man and every mans hand against him. The remedy and only means of peace is Ejice ancillam cum puero suo.

§. 21. Discovery.

IT may by what I have said without any fur­ther argumentation appear sufficiently, that all anticatholick wayes are equally innocent. But it will not yet be so clearly acknowledged that the catholick also is absolutely unblamable, except I wipe off som few spots and blemishes which we conceiv all of us to be in that religi­on, especially the vulgar gross ones about mass, [Page 245]images, service in the latin tongue, communi­on in one kind, saints, praying for the dead, and the respect and dignity of him we all hate, the Pope. When I have done this I shall then I hope have set the ballance straight, and made popery appear equally as plausible, innocent and unblamable as any protestancy. These few prejudices once removed the light of a right understanding will easily spring up, by vertue of what I have said already and what thence will offer it self to every unprejudiced eye and judg­ment in the land. This that I may effect with more delight to my reader; I will mix it with the occasion of the knowledg I have got of po­pery, being my self neither born in a popish land nor popish family.

About six or seven years old I began both by the speech and gestur of my parents to under­stand the story of their misfortune, which had happened it seems by the popery of my grand­father, so far impeacht about the rising of the Earls in the north that he lost estate and life; at which my father then a young stripling being affrighted betook himself to his feet, and fled away, not staying till he came to the borders of Nottingham and Leicestershire where he ended his dayes. I could not even then but weep of times to see my father sigh so frequently and deeply, which yet he seemed to do in great fear and secresy, as I even then discerned; nor did I [Page 246]ever speak word of it all my life, till now after forty years that I find my self past either hopes or fear of many thing in this world. But I could not tell all the while of my youth whether I should be angry at Popery or those that persecuted it: although I remem­ber I had a tender respect for it, when I heard my father say, People were better in Popery than we be now, yet still he added with a sigh in the close, I know not what to think of it.

But by this means I contracted a kind of ha­bitual resolv, to find out if I lived what this Po­pery might be; which although troubles of school and childish sports covered for some years, yet at length it came upon me again so fresh and vigorous, that it ever and anon oc­curred unto me. About eighteen years of age I lived in the University of Cambridg, where being one time desirous to ask my good tutour who was my mothers kinsman, to show me the sta­tutes of the hous; one of my fellow pupils wished me not to do it, for that he had already told him, that none were to look upon them but only the seniours, and that it was expulsion for any els to read them; becaus there was in them much of Popery about confession, mass, praying at altars for the souls of deceased founders and benefactors of the colledg: unto all which I replied not a word. The greatest benefit I got in the University was by looking [Page 247]over the heads and general contents of the ma­ny great volumes I there met with in severall fair libraries: for though I was not able then any further to mannage or make use of them, yet they stood me in stead afterwards when re­flecting upon what I had there seen, I discerned that all those great volumes of learning were, so many as were Christian either latin or greek, all catholick writers.

After two years, wherein I had learned some few terms of logick out of Smith and John Se­ton, I left the University and came up to London where I met with Churches and sermons good store. Therein I observed three things I could not tell what to think of:

• First that both in the Churches of the city and university and countrey, whatever the text might be, still pope and popery was brought in.
• Secondly that ne­ver any good thing was said of it, but all evil.
• Thirdly that contradictory opinions and practi­ses were generally put upon that way: and yet our ministers who could not but see it, did not so much as regard it at all; but equally flou­rished all of them in whatever they said against it without the dislike or check of any, or so much as the exception of him who had spoke of it aforetime even contrary things in the same place.

If Popery thought I be so bad, let it passe: what a Gods name should we talk so much of a [Page 248]thing that is past and gone, and buried with my grandfather, and no man sees or is like to be troubled with it any more. How coms this nois so frequent in all places about a poor busines, as if it were don by design of defamation? Are our ministers afraid we should turn Papists, who know not but by their report what Papist means, nor can no more understand what they be, than we can tell what complexion Julius Caesar was of. We know this way is every where spoken against, and much evil is said of it, but that has been don afore now to the best things; and a general decrying defamation seems rather a conspiracy of interest than any de­served reproach. And to what purpos, since it is dead and gon, should we speak of it at all; much less evil, and so much evil too. We ought to speak well of the dead, at least not ill; for dead men do not bite and ghosts afright none but babes: and to speak ill of another, as it ar­gues a fear we have they may be able to hurt us, and a desire by our defamation to disable them from so doing, so doth it fill our hearts with rancour, which if the party be dead is wholy useles.

But it is a strang thing that popery or any religion upon earth should be such a fardell of trumpery sin and villany, without any good at all in it. Such a thing one would think were impossible to be found. And it is yet more [Page 249]strang that noble persons should voluntarily lose their estates, honours, dignities in court, and esteem among their neighbours, who were it not for that, obstacle would dearly love them, and somtimes their lives too, for a thing hath no goodnes at all in it. The old Pagan religion contained in it many good things, but this Po­pery is a hous of Judas all stench and rotten­nes: for our ministers and the word of God must be beleeved.

And yet again, let Popery be what it will, if it signifie any one religion. it is the strangest thing in the world it should be evil in both ex­treams that be contradictory and exclude one another. Ministers speak ill of it, that may ea­sily pass; and the highest ill, I cannot gainsay it: yea and nothing but ill, they may have a reason for it. But contradictory ills and so many of them and so tangible apparent ones 'tis a wonder of wonders that one and the same faith and profession should be able to exhibite. And yet I have never heard, let a minister say what he will against popery, that the byshop ever calls him to an account for it: as it is don in other things even of less importance, insomuch that Prynnes book against stage-plaies is now questioned. Against Popery, and only Popery all goes currant. No man if he speak but ill enough, can speak amiss of it: and only here two evil extreams are not opposite.

One preacher saies that the Papists worship stocks and stones to which they are superstiti­ously addicted night and day; another, that all their religion is to worship a piece of bread. One, that their consciences are so daily tortured and afrighted with the fire of purgatory and doomsday and pennances for their sins, that they never have quiet life; another, that they carry their top and top gallant so high, that they will go to heaven without Christ, and get eternall glory of themselves without any god-a mercy to him. One, that murders, adulteries, lies, blasphemies and all sin make up the bulk of po­pery; another, that papists are so wholly gi­ven to good works, that they place in them ex­cessive confidence. One, that the Pope him­self and all his papists fall down to pictures and commit idolatry with them; another that the Pope is so far from falling down to any thing, that he exalts himself above all that is called God, and is very Antichrist himself: He that hates and would destroy my person will not surely worship my picture. One, that they wallow without any conscience or fear of God in their excesses; another, that they nothing but torture their carcasses with disciplines and fastings, as if men could not go to heaven in a whole skin. One, that in respect of chastity they villifie matrimony which the apostle calls honourable; another that by a superesteem of [Page 251]their own they make matrimony a sacrament, thereby equalling it with baptisme. One, that the ignorance of papist priests is so gross and palpable that generally they can hardly read latine: another that the little ones which pro­fess the gospel had by their simplicity prevailed over all the vast learning of the subtil popish clergy. One, that popery began in the twelfth age of the Church; another in the ninth; an­other in the sixt; another in the fourth; an­other in the very primitive times of the apo­sstles: I cannot now call to minde the number­les contradictories I observed put upon the pa­pists. Nor could I ever determine of my grand Sires religion by such reports.

Wherefor after a year or two I put my self to travel, all alone and solitary, to make my long in­tended discovery. Humansy speaking, it was rashly done of me, and I several times thought so when I met afterwards with troubles I did not then foresee, that were even ready to sink me. For in all my sufferings which were many and frequent, I could not but think of my many dear friends whose weeping tears in that my hu­mour I had neglected. I beleev to this honour that somthing went before me to provide my enter­tainment, and provoke people againstime for coming to spy the land: for as loon as I set my foot on the other shore and ever since, afflictions have still accompanied me. Nor yet was I ever [Page 252]so much offended with any mans abuse, as there­for to think ill of the religion which I knew him to transgress. It is not to be expected that all the men of a kingdom should equally imbibe the religion of the place. It may well be par­doned, if only one in four follow pure sensual nature as they received it, from the womb, even amongst the best professions. Religion is su­peradded to nature as salt, and is several wayes imbibed by men. Som drink it in as water, and with a little labour are quite concorpora­red with it, and make as it were one body with the spirit thereof: such were the glorious saints of the Church. Som take it in as pow­dered beef or other flesh, unto a perfect sea­soning: yet so as that still the flesh is more, and hath the denomination: these are upright good men preserved by the power of their religion from putrefaction and unsavorines, although they be men still, upright men. Som take it in as clay in a less degree and more imperfect mix­ture; but yet they shew it in their lives and con­versation, for it keeps them together, and if in one action they miss of grace in another they recover it. But som again in the fourth place are like a marble stone or brick which rubbed over with salt imbibes nothing: and such as these have the name of religion upon them, no­thing in them; and they may be met with eve­ry where, especially in outward society and [Page 253]commerce, for they are still abroad, even when better people are retired: and sometimes they will for their own interest get into inclosures too, where they procure much disturbance and vexation to the saints. In a word catholick religion is wondrous good and fruitful, as it was said of Canaan, and brings forth huge clusters of lovely grapes all over the land, but there be also giants and the sons of Anak to be met with there, and I escaped not their hands.

But God knew the innocence of my heart, and I beleev his good angel supported me. For the main, I got the end I went for: and having passed through some part of Holland and Ger­many France and Flanders returned to my countrey, to participate of the miseries which our civil wars then commenced upon pretens of a purer reformation and further elongation from popery, did bring upon us. And out of the love I bear my protestant countrimen I set forth this little Light, that they may no more be inveigled to infect their hearts and hands with the hatred and ruin of the innocent. For ca­tholick faith, which we call popery, is in it self a most sacred and pure religion: it makes million of saints, though it permit some bad ones; even as protestancy, which brings all things to a naked beleef that must suffice what ever life we lead, though it suffer some honest men not apt by the light of reason to transgress [Page 254]so oft as they may, makes a million of loos and wicked ones: but this is the difference, that there the few evil ones have som remors for do­ing ill, here the multitude of desperadoes have none at all. Catholicks cannot doubt of their faith, if Christ who promised to be with his Church unto the worlds consummation, be a true prophet: and again if he be a true pro­phet, then all reformers who jointly affirm the Church to have failed for so many ages, must needs be in an errour. But I com to my travels and particular observations, so much as may serv to my present purpos.

§. 22. Messach.

I Was edified and amazed to see catholick people flocking to Church not upon sun­daies only but every day in the week to their sa­cred orisons, the bells ringing to that purpos all the town over, not only every several hower in the morning until midday, but at verspers compline, and even at midnight mattens when all the religious of a kingdom are called up in the very depth of their sleep to chant forth psalms hymnes and canticles to the prais and glory of the almighty. It deighted me to en­ter their Churches which be kept so sweet and clean and in such a religious quiet retirednes, [Page 255]that it would make a man at his entrance into them, as they say of the kingdom of Florida in a sweet spring day, to forget wife and chil­dren and all worldly busines. But when I be­held the deep reverence and earnest devotion of the people, the majesty of their service, the gravity of their altars, the decency of their priests; certainly, said I within my self, this is he hous of God and gate of heaven: Alas, our Churches in England as they be now, be as short of those either for decency, use, or piety, as stables to a princely pallace: there they be upon their knees all the week long at their pray­ers, many of then constantly an hour together in the morning, and half an hour he that is least, and my hous saith God is the hous of prayer; but our Churches are either shut up all the week, or if they be open, are wholly taken up with boies shouting running and gamboling all about. On Sundaies indeed our people sit quiet and de­cently drest; but to bow the knee is quite out of fashion; and if any one chance to do it, as he is rare to behold, so is he very nimble at it, and as soon up as down, as if he made a court­ship with his knees, or only tried if his nerves and sinews were as good to bow as stand up­right. And our whole religious work here, is to sit quietly whiles a minister speaks upon a text, conferring notes, answering difficulties, expounding words, drawing conclusions, and [Page 256]putting together for ampler dilucidation one text to another; as if he were reading to stu­dents in the school some piece of Aristotles Pe­rihermenias. And thus we spend all our daies ever learning and teaching, and our whole reli­gion is to teach and learn, as if religion were only to lend the ear to one who cries Hearkens; or an art of knowing how to speak an hour upon two or three words of a vers; which for my part as I am well enough assured that it is not the great work of Christian religion, so neither is it the true work of Christian preach­ing; whether we consult reason or presidents of antiquity to find it. For as all sermons left us by greek and latine fathers are grave short and pithy, such namely as they being all priests used to deliver at the altar between the Evan­gile and Creed; so were they ever most free from any such verbal comparing of text with text, vers with vers, and the like various vani­ties which so take up our English preachings, that our sermons be little or nothing else, and only serv to spend time and vent our own fri­volous verbosity.

If it do happen that a more learned Prote­stant do make a sermon of solid matter, as sometimes they will, he will be sure before he make an end by one conceit or other to have a fling at the Papists, to the end that people may think, as indeed they do, that Papists have no [Page 257]such doctrine, though the preacher know him­self that he got it all out of their books; which is a pretty piece of legerdemain, but ve­ry frequent in this land. Another thing I have observed, and it is worth observation, that of all the sermons I have ever heard in England, I have never known any to deliver ex proposito the proper and peculiar doctrin of protestancy, by which and for which we first revolted from the catholick Church; as that our good works be all mortal sins and damnable before God; that we have no will or power to do good or avoid evil; that the commandements of God are impossible to be kept, &c. but rather all contrary; as if we were ashmed of our own doctrin, and afraid to speak before the people what we know in reason could not but offend Christian ears: But all generally do preach, when they preach any good thing, the doctrin of ca­tholicks; though ever abused with their own modes and mixtures. For every sect as it hath a peculiar spirit, so hath it a mode and vein and method proper to it self. The Independent speaks many good words, but inconsequent and uncon­nexed, so much roving up and down as if he had a mind to be prophet errant, and before he gives over, to say somthing of every thing. The Presbyterian ever pursues some Platonick idea, for example, the ingoing and outgoings of Christ, which is so thin and bodiles, that he [Page 258]is forced to assign six or seven wayes to discern it; then gives twelv consequent effects; nine­teen wayes to get, &c. in which wayes he does even tire himself, as you may perceive by his melting and breathing when he comes to the high hills of eighteenthly and ninteenthly: and after some months labour and travel in these his wayes, at last with much ado he finishes his text; which before he handled it was good and easy doctrin, but is now by his tedious exercise rendered obscure intricate and full of doubts. The Protestant cuts his text out logically into so many parts, and then walks through them all with an even rhetorick, adorned with witty conceits and flowers of common places, still bringing un that parcel of the text he is hand­ling with such proportion and measure in the close, that a man must needs say when he has done, that he has shewed a featous piece of art: and when his, or Presbyterian or Independents sermon is ended, then is the great work of their religion done; though all to little purpos, for a dead mans foot, say what you will to him, will never warm is shoo.

But the Catholick, if he speak like himself, having gravely and pithily prest the intention of the gospel for such a day unto the peoples practis and devotion, falls to the great works of sacrifice if it be in the morning, and of even­song in the after noon, adoration, prayer and [Page 259]charity; which is the summe wherein his reli­gion consists; and all his preaching servs but as a pair of bellows to make those coles burn. Nor does any good old catholick, that is well grounded in the constant practis of his faith, care at all for any further instruction; know­ing aforehand that it can tend to nothing els than what before he knew and yet endeavours to practis. For with him pure religion and un­defiled is not to hear words but do deeds, to reliev the orphan and widow, and to keep our selvs unspotted in this world; which unspot­tednes we attain by complying heart and hand unto the rule and sacraments of Jesus Christ. Nor did the primitive Christians for three hun­dred years, ever hear any sermon made to them upon a text all their whole life time, but meerly flocked together at their priests appointment, to their messach, or dominicum, or Leiturgy, or by what other name, for they used many at seve­ral times to avoid the pagans discovery, their Christian sacrifice was called. And it is most strang that we should pretend here in England to be Christians and the only good ones, and yet reject those two great things which were by all Christendom esteemed in every age the very essences of Christianity, the tribunal of absolution and the great Legacy of Jesus his body to his spous the Church; insisting wholly upon preaching which as it is an accidental and [Page 260]relative work of our Christianity, so is it com­mon with us an all religions both Mahometan Jew and Pagan; whose sermons if any should hear he could not tell, by the morality of the master, to what religion they belonged.

It is hard to say, why against all the vogue of antiquity we should be so violent as to abolish the Christian sacrifice, pull down the altars, banish the priesthood, yea and persecute it un­to death, except we mean to repaganise our selvs. Our protestant forefathers when they first rose, found manifestly all the Christian world over, that this incruent sacrifice according to the order of Melchisedeck was and had ever been the sum of all apostolical devotion; for which our many goodly fair Churches, shrines and altars were built, which hang now forlorn and desolate in our hands like great dead car­kasses after the soul is departed: for the inshrin­ed body of Jesus was the life and soul of our Churches, which then died all of them when he departed, mouldring away ever since into dust and rottennes. And therefor Martin Luther with his Kate, the Adam and Eve of prote­testancy, did not for that reason presume to pull down the altars, although they would not keep them up without the mixtur of som errour of their own. But we in England in our strang heat tore down all, without either president of the catholick world or our own reforming fore­fathers.

We cannot but see if indeed we see any thing, that every law and religion hath been still an­nexed with a corresponding sacrfice. Yea so surely and universally, that sacrifice seems both to be born with religion and with religion to be extinguished. The first men who worshipped God in the world as Cain and Abel, are said to have don it with a sacrifice: after the flood with religion again renewed was also sacrifice renew­ed by Noah; and when afterwards through di­vers persecutions religion was brought into hazzard, nothing did the prophets so much la­ment as the ceasing of their sacrifice as may be be seen in the book of Kings and Daniel. And not without reason; for all other kinds of good things offered or don to God are common also unto creatures; only sacrifice is a worship so due to the Almighty, as none either in heaven or earth may partake with him in it: an other sa­crifice properly socalled besides this according to the order of Melchisedeck there never was any amongst Christians. For although faith, hope, and prais be by way of analogy called a sacrifice, in an improper and translated locution, to set forth the worth and acceptablenes of them; yet this is so far from derogating to the great and solemn sacrifice properly so called, that it pre­supposes and establishes it: for the other could not have that analogical name, except that thing were unto which they may bear analogy: [Page 262]prais could not be commanded as sacrifice, if there were no such thing as sacrifice, thence the commendation should be drawn, and to whose worth it should allude: as it were im­pertinent and foolish, to express the sweetnes of any oratory by the name of honey and sugred rhetorick, if we did beleev there were no such thing as honey and sugar in nature. It is true also that the death of Christ upon the cross was both a true and solemn sacrifice: but that is passed away and is the object of our faith, not an external rite about which the Church may meet and com together at all times to wor­ship God, as is this representation of it which our Lord instituted for that very end before his death. Nor is the passion of our Lord proper to us Christians alone, as the real figuration of it which himself instituted; for all the sacrifices of the old law were accepted in order to that passion to com, even as ours in respect of it now past.

And since there were true sacrifices in the old law amongst the Jews, why should there not be also in the new which is beleeved to be more perfect; about which Christians should assem­ble to offer up with it and it order to it all their requests and praises? For Christ our Lord took not away those things which God his father in the old law instituted as being not contrary to him; but only perfected and changed them in­to [Page 263]better things, both precepts, sacraments and sacrifice too. and of this last it behooved him to be more careful then all the rest; for other­wise, sith sacrifice is the only worship proper and peculiar unto God, by utterly taking it away, he had not augmented but dimished his Fathers glory. All other kinds of worship we Christians have for certain which the Jews ever had, invocation, adoration, vows, hymnes, feasts, fasts, faith, hope, charity and prais; must only that which only is proper to the almighty be excluded? especially sith we have all the rea­sons to honour God by sacrifice the Jewes ever had: we are an extern and visible congregation as they were; we have the passion of the Mes­sias to be represetned before our eyes now with us past, as with them it was to com; we have the same God with the highest worship to be honoured, for our sins to be appeased, for fa­vours to be invocated, for received benefits to be praised.

But if any will be contentious and not heed all this, which is nothing but pious reason, let him look upon the primitive Church in the apo­stles time whereof we have some clear footsteps delivered us in the Acts of the Apostles, and he shall find that the apostles and apostolical Chri­stians placed their religion not in hearing or making sermons, for they had none; but in at­tending to their Christian liturgy, and all anti­quity [Page 264]will attest it. The sermons mentioned in that book were only in defence of Christianity, made to the Jews & Pagans for their conversion, not to any Christians at all: Such was St. Peters first speech to the Jews and Gentiles that brake in amongst the Christians in Jerusalem after their Messach ended, and the holy Ghost fallen upon them, c. 2. after this to other Jews, c. 3. c. 5. then to Cornelius a pagan c. 10. So like­wise spake S. Stephen to the Hebrew Priests and Jews c. 7. Saint Philip to the Ethiopian Eunuch c. 8. St. Paul to the synagogue in Pisidia c. 13. to others in Iconium c. 14. to Gentiles in Ma­cedonia c. 16. again to other Jews in Thessalo­lonica and heathen Philosophers in Athens c. 17. both S. Paul and Apollo to the Jews at Corinth and Ephesus c. 18. c. 19. at Troas also he de­fended Christ and his religion against all that resisted it, speaking even till midnight; c. 20. but this was dispute, (and so the text calls it) rather than a preaching; and made una sabbati, saith the same text, cum convenissemus ad frangen­dum panem; so that it was not the work they came together for, but an additament to it. So likewise he spake to other Jews in Jerusalem, c. 22. to Foelix and Agrippa painims c. 24. c. 26. to the Jews in Rome for their conversion c. 28. And no where was ever sermon made to formal Christians either by St. Peter or Paul or any other, as the work of their religion they came [Page 265]together for: nor be there other sermons in that book but what I have mentioned; nor did the Christians ever dream of serving God after their conversion by any such means, but only by their Eucharistian leiturgy, and sacrifice, bread-fraction, or Messach, as is apparent in that book: I will mention but one place in the beginning of the 13. ch. which speaks thus, Ministrantibus illis Domino & jejunantibus dixit spiritus sanctus, &c. Whiles they were administring to our Lord and fasting, the holy Ghost said, Separate me Paul and Barnabas; [...], which Erasmus renders well and truly, sacrificantibus illis Do­mino; which one text gives double testimony both to apostolical sacrifice and priestly ordina­tion: For that ministerial function no man can doubt but that it was a publick work of religi­on; and it could be no other than their great Christian Sacrifice, as the words do manifestly import; since it was made [...] to our Lord; for other inferiour ministeries of the word and Sacraments are not made to God but to the people; but the apostles were [...], administring, leiturgying, sacrificing to our Lord, whent his segregation of Paul and Barnabas from the laiety to the clergy, which cannot otherwise be imagined to be done but by sacredotal consecration, was to be effected. And all that whole book testifies sufficiently [Page 266]that the apostles and primitive Christians ever came together to their Dominicum or Educhd­rist, to their liturgy or messach, and not to any sermon; not ad audiendam concionem but ad frangendum panem.

It would griev any Christian heart to see the poor Catholicks of England so miserably ha­rassed, pillaged, imprisoned, hated, hanged by their own allies and countreymen, as they have been now a hundred years, for the profession of that great work of Christianity which Christ and his apostles taught them; and that they should undergo the same disgrace and ruin by such as call themselves Christians, yea the only pure ones, for that very self same act of Reli­gion, for which both the Apostles themselves and all primitive Christians were so cruelly per­secuted by Jew and Pagan. But the God of mercies look in his good time both upon the persecutour and sufferer, with compassion and favour; them, becaus they have done it igno­rantly in incredulity, these becaus for his fear and love they have persevered hitherto through many great afflictions in his service, and patient­ly withstood all opposition even unto blood­shed and death until this day: But Catholicks had their lession read them long ago, and they have it by heart by this time. They will, saith their Lord and master, lay their hands upon you and persecute you, delivering you into custody and [Page 267]prisons, dragging you before Kings and presidents for my names sake; and ye shall be betraied by parents, children, kinsfolk and friends; and some of you they will put to death, and ye shall be a hatred unto all men for my name: but who shall persever unto the end he shall be saved. But I hope our countreymen will at length dis­cern their own dangerous mistake, and perceiv with me that the Popish Mass which is the old opostolical devotion merits not the hatred and mischief we have either wrought or intended the observers of it in our land.

Hitherto then I hope we have no reason to hate popery, upon the account of their Mes­sach; which is indeed the chiefest piece of our division, and occasion of the many contume­lies we put upon them; especially considering that in our own Communion, so far as it goes, we do but imitate great part of it, and that in their very words.

§ 23. B. V. Mary.

AL Catholiks I could ever see or hear or read of, bear a most devout respect to the Virgin MARY, whom others care not how they vil­lify and dishonour either by their words or wri­tings: and I cannot but dislike this our uncivil carriage, to say no wors of it, as much as I do [Page 268]approve of their piety. Surely that Virgin of whom God would be incarnate, and with whom he lived so many years together, must needs be a person of strang perfection, and worthy of great esteem amongst all such as worship her Son and look upon him indeed as their Re­deemer. He that loves him that begets, saith the good apostle, loves him that is begotten; and I should think he that worships him that is begotten, must needs have some respect for her that bare him. The blessed Virgin was her self so confident of this, that she was bold to say, Ecce enim ex hoo beat am me dicent omnes gene­rationes, all generations, all nations, saith she, shall call me Blessed. And surely if this be true, and in gospel it passes for divine words, we that instead of calling her Blessed presume so high­ly to villify and blaspheme her even in our pub­lick streets, for which in catholick countries we should be in danger of being stoned to death by the people, show our selvs to be a nation that belongs not to the Magnificat. Indeed all here amongst us are not so rude; but such as be, are neither punished nor questioned for it. And what in the name of God hath the Virgin Mary don to us, what ill or harm hath she ever wrought us, that any English Christian should cast so many gibes, and show so much disesteem to that blessed creatur, whom the whole catho­lick world, the angels of heaven, nay our Lord [Page 269]himself, and that great God that made heaven and earth have set in so high a place of honour. Will our incivility, as it hath no ground or reason, admit likewise of no limits? It may be feared that the spirit of Luther anisme is some very foul one; for it hath moved the profes­sours of it in several places unto most unseem­ly language and highest disesteem of very thing that is venerable. Not only princes and prelates, priests and altars, shrines and sacrifice, byshops and their sacred ordinations, the real presence, tribunal of our reconciliation and the like; but the very saints and angels of heaven, nay the most innocent blessed Maid, whom the very Turks do honour to this day, and, that she may not be thought the wors of for that, an angel from heaven saluted by the mandate and in the name of him who is primogeneal Life and substantial Truth with the title of [...] Most beloved and Gratious, escape not the lash of our lips and pens. And yet this is not all neither:

Do not I know that the primitive prote­stants in forreign parts have uttered, some openly, some more obscurely, in their writings many odde words against the very honour of Jesus Christ himself, although our more moderate Church of England I am confident hates them for it. Did not Calvin taunt at his ignorance and passion and too much haste for [Page 270]his breakfast: when he crust the figtree that had not fruit upon it when he sought it? if he had studied catholick divines they would have taught him a more modest and pious interpre­tation than that idle wicked one of his own. Did not Michael Servetus that bold apostate Spanish youth speak openly amongst his fel­low protestants in Geneva, that he wondered that they had raised all their controversies so many as they had against the Church which is named the body of Christ, and yet never a one against Christ the head of that body? did not Valentine Gentile that unhappy Italian, after he had revolted to Calvin take it ill that all the re­formed Churches agreed yet with the papists in the beleef of a Trinity? and with him sided Matheus Gribaldus, Lismanin, Francis David; and Jacobus Paleologus, though this last recant­ed afterward and returned happily to his catho­lick faith. And who-knows not that Luther, Brentius, Calvin, Suinglius, yea and Erasmus too, who though he yet remained catholick would be nibling now and then at Arrian and Socinianisme, let fly many a secret dart at Christ and the sacred Trinity? though they were not yet so bold as to profess openly with som others of their brethren, whom they saw to suffer in their repute for it, any such opini­on; till they found the world in a more for­ward disposition to accept it: and all these [Page 271]bent their bowes and fitted their arrowes to the string, that if not openly yet at least in the dark and in Lunâ, as the prophet phrases it, they might shoot and hit every thing that is sacred, even Christ himself. So true it is, that he who loves him that begets, loves him that is begotten, and he that hates the one does not truly love the other. But the penmen of our creed and gospel who made ho­nourable mention of the Virgin Mary were of another spirit, than we be that so much disho­nour her, although for fashion sake we read over those holy penmens words. A certain pro­testant byshop did not many years ago examin a catholick child that stood before him if he could say his prayers; the boy replying yes, said first his Pater noster; after that began his Ave Maria, which catholicks use to repeat in memory of Christs incarnation; at which words, nay, quoth the byshop let her alone, let her alone, we have nothing to do with her. The child went on to his Creed, and when he came to conceptus est de spiritus sancto natus ex — he sodainly stopt; and she is here again, quoth the child, she is here again my Lord, what shall I do with her now; you may let her pass quoth the byshop in your Creed but not in your prayers. As though we might have faith but neither hope nor charity for her. But if we seriously consider the spirit of those who wrote either [Page 272]our Gospel or Creed, we shall find that of Ro­man catholicks to have a most near consangui­nity with it, and loving them we cannot hate these for the respect they bear his virgin Mother whom we all worship.

§. 24. Images.

IN all places where I came I beheld great store of pictures and images in Churches of Roman catholicks; which being in the postures either of their bloody martyrdoms which for their religion they underwent, or apostolical sacrifice, or sacred retirements, meditations, or other exercise of their faith hope or charity ei­ther towards God or their neighbours, apostles, martyrs, confessours, hermites, monks, virgins, kings, queens, byshops, as they made a goodly show, so did they mightily assist the fansy un­to a more united thought of the religion peo­ple came into the Church to fulfil and solem­nise. But the altar is seldom without the pour­traicts of Jesus and his Virgin Mother, but ne­ver without the Crucifix: the sight of all which is apt to cast into the mind of such as enter into the Church that meditation of the apostle in his epistle to the Hebrewes, Non accessistis ad tra­ctabilem montem & accensibilem ignem, &c. Ye are not com to the high towring mount, flam­ing [Page 273]fire and whirlwind; and darknes and storm and sound of trumpet, and nois of words, which they that heard excused themselves, and requested to hear it no more, and it seemed so terrible that Moyses himself stood trembling and affrighted; but ye are come to Mount Si­on, to the city of our living God, to celestiall Jerusalem and society of angels, the Church of primitive Christians conscript in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just per­fect men, to Jesus the mediatour of a new testa­ment, and to the Aspersion of blood speaking better things than Able.

And all these representations, so much con­curring to devotion and piety as they do, the doctrine and men who tore them down and cast them out of our English Churches, and broke and hewed them in pieces with so much rage, could not be any friends whatever they might pretend, either to our mount Sion or the citty of our living God, the celestial Jerusalem, so­ciety of angels, the Church of primitive Chri­stians, or to the spirits of just men perfected, or to Jesus mediatour of the new testament, or lastly to the aspersion of blood speaking better things than Abel, all which was there pour-traited and described.

It is the judgment of all men that the viola­tion of an Image redounds to the Prototype; and therefore Kings not only in Christendom, [Page 274]but beyond it use to punish a grand traitour either deceased or fled even in his effigie. Every particular person loves to behold the picture of him he esteems, and again if he hate the person he detests the face: thus even our late rebells here in England after they had murthered our good King, shot his pictures with bullets, and broke them with their cimiters and spears all the land over. Thy adversaries saith the Pro­phet have roared and raged in the midst of thy synagogues, and for thy ensigns have set up their own banners; as once of those who with strong exes cut up the thickest of timber unto the temples structure it was esteemed an honour­able and noble work in them; so is it countd now if any on the contrary break in pieces thy sculptures with axe & hammers: they were Gods enemies then that did all this, and that brake down his sculptures; and by those very works of theirs concluded to be his enemies by a great Prophet, who well enough understood who was Gods friend and who his foe.

If any would consider the constitution and exigence of mans nature he would soon find not only the convenience but necessity of such helps as ocular representations afford us: for the fansy hath nothing but what it receives from the senses, and the intellect works upon nothing but what it has from fansy; and therfore did God make man in the last place after heaven [Page 275]and earth was framed, to the end that in so great a variety of sensible objects he might find somthing to think of even in the first instant of his being; wheras if he had been made before other things he had stood like a stock or stone without any possibility of a thought. Now nothing administers to the fansy and conse­quently to the mind with that variety and life and power as doth the eye: the supplies of the ear care but dead things to it, especially in the account of exciting desire and love: let Cicero speak a whole day upon the beauties of a prince­ly seat, countrey, city, man or woman; yet when the eye comes once to see the thing in its own properties, it discerns and represents more at one glance than could his or all the oratory in the world ever by the help of the ear im­print into the mind. Indeed who is so igno­rant, that he has not observed ere this; that the eye has a hundred fold the actuosity of the ear: nor is it unknown what strange melting affections are caused in the heart by a continual sight and meditation of some sacred pictur of the Crucifix; when sermons float by and effect little or nothing in comparison; even as world­ly objects so long as they are coached in aiery words pass away like wind, but once seated in the throne of the eye they move impetuously. Nor can all the ministers in the world give me a reason why the eye in a sacred purpos may not [Page 276]have the helps of her species, as well as the ear have hers; or why the minde that is to be mo­ved and can never be moved too much in such things may not as well have the quicker as duller assistance. For when any one preaches upon the Passion of Christ, does he do any thing els but labour to work out such repre­sentations in the ear and minde as oratory may effect, for the moving of affections cor­responding to such an object: and if such good meditations put into a book of devotion be as­sisted with an ocular representation which is more quick and full, and carries more of life with it, what harm is it! surely he that deprives me of the more lively helps, never means whatever he pretend, I should have any cordial feeling of the things he talks of.

And verily the Protestant pretenses for their removal of images out of our Churches are but simple ones, and the simpler they be the the better it seems they serve the deluded vul­gar. First say they God has in his commande­ments forbidden the making of graven images: Good, and has he so? do you not find too that he commanded it? see if he did not give order in the same scripture for Cherubins and Seraphins to be made and set up in his sanctum sanctorum over the ark? what then, did God or Moses forget himself, and contradict his own words? or are you blind? or only catho­licks [Page 277]fools? or what is the matter. Look seri­ously and you shall find that Moses forbad pro­phane and forreign images, but he command­ed his own: though he disliked the ugly face of Molech Dagon and Astaroth, yet did not he therefor will his people should tear down his own Cherubins. And Christians likewise have not any images of Simon Magus although they have St. Peters: the Crucifix they will keep and use and honour, not the portraict of Him with a cloven foot: if they esteem the memo­ry and effigies of great Constantine, yet not of wicked Dioclesian; if we find in their Churches the image of blessed S. Bennet or good Saint Francis, yet shall we never meet there with the face of Luther or Calvin: so that here in the catholick Church as well as in Moses law is both, Thou shalt make graven images, and again Thou shalt not.

Thus much Anticatholicks might themselvs understand, if they would consider any thing seriously, by the very words of the text. Thou shalt not make to thy self any graven image: not make to thy self. As if he had said, when you com into the land amongst the gentiles, let none of you be inveigled either by their exam­ple or words, to make to himself any of the images he shall see there set up by the inhabi­tants, contrary to the ceremonies of Moses and practis of the synagogue, which doth so honour [Page 278]her own Cherubins, that she abominates all idols and their sculptures. And thus if any ca­tholick should make to himself and upon his own head and fansy, contrary to what is al­lowed, any peculiar image of the planets for example, or wicked men to worship it for sacred, I beleeve he will be punished for his transgres­sion. So that images are not forbidden in the general notion of images, but only of such or such a kind; as if I should forbid my servant who travels with me into France and keeps my purs, to make unto himself any cloathes; I in­tend not that he shall go naked, but only that he make no cloathes but what and when and in what fashion I approve. Secondly they say, it is idolatry. But this is spoken without logick. Except the thing represented be an idol, devil, or somthing opposite to God, or below man, whom yet he will worship; the honour and use of the image cannot be idolatry. If I may respect and love the person. I may love and re­spect the image too; sith this my esteem is terminated ultimatly only upon the prototype. Moses never feared idolatry with his own Che­rubins, and yet he had as much reason to fear it as the Christian Church can have. The ho­nour of an image is but a natural resultancy from the exemplar represented in it, and this can be no other affection but what is due to that: as any man may perceive by four several [Page 279]images set before him, the first of his king, the other of his father, a third of his sweet-heart, a fourth of his mortal adversary: upon the sight of all which he conceivs and can conceiv no other but that passion he bears the proto­type or thing resembled, honour to one, duty to the other, tender love to the third, and hate­ful disaffection to the last. Now that the saints and angels of God, spirits assisting to Gods glory and worship, and administring to our ne­cessities deserv a veneration at our hands I shall speak anon; and from the image can result no other but what is their due. As they be no Gods, so neither can their image make them so: the image of my enemy makes him not my sweet heart, nor can the picture of my neigh­bour make him my king: And how can the re­presentation of Gods saints and servants make them otherwise than what they are. But all these petty arguments are taken from the ran­courous Jewes, who were never bent against images in general, till they saw the Christians to keep and worship the figure of Jesus Christ whom they all hated.

And if Protestants can love Jesus Christ crucified and hate the representation of his cross, which two things how they can consist together no reason of man can compre­hend; yet let us not maligne the innocent Pa­pists for doing that which the reason of all [Page 280]mankind allows. What person soever I may love, I may like his image also.

§. 25. Latin Service.

THe catholick liturgy is and ever was all over the western empire in the latin tongue. This general custom of keeping both mass and bible in an unknown tongue from vulgar hands, as it may be made to carry with with it a plausible surmise either of fraud or en­vy; so hath it been the great engine used by Protestants both to draw and keep a vast num­ber of people from the bosom of the catholick Church. The busines of Scripture I have al­ready hinted at: For catholicks have the summ of scripture both for history and dogme deli­vered them in their own language so much as may make for their salvation, good orders being set and instituted for their proficiency therein, and what needs any more? or why should they be further permitted either to sa­tisfy curiosity, or rais doubts, or to wrest words and examples there recorded unto their own ruin, as we see now by experience men are apt to do. Besides the book is sacred and there­for not to be sullied with every hand. What God hath sanctified let not man make common. It is against the natur of a thing segregated to [Page 281]divine use, to be vulgarly mixt with our pro­phane utensils and touch and talkings; and in­deed it is a contradiction in rearms; for if it be segregated from them, how is it mixed with them? if it be mysterious how can it be vulgar. And this is the judgment of the whole world, both present and past: Not onely maho­metans and pagans who evermore kept the book that spake forth the secrets of their reli­gion still in that one language it was deliver­ed in; but the Hebrewes too, as well as the Christian Church: Nor was the bible, the law of Moses, or the prophets, or hagiography ever put out of their hebrew into syriack, ei­ther in Moses time or after, either by his com­mand or any permission of the high priests that followed. Nay it was so far from that, that it was not touched or looked upon by the people even in its own language, but kept privately in the ark or tabernacle, and brought forth at times to the priest who might upon the sabboth day, which is our saturday, read som part of it to the people, and put them in mind of their laws religion and duty. Whereas the Christian bible is in the hands of all who understand ei­ther greek or latin. So great is the indulgence of the Catholick Church, and so good an opi­nion hath she above all others of her children; though every one is not permitted to prattle and dispute about it, as I think no wise man [Page 282]will think it fit they should. And this retirednes of sacred doctrin and rare approach unto the eye and ear with high reverence and solemnity, works in the minds of people a wonderful great awe and impression of respect; whereas fa­miliar usage renders it contemptible. Indeed after that sacred book becomes once to be slightly thrown about with ordinary touch and tongue, what doth it work but self will and conceit, contentions, pride, schismes and wars? experience hath proved it: for every one hath a text both to defend himself and oppose his neighbour, whether it be in earnest, or as it often happens in sport and jest, whether wrong or rightly applied.

Nor can the Bible be well translated; for the original carries oftentimes so great a lati­tude and amplitude of senses that it cannot be brought into a vulgar tongue without confine­ing the signification, to the great alteration and perhaps subversion of the holy penmans intention. Besides, when men write or speak with a special peculiarity of spirit, as all indeed do, but those holy writers much more; this genius of theirs is so lapt up in their own words or sounds, that by transmigration out of the coverture in which that Spirit was born and bred, as a snail in her shell, it doth in a manner quite expire and vanish. We find daily, that books translated out of one tongue into an­other [Page 283]lose much of their connatural grace and sweetness, if not all the whole genuine power and life they carried in their own character. So ticklish and volatile a thing is that hidden ge­nius couched in the rinde of mens words. Nor is a man better known by his face than writings; I mean, if he draw his discours and sens out of his own bowels: for otherwise if he be only a book botcher or collectour out of other au­thours, it will signifie little; which I take to be the reason why many spiritual books written in these times out of antient contemplatives, al­though the matter is the same and the language mended, yet be they in these penmen but dry unsavory stuff, which in the first authour was a fragrant ravishing devotion; the good things therin contained have by their transmigration lost their own spirit, and the latter authour, if so I may call him, had not another to give them answerable to their nature. By all this I would say thus much, that the Bible translated out of its own sacred phrase into a prophane and com­mon one, loses both its own property and am­plitude of meaning, and is likewise devested of its peculiar majesty, holines, and spirit: which is reason enough if there were no other, why it should be kept inviolate in its own stile and speech. Sacred doctrin like the persons is not to pass de domo in domum, but remain under that roof which first covered them. And as for [Page 284]peoples instructions, it is as I said before to be made by the priests and pastours of the religi­on, on whose lips the sacred knowledg hangs and thence drops down upon the assembly, out of that book according to occasion and times, as holy Church whole book that is shall judge it fit. We commit not to children the whole pot of honey, whereby they may surfeit and hurt themselves, but give them only some few drops upon a stick of licoras so much as they can digest and make use of for their health.

And if the book wherin religious rites be grounded lawfully may, and in reason ought, and in practise ever hath been kept segregated in a language not common to vulgar ears; much more are the sacred solemn rites themselvs to be per­formed in a tongue that is segregated from common use, answerable to the Book according to which they be executed: which custom as it renders that great Act more majestick and venerable, so doth it carry with it much of con­venience and no inconvenience at all. For thus the Church all over the world, as opposite to Babel, wherein were so many divisions of tongues, shall as in heart and faith so also in lip and language be unanimous and linked to­gether; and the great work of Religion, wherein all Christian people from one coast of heaven to another do unanimously conspire, be so uniformly executed, that men may in all [Page 285]places of the world meet with their own Chri­stian Church in one mode and fashion both to acknowledg and joyn with it in their orisons. Nor could otherwaies any one priest serve in se­veral countries, or administer presently in a place which himself or others with him had converted: for which caus men studying to get that one language, which is stretched as large and wide as is the catholick Church throughout the world, have in all places one tongue, and that no hard one to convers withall; which did not the Church use it in her rites would in time be utterly neglected. The Hebrew Church be­ing immured in one Kingdom had not those many reasons which her younger sister, whose territories are extended from East to West hath, to keep her rites in a language differing from the vulgar; and yet she did so.

Inconvenience in this practis there can be none assigned, but only this; that if the latin tongue be used at the altar, then cannot the vulgar people understand what is said. But this is not of any moment. For first the peo­ple have all the whole scope and purpose and frame of sacred liturgy set down in their own prayer-books, and if they will, in their hearts and mind; whereby they may if they pleas as equally conspire and go along with the priest in their devotions, as if he spake in the mother tongue. Secondly catholick people come toge­ther [Page 286]not for other busines at the Mass, but only with fervour of devotion to adore Christ cru­cified before them, and by the mediation of that sacred blood to pour forth their supplications for themselvs and others, which being don, and their good purpos of serving and pleasing that holy Lord that shed his blood for us renewed, they depart in peace: This is the general pur­pos of the Mass; so that eyes and hands to lift up, knees to bow, and hearts to melt, are there of more use, than ears. But thirdly there is no need at all for the people either to hear or un­derstand the Priest when he speaks and prayes and sacrifices to God in their behalf: Sermons to the people must be made in the peoples lan­guage; but prayers presented to God for them if they be made in a language that God un­derstands, it is enough.

This was well enough conceived by the whole congregation of Israel who commonly stood in vaste multitudes without in a large outward court when the priest entered his sanctum san­ctorum, to offer and pray for them, who all the while were so far from hearing that they could not see him: this if any doubt, he may both discern it in the old law, and in our gospel too; where Zacharias is said to be praying at the al­tar when all the people stood without. Why then may not the younger sister Church of [Page 287]Christians likewise pleas and pacify her heaven­ly father with sacred words and rites addressed unto him in the behalf of the people, although these do not understand, nay not so much as hear what is said. And what matters it, if I pray for a friend whether he hear me or no, so that God unto whom I pray do hear and accept of my humble addresses. St. Paul wrote to Rome from Corinth most heartily in his letters requesting their praiers; and he esteemed it as good, as if he had himself been by and heard it; and yet the catholick altar is not so far from the people, as Corinth is from Rome. Wherefore in St. Pauls judgment one may pray for another not onely priest for the people, but people also for the priest, without being under­stood, or so much as either heard or seen. Nor could St. Paul in his own reason ever deny the efficacy of those praiers which be made by one for another in any whatever language, for it was all one to him what language the Romans spake; and if he did reflect upon it he could not be ignorant that they spake not the lan­guage of Corinth when he wrote to them from thence, that they should pray for him there at so great a distance.

But if any will yet be obstinate and object unto me that S. Paul himself even in his epistle he wrote to Corinth from Ephesus, which was his first letter he sent to that people, speaks [Page 288]there about the end of the same letter very much against their praying and prophesying in an unknown tongue; he may know first, that even the tongue of the Romans whose prayers notwithstanding S. Paul so earnestly re­quested at Corinth was an unknwn tongue to those that lived there, and yet that wise apo­stle would not we may think contradict him­self: Secondly then, what was the matter? The busines was this. There were in the primi­tive Churches up and down many gifts and gra­tuities bestowed upon Christian people by that holy Spirit who would thereby exalt the gos­pels glory, as extemporary prophesies, work­ing of miracles, gift of tongues, and the like; and S. Paul hearing at Ephesus of some disor­ders in Corinth upon that account, as those kind of gifts are possible to be abused, he wrote to them about it, to let them know that the spirit of Jesus for such his voluntary donations unto men was indeed to be praised; but yet that Christians should not therefor place in those things their utmost glory: and then to diminish further the huge esteem they had there of gifts and tongues before all other, he lets them know that of all the other gifts, that in particular was liable to the greatest inconveni­ences, even far more than either wonder-work­ing or prophecy. This is the apostles drift as any one may see that understands a grave and sober [Page 289]letter. But what is all this to any service of the Church.

But thirdly that I may make the thing yet a little plainer; the Latin in which the Catholick service is kept is no unknown tongue, and there­for that objection of no valiew against it. There is no tongue in the world can be said ab­solutely either a known tongue or unknown, but only with relation unto people; and so every language in the world is in respect of som people a known tongue and in respect of others an unknown. English is an unknown tongue to Vienna, but not to London; high Dutch is an unknown tongue to London, but not to Vienna: And therefor that we may conclude a tongue to be known or unknown, we must compare it to the family or people in reference to whom it is used, and no otherwise: and that family or people must be considered, not in any other respects if they have many, but only in relation to that particular rank or order which refers unto such a language. An English merchant living in Anwerp hath two languages which himself and family speaks, English and Dutch; and both of them in reference both to England and Hol­land jointly may be called both known tongues, and unknown: but in his busines with the Eng­lish, dutch is the unknown tongue, in his Hol­land affairs, english. So the Pope as he is go­vernour and lord of the city of Rome speaks [Page 290]Italian as all the other people there do, and it is the only known tongue in that degree and order; but as he is head of the whole Church spread over the earth, which is a mystical body distinct from the body politick, and hath a lan­guage of its own quite differing from the Ita­lian, that passes through Germany France and Spain, both Indies and the Islands, the north and south world, wheresoever Christians live, so he uses and speaks that general language which is latin: and in that sens Italian is an un­known tongue, and Latin only the known tongue of the Christian world. So that in order to religion that one language that is spoken not in one corner, but runs quite through the hous, and is common to all as they be ranked in the series of Christianity, wherein they are trained up by the father of the family, and which in reference to religion he only speaks himself, is the only known tongue in order to it and all other tongues unknown: And so not latin but english, not latin but dutch, not latin but spanish is an unknown tongue to the Christian world; for all these though they be the known languages of particular kingdoms which be but a corner of Christianity, yet not they but latin is the known language of the whole Christian body and family through the world. The hous of God is but one in it self, although it be dis­perst over several nations, and the language fit­ted [Page 291]for all the body must consequently be but one, wherein all those nations are united and linked together exteriourly, even as they be joined interiourly in faith, which in that one tongue is carried up and down and conserved; and all other tongues, english, french, spanish, be accidental to Christians as they be Christians, even as the times and places of their abode be, nor be they fastned unto them by their Christianity but by corporal birth and educati­on, which be contingent and altogether acci­dental to religion. So then latin in reference to religion, which for reasons above named must use one language, is so far from being an un­known tongue that it is the only one known language of the Christian world, united to Christian faith as the proper garment to a body, by whose fashion it is discerned.

I know that a part of the Church useth greek in her Liturgy, and som few people Hebrew, as well as the generality does Latin. But I men­tion only the latin tongue becaus my countri­men take notice only of that. And all the three languages agree in this, that they are se­gregated from vulgar use, consecrated by the cross of the Meffi [...]s, approved by the general pastour, and equally liable to the present ob­jection, which is so trufatical that it casts not the least blemish upon popery for that custom: and I hope all wife men will be of my mind. [Page 292]Our land me thinks should thank the Pope for keeping his Mass and Psalter in such an un­known tongue: For so our vulgar if they should be curious to see it, yet can they neither be offended by what they hear, nor so much as discern that our own English communion-book is drawn out of the popish Breviary and Missal. To revile and hate a custom whence we do our selves receiv so much benefit and no body and harm, is fals latin in morality.

§. 26. Communion.

EVen as to pleas the people and to draw and keep them from the catholick Church we threw the Bible amongst them, telling them withall that as it is easie to understand, so is eve­ry man inabled to interpret it, although our Protestant Church does now too late repent it, and wish with all their hearts it had never been done: so likewise another plausible advantage we took against the Pope and Church wherein those people communicate commonly but un­der one kind, by giving all communicants a spoonful of wine together with their mouthful of bread: which stratagem has given as ample content as if people had been treated at my Lord Majors Feast. For who would not drink with their meat? and what reason can be given [Page 293]that they should not? or that a feast with wine should not caeteris paribus be better than with­out it.

But a little to abate our insulting over a grave religious people, let me argue a little for them after my plain manner. Protestant coun­treymen you cannot but know, at least you ought to know, that the catholick Church uses the cup in communion as much as we in Eng­land do, and in sacrifice more; for so I distin­guish at this time that the sacrifice is for the priest, communion for the people; more I say than we ever mean to do: for the deacon or minister at the altar after the priest had com­municated the people with the hoast, carries the cup after him to all the said communicants to drink: before which action of communion the Priest to prefigure Christs passion upon the al­tar and his blood effused had both consecrated and consummated both the kinds himself. Is not this enough to silence you? I should think it were; since you are taken so clearly in a dissi­mulation, at least, that I may speak no more, when you say that Catholicks have not the cup in communion, concealing what you ought to acknowledg both that the people have as much as ours, and that the priest consecrates and con­summates both, which others do not. Oh but you will say, they give not the people the con­secrated challice which is the very blood of [Page 294]Christ! very good, no more do Protestants; do we give the people any more then a cup of natu­ral wine? they do so too: if you answer, it is blest wine; know and remember, that when you speak against the Priests consecration, Oh then that blessing is nothing; but when you would argue against the communion in one kind, then you make something of it: so likewise your own blessing of the cup when you talk against puri­ritans, o 'tis a great and venerable secret; but when you plead against Catholicks, then 'tis but an empty ceremony. Where shall any one hold such slippery cells. But to omit these cavills. May not Anti-Romans be ashamed to say that Catholicks use not the cup which they use as much as any, and to as much effect as we will allow it to be used, and yet more too? The ca­tholick people in communion (I must say it again that I may be understood) do drink of such a cup as Protestants do affirm to be the only cup and no other; and over and above this communicate the very body of their re­deemer animated with his soul and sacred blood, and hypostatically united to his deity, which thing Protestants neither do nor will allow it, although gospel do both direct and command it. And yet we will be talking of I know not what defect of catholick communion, not re­membring too, as we forget other things, that all the vertue of consecration is attributed by [Page 295]Protestants only to our feeding upon Christ by faith; which no man can deny but that it may be totally done and compleated without touch­ing either bread and drink: and therfore have they mightily laboured to make good, that when our Lord saith in St. John, My flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed, that he speaks not one word of sacramental eating or drinking but only of feeding upon him spiritu­ally by the mouth of faith. May not Catho­licks say the like to any text that shall be brought for the people communion of the challice? He is surely a mad man that so bela­bours his adversary in one argument, that by the same he knocks out his own brains in an­other. So then Protestants take from the peo­ple both the real body and blood of Christ uni­ted and effused, and then exclaim against Ca­tholicks for not using the effused species as well in communion as sacrifice. We who hold nei­ther as we ought, condemn them for withhold­ing one who hold both, and call that in them a sacriledge with we our selves esteem but a ceremony. The catholick Church feeds her people with real meat; we feed ours with signs and husks: Though others might upbraid the witholding of one kind, if it were so, yet surely we cannot ingenuously do it, who have taken away the reallity of both. Whatsoever Prote­stants do truly hold and teach concerning this [Page 296]sacrament, the same do catholicks from whom they had it, maintain too: and what more ought to be done, the Catholick Church does it and Protestants do it not. Must we feed upon Christ crucified by faith? Catholicks do it, and it is the very end of their religion. Must the Eu­charist be taken in remembrance of him, and commemoration of his death▪ They do it. Must both kinds be blest and taken? they do that too. Must the people drink wine out of a cup in communion, Catholik people do the like. On the other side, Catholicks do really partake of the animated and living body of their Redeem­er: this ought to be done to the end we may have life in us. And yet Protestants do it not. Catholicks have it continually sacrificed before their eyes, and the very death and effusion of their Lords blood prefigured and set forth be­fore them for faith to feed upon. This Prote­stants have not, they do it not; and yet this ought to be done; for so our Lord command­ed when he said to his apostles, hoc facite; this do ye which you have seen me to do, and in that manner you see me do it, exercising before your eyes my priestly function according to the order of Melchizedech, with which power I do also invest you, and appoint you to do the like even to the consummation of the world in com­memoration of my death and passion, exhibi­ting and shewing forth your Lords death till he [Page 297]com. This I say Protestants do not, and we are mad angry that the Papist does what his redeemer injoined him. Thus far ad hominem.

The consecrated challice is not indeed ordi­narily given by the priest to people in private communion. And it is neither expedient it should be so, nor necessary to any effect of communion: nor yet is ther in gospel any pre­cept for it. It is not necessary unto any effect either in the Protestants way which is fals, or in the Catholick way which is true. In the Prote­stants doctrin all the effect of communion is wholly attributed to the operation of faith, and Christs words say they are to be taken spiritual­ly and not literally, for flesh and bloud profit­eth nothing: And therefore according to them one kind is enough, nay if we have neither kind there is no loss but only of a ceremony, which may be supplied well enough at our ordinary tables. According to catholick doctrin whole Christ is really under either kind, and so it is in­different in which kind we receiv. But it is not expedient ordinarily to communicate under the liquid species for danger of effusion, as would somtimes happen in assemblies severally dispo­sed. And yet there may be reason by circum­stance of the person to communicate rather in the liquid kind than the other, as when the communicant is young or sick, and not able to take down the other: and therfore in antient [Page 298]times such people were ordinarily communica­ted in the liquid species only, by the help of a spathula linguae, or little pipe made on purpos for that use: and for aught I know it may so be done still upon the like occasion. As for any precept of communicating under both kinds I never heard or read of any; none hath the great mother Church delivered either in her gospel or out of it. For all the whole passage of the last supper whence Anticatholicks do principal ground their reasonings, concerns on­ly the sacrifice; how the apostles and their suc­cessours should consecrate and bless it; what they should take to bless and consecrate; and how they should consummate after consecrati­on: And ther is not there any word or fact concerning the communicating of people; nor were ther in that time and place any lay peo­ple at all to be communicated either man wo­man or childe, but they were all excluded: and if a man would draw negativ arguments as som do out of scripture, he might conclude out of that place that lay people are to receive in nei­ther kind sooner then in both. And although learned Saint Paul may insinuate in his ep­stles that even the laiety did partake of Christs body, yet it may readily be answered in the Pro­testants own grounds, if he did plainly say so, that he spake not of a corporall but spirituall communion.

Indeed the whole manner of giving commu­nion to the laiety is wholly left to tradition and to the judgment and disposition of the Church; which appears more probable, for that the ca­tholick Church hath according to her own pru­dence unto some persons in som times and pla­ces used only the communion of the challice, to others only the sacred bread, to others both; no man ever finding fault therewith or startling at it as any new thing: and if we con­sider the scrupulousnes of former ages we can­not but think they would have risen up and ex­cepted against this, if it had been deemed ei­ther new or ill; or if it had not been in the breasts of all good Christians preconceived and fully known, to be totally arbitrary and in the Churches power to communicate the laiety ei­ther in both kinds or only one; and of the two in which she pleased or thought most fitting for the condition of the communicant. This was certainly the opinion which Christians ever had concerning communion. But as for consecra­tion it seems necessary to the integrity of the sacrifice and the fruit thereof to the whole Church, and determined under a precept that it should be made in both kinds: for so it was instituted to declare and set forth before our eyes the Passion of Christ and his blood effused; of which it could not be a compleat figure or representation except both kinds were conse­crated [Page 300]and so the effusion exprest. It was to ex­hibite whole Christ crucified both quoad conti­nentiam and quoad significationem; which signi­fication is not requisite in communion where the thing contained is received and not the sig­nification or mode exprest.

This indifferent use of communion amongst the antient Christians in either kind, somtime one, somtime the other, somtimes both, is enough to verify that of Saint Paul, if it be taken, as it ought to be, in the literal sense; We are all partakers of one bread and of one cup: For though either kind were lawful for any one, yet that any one kind was sufficient, one may easily see was the opinion of that good apostle by what he speaks in the foregoing comma; Whosoever shall eat this bread or drink this cup of our Lord unworthily, &c. and v. 24. and v. 25. repeating the institution as our Lord delivered it, makes him after the consecration of the bread say absolutely, Do this in commemoration of me; but after the consecration of the chal­lice he speaks with a limitation, Do this as oft as ye shall drink it in commemoration of me. So that the particle (And) in the other text, must needs be taken disjunctively, when he saith we are all partakers of one bread and of one cup; that is to say, all of us either partake of both, or each one at least either of one or the other: which manner of speech is very ordinary in all [Page 301]languages, Mulier est domus salus & ruina, A woman, saith the proverb, is the safety and ruin of a hous; yet not conjunctively or both toge­ther, but either the one or the other, according as she is her self either wise or foolish: and no­thing is more usual in common speech than to use this particle And disjunctively, when we speak unto many at once, or of many: thus ten men rising from a feast may say, we have fed heartily to day of flesh fish and fowl; though one might haply eat only of one kind, another of another as it chanced, and yet not any one of all

If a man do seriously peruse either the gos­pel, or Acts of the apostles wherein is delinea­ted the primitive religion of Christians, he may easily gather that communion then was thought sufficient under one kind, and that the species of Bread was most usual to such as were in health. For

• first, gospel speaks of as much ef­fect of this one kind, as of both. This is a bread com down from heaven that if any eat there­of he dies not, Joh. 6.50. again, he that eats of this bread shall live for ever, v. 25. If any one eateh me the same shall live by me, v. 58. and he never there compares himself to wine as he does to bread, nor mentions the drinking as he does the eating of him. We are one bread and one body, saith S. Paul, all that do partake of one bread, 1 Cor. 10.13. And what is there more [Page 302]to be expected, but union with Christ and his mystical body, immortality and life eternal with him, which all follow upon our worthy communicating of the sacred bread.
• Secondly, when our Lord brake bread with his disciples in Emaus and so disappeared, very great and antient divines do teach that he did before them the same sacramental act he had himself insti­tuted and done aforetime before his apostles, and by that he was discerned: which interpre­tation is very probable, for there be set down the same words and gestures, He took bread and blessed, and brake it and gave it to them, Luke 24.30. And if it were so, then it seems the cup was not thought necessary either by Christ himself or his disciples; otherwise neither Christ would have done his work imperfectly and va­nished before he had given them the cup; nor would the disciples have judged him by so doing to be their master, but som evil spirit or impo­stour, as who had kept the cup from them against their right: Nay by this example it seems that the very consecration it self may be dispenced in case of necessity to be don only in one kind, though the complete sacrifice and mode of signication would be unexprest.
• Third­ly in the first and second chapters of the Acts of the apostles where mention is purposely made of the religious assemblies of the Christians and their sacred Synaxis, ther is much speech there [Page 303]of their breaking of bread, but not any word of the use of a cup amongst the people.

And it is enough insinuated as well directly in these forenamed places, that that was the religious work of the primitive Christians, as it is indi­rectly afterwards c. 20. One day of the sabboth saith the text, when we came together to break bread. No mention being made any where in all that book of the challice at all. So that I must conclude, as I said before; that the com­munion of the challice is neither necessary to any effect of the sacrament, nor expedient to be generally practised; nor is there in gospel or sacred writ any either precept or president for it. But the autority and practis of the ca­tholick Church descended from the apostles is in this as in all other points the best and most irre­fragable convincing argument, which S. Paul in another case kept for his best and last refuge, 1. Cor. 11. If any one saith he will be contenti­ous we have no such custom nor the Church of God. And if there be no such custom in the Church of God, let not any of us be any further contentious.

§. 27. Saints.

I Do not remember that ever I took into my hands any catholick Breviary or Missal or [Page 304]other prayer book, but it had prefixed before it a calendar or catalogue of great saints amongst them, apostles, martyrs, confessours, virgins, of whom the Catholicks keep a very respectful memory, as of the temples wherein God did once dwell and work wonders in the Church. And although this act and custom of theirs be made by our voluntary interpretation a thing of much offence and scandal against them, yet looking upon it with an unprejudiced eye I can­not discern it to be any other than the civility of a due respect: For what ingenuous noble spi­rit would not do as much for the great heroes of his own family that have upheld and innobled the hous. And what sayes Christ? would he not have it done so to his? surely if these things had not been don in his Church, but all memo­rials of him and his blotted out, according to the fansy of every reformer, we had had by this no more certainty of him than of Jove or Mer­cury. But what sayes he therefor? He that loves me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him and make my mansion in him, &c. he that leavs father or mother for my sake shall sit upon thrones, &c. he that shall overcome and keep my words unto the end I will give him power over nations, as I have received from my father, and I will give unto him a morning star, &c. and the like promi­mises of glory I stand not now to mention. And I should think whom God and Christ so [Page 305]highly honours that we may honour them too, nay I beleev we should; for a good servant ought to respect him his maister loves. And what are we afraid of? least people by much re­flecting upon such eminent examples of vertue should be moved therby to imitate them? what can it be els? If saints were proposed and de­scribed unto us, like Mars Jove and Venus, eminent both actours and patrons of vice, then we might justly blame it: But who can dislike of an example of heroick vertue, though it were in a Romance. And all those saints even from the first of January to the last of De­cember, are so commended for their sacred re­tirements, ravishing contemplations of Gods love and the life to come, carnal mortifications and castigations of body, fastings, abnegations of themselves, excessive charity, daily renewed resolutions against the world flesh and devill, and valorous attempts for the love of Jesus to justifie his truth and gospel even to the effusion of their bloods, that we read nothing els of them; all which is but what Christ and his apo­stles both by example and word either prescri­bed or at least counselled both them and us to do. And who can make bitter gibeing inve­ctives against them and their legends, but only he who is an enemy to the vertues there com­mended? What my self and others in England have read and heard against Popish Saints it [Page 306]would be tedious to speak; but I find it to be the spirit and genius of them that depart from the Popes religion: Luther the Hectour ram­pant was excellently dextrous at this feat of disabling persons of renown, and before him his grandsire Wicleph, who publickly affirmed that St. Austin, St. Bennet, St. Bernard and other such like men were damned in hell for founding religious orders; yea and even John Calvin himself that holy faced man was so in­temtemperatly given to this theiomachy, that he opened his mouth not only against all saints and their memorials in the register of the Church, but even the renowned persons both of the old and new testament canonized in ho­ly writ; Noah, Abraham, Rebecca, Jacob, Ra­chel, Job, Moyses, Josuah, David, Elias, Jere­mias, Daniel; The B. Virgin Mary, S. Joseph, S. Mary Magdalen, Martha, the haemorroiss Woman who touched Christs garments, S. Pe­ter, S. Paul, S. Matthew, S. Luke, S. Zacha­rias the husband of Elizabeth, and S. Denyse Areopagite, &c. and his own words against all these I could easily set down, but that I would not tire my reader nor foul my paper with his detracting unseemly speeches. But I should be­ing left to my own reason, shrewdly suspect him to be an enemy to vertue, whom I find to calumniate and disable all those persons who by authentick history are so much commend­ed [Page 307]for it, and by the same proposed unto us as an ensample of our lives. It is not only their due, but our benefit to keep the memory of saints before us.

Besides that man cannot easily forget his own imortality after our deceas, who often rumi­nates upon such vertuous presidents whom be­ing dead he honours as yet living. Honourable mention of Saints deceased proves an immorta­lity of the soul, and this immortality renders the saints even after their deceas still more honoura­ble; so that he that honors them must needs believ this, and he that truly beleevs this will be apt to honour them. I am God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, God is not the God of the dead but of the living; so argues and disputes our Lord Christ, proving the souls immortality by the honourable mention of souls departed. And his argument is good and very subtile; for if God be the God even of souls departed, then souls departed are not nothing but som subsist­ing thing; for God cannot be said to be the God of that which is not. And these two ef­fects, a beleef of our immortality, and a prone­nes to imitate their good works so highly crowned, hath this memorial of saints wrought all over the catholick world, where ther is not a man but will urge himself somtime or other for the respect he bears to such a glorious saint, who by shedding his blood or mortifying his [Page 308]body magnified God and his religion upon earth, to do somthing either of pennance or charity superabundant, over and above what he should have thought upon himself without that help in imitation of the good pattern of him, who being once a man compassed with the same infirmities that we now be, hath shewed us not­witstanding both by his life and doctrin that such good works are both feasible by frail man, and very commendable too, and beneficial even to the reward of never ending glory. And to this end do Catholicks read their saints lives, la­bouring each one to the degree of his devotion to rais up in himself the lively sparkles of hope and faith and charity, by those examples which he sees not confined only to the one age of the apostles, but translucent in all times and places by his continued goodnes to his Church whose mercy endureth for ever.

Nor are those saints lives so prodigious and incredible as we in England take them to be, I speak of solid authenticated legends. For I have my self seen with mine own eyes and known hundreds of living men that have equal­led them in those practises. And he that knows the vigorous nature and life of Gospel, where it is really put to practise and not only verbally profest, will wonder at nothing. If ye say to this mountain, remove hence saith our Lord, to aright beleever all things are possible: and I am [Page 309]confident by what I have seen my self, that ther be now, as bad a world as it is, an immens number of people among Catholicks as eminent in all perfections as ther have been in any age, and som of them equall too even to the glori­ous saints of old whose legends we read. For thousands of people do make it their very pro­fession, even as people here in London set up and profess a trade, to lead their lives exactly according to the tenour of gospel, noting eve­ry evening before they sleep all the deviations even of their very thoughts, and making reso­lutions in the morning for the renewed practis of all such vertuous actions that may probably lye in their way; and in particular, such a vertue to day, that to morrow, this in the third: and so they end their lives. All the Catholick world knows I do not lye. And all this is don not by any force of nature, but against it, by the meer power and vertue of their religion, where­by I have known many men to subdue corrupt nature even to amazement and miracle. And the various examples both of good people yet alive and of eminent saints departed, whose cells and vestments, and beads, and books are yet reserved amongst them, incourage Catho­licks unto this vertuous adventure; while not only by sight of their lives who live amongst them, and of the mortified figures of the holy persons deceased, and bloody necks of their [Page 310]martirs, but also by sermons and the continual rites of the Church prefiguring before them the conversation and passion both of Jesus him­self and his many glorious followers who have imitated his steps, that none might think but that the same life might be led though not in the same degree, and the same valour be shown in undergoing both carnal castigations and death even by meer man, through the grace of him who strengthens us to all things, they are made continually to remember and seriously lay to heart both what they are to do and whom to imitate; by which reflections they are more moved towards all the good works of piety, than without them such a poor weak spirit as mans is, housed in mouldring clay, could ever bee.

And that this hath been the practis of the Christian Church in all times to set before the people the lively pourtraits of their holy and well deserving foregoers, for their greater incitation unto semblable good works unto which their religion calls them, I could easily show throughout all ages; but that I intend here to speak no more than what may somwhat allay the preconceived prejudice we have taken up against the Popes religion, especially in the few particulars I touch upon; of which I speak no more than what I think may suffice to un­beguile such as list seriously to ruminate upon [Page 311]the truth. And if in these things which seem harder to us their caus be just, I should think the lesser prejudices should fall away of them­selvs, and we at length love one another as we ought; for no man I think does willingly hate the innocent. Only two testimonies of the pri­mitive respect unto saints and their images amongst Christians taken not out of the bow­els of the Church, but from her enemies, one from the Jew, the other from the Pagan, suf­ficiently known in history, I cannot but here mention. The Jews in the first three ages of the Church even from the apostles to Constan­tine the great, accused the Christians not on­ly in private but even before the Roman em­perours and Senate, of three great violations of Moses law; first that they broke the sabboth and had turned it from the seventh day of the week unto the first, making that holiday which Mo­ses ordained for work, and that a working day which Moses made holy: secondly that they worshipped images of their saints and kept them not only in their houses but in their oratories and chappels: thirdly that they brought in a strange God, Jesus Christ they meant, which neither they nor their forefathers knew: all which seemed expresly against the letter not only of the general law but of the two tables of the ten commandements. The pagan all over the empire laughed at the Christians for three ri­diculous [Page 312]worships of theirs; namely of a brea­den God, of the priests genitals, and of an asses head: the first whereof proves the primitive sacrifice, of which I have already spoken; the second their confession; the third their use and respect they had of images: for the Jewes had defamed Jesus Christ our Lord, whose head and half pourtraict Christians used upon their al­tars even as they do at this day, amongst other things of his great simplicity and ignorance.

Some will haply say, if this were all that is done to saints to keep the pictur and read the lives of such renowned personages who conse­crated themselvs to Gods glory and service, for the incitement of our affections unto the like virtuous atchievements, I should not much blame it: But papists over and above this do pray to saints too, and that is no wayes excusa­ble. Give me leav to reply to this. That which you now say you cannot much blame, has been made so odious that never a Catholick in Eng­land durst for this hundred years so much as let a Crucifix hang in his chamber, lest both he and it should be torn asunder by us. And what you judg in excusable, their praying to saints which I have so often heard and read in our protestant Churches and books objected so eagerly and constantly against them, when I found it other-wayes than we in England conceiv it to be; I was glad both for their sakes and ours too.

I did therfor curiously examin and turn over the whole Roman Breviary and Missal which is the devotion of the Catholick Church, and contains, almost a fourth part of it, a comme­moration of several Saints, according to the daies of the year wherin they flitted hence into a better life. And I did not meet with so much as any one prayer addressed to any saint or an­gel of heaven, no not upon those dayes wherin commemoration of them is made; but direct­ed all of them from the very first prayer to the last unto God the father by Jesus Christ in the unity of the holy ghost either exprest or im­plied. And their practis herin is conform to antient tradition confirmed by their own law in a councel at Carthage under Pope Siricius an. 397. wherin it was declared and ordained that all publick prayers of the Church should be made directly unto God the Father. And Ca­tholicks even upon a saints day, making their prayer to God, beg only of him amongst other their requests, that the good works of such a saint in whom he glorified himself, may speak better things for them than they can themselvs deserv. For example upon St. Bennets day, Intercessio nos quaesumus Domine Benedicti Ab­batis commendet, ut quod nostris meritis non vale­mus ejus patrocinio assequamur. Upon the feast of St. Francis, O God who by the merits of St. Francis doest inlarge thy Church with a new off­spring, [Page 314]grant unto us by the imitation of him to despise earthly things and enjoy celestial. And so run all the other praiers of the Church wherin any invocation of saints is made, directed ever unto almighty God by his son Jesus Christ.

And this is no more than what was ever don in the Hebrew Church both befor and after Christi­anity was in the world, as the works of ancient Rabbies can witnes, and no less holy writ it self, when it makes almighty God sooner as it were condescending to the peoples petition by the mediation of the merits of glorious patriarchs whom he singularly favoured, and his wrath and displeasur against the Jews then at a height when he refuses to hear those saints in their be­half. If Moyses and Samuel, saith the sacred text Jer. 15. should stand before me, yet is not my soul unto this people: that is to say, he would not in the behalf of such desperate wicked peo­ple, accept of the praiers even of those saints that were most dear unto him: and this was spoken by the prophet long after Moses and Samuel was dead. Long before this the Patri­arch Jacob does most plainly insinuate this cu­stom of saints invocation as ordinary and fa­miliar among the Hebrews, when being to bless his two nephews Ephraim and Manasseh, he speaks thus. The angel who brought me out of all my evils bless these children, and upon them be in­vocated my name and the name of my fathers, [Page 315]Abraham and Isaac, Gen. 48. And ther is a formal prayer to that purpose Exod. 32. which expresses as much invocation of saints as any, or all the praiers of the Christian Church do ever use. Remember saith Moses, remember O God, Abraham, Isaac and Israel thy servants unto whom thou hast sworn by thy self, saying I will multiply your seed as the stars of heaven: Which prayer was after imitated by Daniel c. 3. Withdraw not O Lord thy mercy from us for Abraham thy beloved, Isaac thy servant, and Is­rael thy holy one. And if Daniel and Moses praied to saints well may we do it: and if that of theirs was not a praying to saints, but only to almighty God by the concurrence of their merits, then is the Catholick Church to be not excused only, but commended; for she does the like in those prayers of hers she makes any mention either of saint or angel and no other­wise.

In their letanies indeed and short ejaculati­ons, Catholicks seem to invocate saints direct­ly, when in one part of them they say: Holy Mary pray for us, St. Peter pray for us, &c. But this though in words and sound it seems direct, yet in sense and purpose it is indirect; so that sancta Maria ora pro nobis; omnes sancti Dei intercedite pro nobis, is in sense but this, Sancta Maria & omnes sancti intercedant pro nobis ad Dominum ut nos mereamur, &c. And [Page 316]if we ponder it right, it must needs be so: for when I pray any one to pray for me, consider­ing the object and matter of my desire which both of us must joyn in, I do not, properly speaking, pray to him but by him; and only desire in my good affection, that the prayers he makes for all may be available unto me. And this is the more apparent, becaus the letanies are directed unto God, beginning, continuing, and ending with him. Lord have mercy, Christ have mercy, Lord have mercy, Father of heaven God, Have mercy on us, O Son redeemer of the world God, Have mercy on us, &c. Holy Mary pray for us, St. Michael pray for us, &c. Be propitious, spare us O Lord. From all evil, De­liver us O Lord, &c. By the mystery of thy in­carnation, Deliver us O Lord. By thy nativity, Deliver us O Lord, &c. We sinners, Beseech thee to hear us. That thou grant us peace, We beseech thee to hear us, &c. Lamb of God that takest away the sins of the world, spare us O Lord, &c. Lord have mercy, Christ have mercy, Lord have mercy. Our Father, &c. Thus the letanies run and he that directs, continues and ends his leta­ny or praier to God, must needs pray to him, and objectively to none but him. So that the inter­position of any intercessour must needs be in­direct in sense, however it be exprest in words; and can signifie no more but this, that God would gratiously accept of the prayers they [Page 317]make, in our behalf. For that they do pray for their brethren and adoptives of the same bliss both reason and holy writ sufficently assure us.

Nor is this way of expressing our desires un­usual in holy Scripture. Bless ye our Lord all the works of our Lord, bless ye our Lord O angels of God. O sun and moon, bless ye our Lord, O stars of heaven bless ye our Lord, praise ye and magnifie him for ever, &c. Thus pray the three confes­sours in Daniel. And the whole 148. Psalm runs in the same tenour. Prais our Lord all ye angels of his, prais him all his powers, prais ye him O sun and moon, prais him all the stars of light, &c. Here is an invocation direct in words not only of the saints and angels, but stars and me­teors, earth and seas, frost and snow, heat and cold, light and darknes. And yet I am not bound who use that devotion to make it good that the sun and moon, or other things there invocated hear me when I speak to them in this manner: sith I do but only express my affecti­on and desire that sun and moon, heaven and earth, frost and snow, heat and cold, moun­tains and hills be in their manner instrumentall to the almighties prais and honour, whether in words I speak directly to the sun and moon, as I do in that Psalm, or express my self otherwise, saying; May the sun, moon, heaven and earth concurre with me to the honour and prais of God [Page 318]mighty: the affection and meaning is still the same. Nay the kings and princes of the earth whom in that same Psalm I invocate to my as­sistance do not more hear me when I say that Psalm in my chamber, than do the mountains and hills. In like manner it is all one for me to say either thus: Let the prayers of the saints and angels of God assist my condition with the al­mighty holy one; or thus, Pray for me O saints and angels of God to assist my poor condition with God almighty and holy. The devotion is as good this way as the other, and all one and the same thing. And the antient Christians used indiffe­rently either the one way or the other, according as they deemed either this or that more agree­able and pathetical to the exciting of their de­votion and obtaining their desires with God. Nor did those wise and devout people over enter into the curiosity; whether the spirits of another world did either see or hear or know what we speak or think or do in this: much less did it ever enter into their creed that they do so. Af­ter a thousand years arose our Schoolmen who amongst other of their subtilities raised the difficulty, Whether Saints in another life hear and see all our motions in this: and generally they defended, and neatly declared both that they did it, and also how it might be done; namely by the mirrour of divine essence seen and enjoyed by the blessed. But this [Page 319]is a meer nice theological subtility and no busines of faith at all, neither for the mode how it is done, nor yet for the doctrin that it is done. And if those schoolmen thought this their do­ctrin necessary for any practis of saints-invoca­tion in the Church, they showed themselvs not so good rhetoricians as they were logicians. He that will defend pure naked faith is not bound to enter upon any such dispute with the adver­sary, or go any further than his faith reaches; for so he does but intangle religion and expose it to needles doubts. But this is a great mistake of many men otherwise of very great parts that they think what they have heard in the schools of S. Thomas or Scotus is all of it de fide; not considering that the schoolmen rai­sed a thousand questions and invented several declarations like ramparts about the cittadel of Faith to inable men to speak against all opposi­tion several wayes; either in the way of St. Thomas or Scotus, Gandavensis, Durandus, Au­reolus or other doctour, not to oblige them to defend those waies as the cittadel it self, when it shall com by any adversary to be opposed. And although with som Antichristian great wits, as Plotin, Porphyrius, Julian such subtili­ties may be spoke of, yet still with this cau­tion it must be done, that they first understand that Christians are not bound when they defend the simplicity of their faith, to make good those [Page 320]subtilities besides it. But with a grosser textual opponent as our Protestant is, such curiosities are not at all to be touched. For he concludes presently that invocation of saints is not to be used, if any one go about to tell him that they hear our prayers, and make it not sink into his head how they can do it. And thus catholick faith is prejudiced for want of wise comport­ment in the defendant.

There is also another little defect in som late catholick writers, that in their controversies with Protestants, wherein they hold that it is lawful to pray unto saints, they consider not that they mean it one way and their adversary another. This should first have been cleared, before they had proceeded to perswade what could never enter into our Protestant heads in the sens they understood it. For properly and strictly speaking, to pray saints or by them is one thing, to pray to them is another: that in­timates the means, this the final end and object of our prayer; and the Catholick uses it in the first sens, the Protestant understands it in the lat­ter, as I know by my experience and conver­sation with them in all places. St. Paul in his epistle to the Romans as elswhere very fre­quently calls the Christians Sanctos saints, and in the end of that epistle earnestly importunes them to help him in their prayers for him unto God. And yet will Protestants never be per­swaded [Page 321]for all that, that S. Paul prayed to saints: and indeed in their sens he did not; but that he did pray to saints in the catholick sens, that is prayed saints or prayed by saints no ra­tional man can deny. And such and no other is the devotion of catholicks in this kind, save only that their practis is more plausible than that of St. Paul now mentioned. If the pray­ers of such as be in viâ and sinners in som part of their conversation, though saints in profes­sion, be so useful and may commendably be de­sired; much more those of consummate saints in patriâ, absolute friends of God and parta­kers of his glory: these the sacred text assures us that they pray for their brethren, but men in this life although they be requested may neg­lect to do it, their prayer is surely effectual one way or other to our good, when men of this life may obtain for us haply nothing at all. Nor is it of any purpos whether they hear us or no, sith we do but pray them to do for us what we are assured they do for all; and so apply the benefit of their prayers to our selvs; or pray by them not to them, or to them in the catholick but not in the protestant sens.

If any one like not this my way of explica­ting this holy custom of the Church, he may use what other he pleases. But this I do use as most facile and connatural to pious oratory, which easily diverts unbeleevers objections, and [Page 322]best answers to the state not only of Christian saints but also those of the old law, who could not see the necessities of men upon earth by any mirrour of divine essence which then they enjoyed not, and yet they were prayed unto then, as well as the Christian Saints be now. And to me it seems irrational to defend an easy custom of religion by a hard subtility of phi­losophy, which clears not but renders that ob­scure and doubtful which was clear and utterly undoubted of before All Christians ever be­leeved saints invocation to be lawful and pious, but it entered not into the Creed of any, that those of another world either hear or see what we do in this: and this opinion brought to clear the other practis is harder to beleev than it, and no point of faith neither, although by the sub­tility of Christian Philosophers it be rendered probable enough to such as allowed of the Chri­stian custom aforehand.

This pious rite of saints-invocation common to the Hebrew and Christian Church is necessa­rily justified upon the supposal of three princi­ples which all I think will grant.

• First that Gods grace whereby men are made partakers of the divine nature is in a singular manner in some persons more than others:
• secondly that the souls of those holy people and merits of their good works are immortal with God even after their death:
• thirdly that God cannot dislike [Page 323]the reflections of his divine nature diffused in them out of the fulnes of his beloved son, when any one makes use of them the easier to find mercy in his sight.

And all protestant ob­jections, as Come unto me saith Christ, &c. are but childish: for who does a man come unto or go unto but Christ and God alone, when he sues to none but him for grace and mercy, whether he use or use not the helps of other in­tercessour with himself to facilitate his request. As innocent therefor is popery in this as in any other her religious practises, and we destitute of argument to carp at them for it. Let us therefore love and not hate, rather honour than diminish them without caus.

§. 28. Dirge.

ALl over the catholick world prayers are constantly made for the dead both in publick and private: Insomuch that one day in a week the altar is set apart for that purpos, and it is a rare thing when one half hour in every day is not spent there by some priest or other, together with the people for that end, nor is there a private person in the world that makes any orisons apart, but will send forth som short ejaculations for the requiem of souls departed before he give over. So that I may truly say, it [Page 324]is as ordinary for Catholicks to pray for the dead as for the living, and for one another as for themselvs. And this custom carries with it so great a show of piety, that for my part I could never dislike it; and I have heard but few discreet persons speak otherwise against it, than only as an ungrounded opinion. For of it self what can it be but purest humanity to remember our friends when they are out of sight; and to pray for them even after their deceas a most pious charitablenes. The questi­on is, whether the doctrin be well grounded, or whether it may make for good accordingly to use it. If the deceased be utterly dissolved, and soul and body equally extinguished, then it is likely my praier cannot avail for any benefit; nor will it becom either my charity or discreti­on to pray for them that are not: for God is not the God of the dead but of the living as our Lord speaks; nor is he to be requested for bene­fits to any thing that is not existent, and abso­lutely incapable to receiv them. But if their souls be still immortal with God, where or in what condition soever they be, it cannot hurt I should think either me or them to wish them well: for wheresoever they are, if so be they are any thing, they are present to God, who fills all things, if not more yet assuredly as much as we that live this mortal life, and as they themselvs were, when they lived amongst [Page 325]us; and God whom we pray unto is equally present both to them and us, who assuredly hears and sees and knows us both. And since the Almighty has set a limit to our knowledg, none to our, charity towards any man, no rea­son can be given why I may not wish well unto them all my life time even after their deceas, whom I might pray for while they lived, even by the command of him who bad me do well unto all, and have love which is ever accompa­nied with well wishes and praiers, even to my very enemies; never prescribing me either li­mit of time or measure of charity. Those I pray for after their deceas must needs be, if they be yet subsisting, either in hell or heaven or som third place; I speak vulgarly that I may be understood, not heeding at all whether a soul in Aristotles philosophy may be said in rigour to be in any place or no; in right reason whatso­ever is, must needs be somwhere, and that is all my meaning. If the soul I pray for should chance even then to be in heaven; then my prayer for him is answerable to Gods will, and so not evil but good; whiles I beg rest to him to whom God hath given it: for prayer though it often supposes, yet it doth not necessarily re­quire a want of the good thing prayed for in him I wish it unto; otherwayes I could not say as well and truly Our father who art in heaven: sanctified be thy name, thy kingdom com, thy will [Page 326]be don: as I say afterwards, Give us this day our daily bread, &c. In the former there is no want to be imagined; for they both are and shall be, whether I pray so or no; and I do but only show my love and charity to God, in wishing him to be as he is, most holy powerful and just, and desiring that to him which he nei­ther does nor ever can want, all sanctity, pow­er and glory: but in the other requests a want is presupposed before the petition. If he should be in hell, fith it is not Gods will I should know so much, I can no more be interpreted to gain­say his pleasur than when I prayed for the same person upon earth and wished him what he should never have: for even then also I knew no more of Gods disfavour towards him than now I do; and my good wishes in both places presented ever under a tacite condition of Gods good pleasur, may be equally acceptable in or­der to any effect either to him or my self for my charity towards him, as they would have been whiles he lived; for I shall still have the merit of my own charity in complying with Gods precept of an unlimited love towards all all men, and he may receiv too as much good by my praiers now he is com to such an end, as when he was going to it: especially if he were according to the doctrin of som Protestants so destined to ruin by Gods unresistable will, and by the torrent of that unavoidable decree so ine­vitably [Page 327]hurried to damnation, that all things even the best and most sacred means make only for his destruction. Indeed if any ones final ruin should be revealed unto me as now is I think the condition of evil angels, then in pray­ing for any such I should formally resist Gods will; and therefor I must not do it: but so long as it lies hid, let not me dive into his secrets but look unto my own duty, which shall never turn to my blame, tho it may hap not to con­cur with the beneplacite of his hidden purpos. And in both cases, either of the final bliss or ruin of him I pray for, such kind of suffrages though they may prove not to be adjumenta mortuorum, yet are they still consolationes viv [...] ­rum, as great S. Austin speaks in the like case.

But lastly if he be in any third place in ex­pectation of glory, then without controul I may wish him what he is ordered unto, and do any good thing I shall know by such means as I know all other points and pactices of religion, may further his expiation. And such an opi­nion have all Catholicks or ancient Christians ever had of their forefathers, who died in the bosom of the Church, that they were as capa­ble of prayers after their death as before it; and that heaven was not so easily attained even by good and holy professours, without some an­tecedent expiation of their venial transgressi­ons, [Page 328]without which men do rarely depart out of the concretion of these earthly tabernacles inclining still to sensual propensions, let their souls endeavour never so much by the help of Gods grace and sacraments to expiate and clear their thoughts, or to raise themselves to the object of eternal purity, whiles they breathed here below. Thus the case stands concerning this point.

And that every soul that passes out of the concretion of a mortal body with any sensuall contagion, after mortal sins remitted, passes through some expiatory pains, commonly cal­led Purgatory, declared by the antients some­times by the notion of darknes, somtimes of scorching fires, before he can enter the place of glory where no inquinated thing can come, as it is an opinion can never be demonstra­tivly either proved or disproved, no more than other contingencies of Gods will, so becaus it is a thing as constantly beleeved in all ages of Christianity, and as unanimously practised as any one thing I know, I do not see any reason it should be so slightly thought of, or severely condemned as I see it is by som, as an unground­ed popish superstition. For it is not only the opinion of all orthodox Christians, but of all people in the world, excepting only the disci­ples of Luther who jeer at all things, that ther be other places where souls departing this life [Page 329]may have their resort besides hell and heaven; as if it were derived even with the souls immor­tality from the first inhabitants of the earth unto all their posterity. The Pagans beleeved it, as appears by Virgil, Cicero, Lucretius, and the few remnants of their religion both under the Roman empire and elsewhere. The Ma­hometans that rose a thousand years ago, and took to a miscellan religion made out of Pagan Jew and Christian beleef, hold it to this day; and the Hebrews taught and profest it as ap­pears by the antient Rabbies: as if this opini­on of a third place had come down even from Adam to all his whole progeny; first to Cain and Seth, by Cain to Enoch and his line; by Seth to Enos, and so down to Noah; from him to Sem Ham and Japhet; by Sem to the Assiri­ans, Aramites, Persians; by Ham to the Ethi­opians, Egiptians, Palestines, Cananites, Sido­nians, Jebusites, &c. by Japhet to the He­brews, Medes, Bactrians, Indians, Babylonians, and isles of the Gentiles; although it be seve­rally mixed and modified according to the te­nour of the various religions that profess it.

This opinion then of the souls immortality and its detention after death in som place citra coelum is not any new thing freshly taught ei­ther by our blessed Saviour or his Apostles, as any peculiar doctrin of his own, but taken up as granted by tradition of the Church of the [Page 330]Hebrews, and supposed and admitted by all sides for true, upon which our Lord built much of his own instructions. And that may be the reason that in his parable of Dives and Laza­rus, which he recounted under the figur of a story then past, he saies expresly that Dives was in hell torments, but he does not likewise say of Lazarus that he was in heaven, but in the bosom of Abraham, Luc. 16. For heaven gates as they were indeed not opened unto any until the passion of the Messias, who first entred there as primogenitus ex mortuis; so neither did the Jews beleev that any should have access thither before his coming, as I think it may ap­pear, to omit other places, in the Acts of the Apostles. For ther St. Peter preaching and proving before the Jews that Jesus was risen and ascended into heaven, and was consequently the true Messias, he takes his argument to prove it out of a psalm of David which speaks thus, I foresaw the Lord alwaies before my face, &c. therefore did my heart rejoyce, &c. becaus thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, &c. thou hast made known to me the waies of life, &c. This is his first subsumption. Then he goes on in his argu­ment. David was a Prophet, and foreseeing the resurrection of Christ he spake those things of him; therfor Christ is risen and our Jesus is the Christ. This is St. Peters argument. Then he anticipates an objection: for some might say, [Page 331]David spake not those words of the Messias, but of himself: unto this St. Peter replies with three reasons; first David was a Prophet, and therfore he spake them not of himself, but of another whose resurrection he foresaw; second­ly, he saith, The Lord said unto my Lord sit thou on my right hand, &c. it was then the resurrection and ascension of one that was Da­vids Lord, therfore not of himself; again it could not be meant of David, for David ascend­ed not into heaven, which is an argument ad ho­minem, ex concessis: as if he had said, you all know and beleev that neither David nor any of the Patriarks ascended after their death to their finall rest, but staid in some interjacent repose till the Messias should com and lead captivity captive; that is to say, take along with him in his train and service all those holy prophets and patriarks of the old law, who had in their place of detention waited for the consolation of Is­rael. I say St. Peter must suppose that pro­position on which the firmitude of his whole discours was chiefly grounded to be admitted by the Jews for true, otherwise his argument had been inefficacious, and had neither proved Christs ascension nor yet Jesus to be Christ: and if the Jews had beleeved Davids soul to be in heaven though not his body, yet still the argu­ment in my judgment had fallen short. All this infers that the Hebrew Church did beleev a [Page 332]detention of spirits citra coelum, and that the Rich man might go to hell before Christ, but Lazarus the happy went but into Abrahams bosom, that is to say, unto that repose where Abraham David and all the antient patriarks ex­pected the light and redemption of Israel, and not into heaven it self.

And they might very well so beleev, for how can any one hope for that upon anothers gift which he never promised, when he promised all other things but it; heavenly bliss amongst all the fair promises made in the law of Moses was never so much as mentioned, nor those people ever put in hope of it for any good work they should do. But in the new testament of our Messias heaven which himself should open to his faithful, is frequently promised as an immens motive and incitement to good words, they should for his love by the assistance of his grace act and persever in unto the end. Yet so too, as that in the execution of this promis it is suffici­ently insinuated, that if any spirit issue out of his body not absolutely purified, himself may indeed by the use of such means of grace as our Lord instituted, be saved, yet so as by fire, 1 Cor. 3. And therfore our blessed Saviour speaking of the severall trespasses we make in this life gives us this counsel, to set all right and straight as far as we can, while we are here in via, in the way of this life; for if once by [Page 333]death we be delivered up to the place of hold, de­tention, or prison, ther will be no getting forth thence till the utmost farthing be paid. Math 5. that is, as holy fathers do jointly interpret the place, till absolute satisfaction be made either by sufferance or suffrages. And that redempti­on or remission of some sins may be had after this life is enough insinuated unto us by him­self when he tells us, that there be some sins that shall never be forgiven neither in this world nor in the world to come: For if any should tell me here in England that som criminall of­fences will neither be pardoned at the Sessions, nor at the Kings bench at Westminster, he suffi­ciently insinuates, if he speak properly, that releas may be had for som other offences in both the places.

S. Paul in his epistles, although he do som­times indirectly hint at this doctrin of expiati­on after this life; yet does he not directly make use of it as a topick place, either in his exhor­tation to vertue or disswasion from vice. But the reason is manifest, for being a thing mixt of good and ill, it could serv sufficiently to neither purpos; and heaven being now lately promi­sed to all those that walk piously in Christ Jesus was a more full and stronger motive of perswa­sion, as also was hell a greater argument of affrightment, then the interjacent place of ex­piation however penall could be, which by [Page 334]reason of the temporality of the sufferance and hopes of approaching glory admits some com­fort to mitigate the terrour; and again by rea­son of the penalty of that condition and trou­ble of expectation, carries enough of terrour to allay to comfort of the place. And yet in­cidentally and without design ther is there to be found as much of purgatory as of the litur­gy, the trinity, primitive absolution, and other mysteries of faith. In a word, the thought of heaven served well both to incourage people to the utmost perfection of charity and good works, and to comfort them also in tribulati­ons; which the memory of their expiation be­fore it could not do. And on the other side if any were wicked, for such a one purgatory would neither be a seasonable nor sufficient me­nace. Yet both all their life time and especially when they came to dye, all records of primi­tive times will tell us how careful the antient Christians were to provide for their souls assi­stance after death. And accordingly S. Austin commends the piety of his mother Monica, in that she begged so earnestly of him her son to be mindful of her soul when he stood at the al­tar, to pray heartily for her after her deceas: and he sets down at large in the ninth book of his Confessions c. 12. and 13. the dirge and sa­crifice and prayers he made both for her and her husband Patricius. And the doctrin of expia­tory [Page 335]punishments after this life he teaches in se­veral places of his many learned volumes: In his 20 book de civitate dei c. 9.13.16. and 24. In his comment upon the 37 psalm: In his book of fifty homilies hom. 16. In his 41 sermon de sanctis. In the 110 chapter of his Enchiridion; In his book de cura pro mortuis c. 2. and 4. By which and other places we may see, that S. Au­stin was not only of this catholick opinion, but he was also a priest himself, who both taught and practised it, sacrificing at the altar for souls de­parted. And so was S. S. Bede, German Constan­tinopolitanus, Jo. Damascen and Alcuin in the eight age of the Church, not to mention later times: S. S. Isidore, Eligius and the fathers of the eleventh councel of Tolledo in the seventh age. S. S. John Climacus, Gregory the great, and the Fathers of the councel of Valentia in the sixt, S. S. Jo. Chrysostome with the above-named S. Austin, Paulinus, Eucherius Lugdu­nensis, Victor Ʋticensis, Socrates, and Theodo­res in the fist. S. S. Eusebius Caesariensis, Atha­nasius, Basilius Magnus, Cyrillus Hierosolymi­tanus, Gregorius Nazianzen and Nyssen, Epi­phanius, Ambrosius, and Hieronimus in the fourth. S. S. Eusebius Alexandrinus, Zeno Ve­ronensis and Origen in the third. S. S. Ireneus, Hermes, and Tertullian in the second; who were all of them priests, catholick Roman priests, and publickly taught, as I am able to [Page 336]make it apparent out of their works, this ve­nerable religious doctrin of the souls expiation after death, before it arrive to heavenly bliss, by the prayers and pennances and alms deeds of the faithful left behind them in this world; and did it, and practised it themselvs in their houses, altars and oratories: according as they had re­ceived it from the first age, which they found in an universal beleef and practis of the same truth; as even yet appears by the antient litur­gies and testimonies of S. Matthews; S. Mark, S. James the elder and the younger, S. Clement and S. Denyse the Areopagite? Thus Popery did in old times and so it doth still. And I hope none of us hereafter will have the heart to hate and persecute that religion, whose charity and goodnes is so great that it extends beyond the very horison and utmost limits of this world.

§. 29. Pope.

THe catholicks, as I perceived by their books and practises, do all the world over pray for their Pape and pastour with a most tender affection; which I esteemed a piece of most ci­vil piety practised in all ages for the comfort and good of him they look upon as supreme head and governour of their religion under God upon earth. We may perceiv in the epistles of [Page 337]good St. Paul, that to pray for one another was a thing very familiar to the primitive Chri­stians; but when S. Peter their prince and head fell into danger, the whole Church then united their supplications in his behalf, as one in whose welfar they were universally and in a more peculiar manner all of them concerned: Peter was kept in prison, saith the sacred text in the Acts, and prayer was made without intermis­sion by the Church unto God for him. I doubt not but that they praied likewise for other apostles too, that God would keep and bring them out of danger; but the writer of that Story gives us no notice of any universal praier made for any one, but only Him the head and prince of all the whole congregation, therby to intimate the singular respect and love they did universal­ly bear him.

But we in England do not more ordinarily call a Spade a Spade, than we do traduce, defame, execrate the Pope, and proclaim him, whom also we do not know, leud, wicked, sensual, proud, seducer, serpent, Antichrist, and I know not what; and that not only in our ordinary society but in books and sermons; not only som of us but all hate him; not in England only but all protestant places; not now only but in all times since Protestancy began: and our very children by that time they com to be eight or nine year old are by our example and imitation [Page 338]inabled to say after us like parrets, Pope is a rogue, pope is a rogue. This behaviour of ours if it be not impious, yet no man I should think will after serious consideration deny it to be unmannerly. And what kind of spirit must this be, that delights so much in defamations and curses! Surely the spirit of God is a meek civil and quiet spirit. Either the Pope is good, or evil; if he be good, why do we hate him? if bad, why do we not pray for him, as gospel teaches us to do even for our enemies and sin­ners, but still defame and curs him to make him wors. I know much good he has don our land, even so much good as the Christianity we had from him hath ever wrought amongst us; but never any evil, no not in the least kind. Mini­sters above all others stand excessively ingaged to him even for the very bread they eat; for the formality of their clothes and cassocks they wear; for the pulpits they preach in; for the parishes and tithes they liv upon; for the uni­versities they were brought up in; for the de­grees they have taken there, and the canon of their ordination; for the catholick learned books they study; and the very gospel they ei­ther do or seem to preach: all which were ori­ginally from the Pope. And as for others of the laety; if the Churches they meet in once a week, and the hopes they have of a life to com; if the good wholsom laws of the land, if corpo­rations [Page 339]or other orderly dispositions in the king­dom; if the antient militia now almost abo­lished, wherein earls and marquesses command the counties, dukes over them, and the King over the dukes; that in a moment all the land might be up at his Majesties beck; and the like militia by sea, where admiral; vice admiral, and reere admiral were all subjected to the king, be­sides the train bands for defence of cities) so orderly and wisely instituted; if kingly autori­ty and his crownland; if the orderly sittings and proceedings in Parliament; if dignities and titles of honour; if the decency of gowns and caps and modes and rules of government in colledges, halls and Innes of law; if our very fashion of preaching and administring sacra­ments; if all these and several such like things ordered and constituted amongst us be of any worth, or commendable, or may deserv any thanks, we must then be civil towards the Pope and his catholick beleevers who invented, dispo­sed and ordered all these things for our good. And yet we are so far from thinking of any of these things which might civilise us towards him, that transported, we cannot our selves tell how, with animosity and passion, we in­veigh endlesly not only against Papists, but even against the Pope himself, who as he never hurt us, so likewise doth he even to this day wish us all both temporal and spiritual good.

And I should think we might hereupon take occasion to admire at the Popes great civility and temperance not again to be paralel'd in the world, who though he hath seen so many hun­dred virulent books writ against him, and heard more words; yet hath he never been known to let fall the least word of passion against any, nor move any engine for re­venge: And thus much several of our countri­men have experienced of late years in Rome, where railing at the Pope even under his nose, as a wicked proud Antichrist, they received be­ing called before him no other check but this: My friends be peaceable while you are in my ter­ritories, least the people should fall upon you and hurt you; when you are out of my territories say of me what you please. I have seldom known any noble person, but if his honour were tra­duced, especially if falsly, undeservedly, and by an inferiour person, and frequently, and in a high degree, but he would move more or less to a just reveng of his right. Only the Pape goes quietly on in his cours as the full moon in the firmament, which heeds not at all the barkings of so many curres that vainly open their mouths against her. But in the interim can there be any thing more unseemly than a young Minister in a pulpit here in England, vapouring and talk­ing before a congregation, that come thither to hear Gods word, against a gentleman, a [Page 341]grave venerable person, a byshop, a Prince, who also living a thousand miles off hears not a word he saies, and if he did would heed it as little. We read a story, in the book of Kings, of a company of boies that mockt at Eliseus a grave and venerable person, as he was going up to Bethel, crying; Ʋp baldpate, up baldpate; and the very bears issuing sodainly out of the woods tore them in sunder. May not we justly fear som such like event for the like if not grea­ter crime of ours shall fall upon us, who do not only call that venerable person and his priests Baldpate, but Antichrist, frog, caterpil­lar, serpent, &c. Besides the absence of the person we calumniate, flout and expose to deri­sion is a circumstance that does not a little ag­gravate the fact, and renders it no less foolish and irrational than 'tis unjust and rude. It is a wonder that our Protestant byshops should countenance these disorders. A wise woman will not hear her child call her neighbor Whore, without the application of a just rebuke, know­ing that such like impudence being countenan­ced, may imbolden him at last to call Her so too. Indeed the judgment is already com home to our doors; for now our byshops of Eng­land are as contumeliously treated in the pulpits by their own ministers, as the byshop of Rome was by their connivance and applaus abused aforetime in the same place by the self-same [Page 342]persons. Nor have ther been any in this land more furiously bent these last twenty years a­gainst our good King, than they who to flatter our former princes most passionately reviled the Pope; and the seed of those men who in the dayes of Edward the sixth, Queen Elisa­beth and King James plotted so vehemently against the Catholick Church and nobility even to their utter disgrace and ruin, under a pretens of establishing our State, were now the onely great fighting sticklers against our State and Monarchy. I give only this note by the way, to reach all men to do to another as they would others do to them, and no othewaies: for God is just and punishes all iniquity of men, (often­times with those very rods and scorpions, which themselves used before to plague their innocent neghbours) who when they knew the justice of God, yet would they not understand that they which do such things are worthy of death; and not only they who do them, but they also who consent and yield compliance to the doers.

But that I may a little lay open to my coun­treymen the unreasonablenes of our proceed­ings, in hating and reviling a Person, whom Ca­tholicks on the contrary do so much esteem and love; to what I have already said let thus much be added: That the Pope is one, whose whole life and study is to defend innocence, promote [Page 343]concord, and maintain unity of Faith in the world: nor is ther any man but he alone that looks to the general safety of all Christianity; and in all times like a faithful pastour he hath so don it, as if it were not so much his office to do it as his nature. And this we might easily see if we would look over antient stories, and not suffer our selves to be misled by the reports of those who think themselves undon if he that would curb their extravagancies should com to be thought of according to his true deserts. I might make it good in many particulars: but I will content my self onely to run over briefly the eighteen general councels that have been in several ages in the Christian world, and their results and motives; wherby men may be per­swaded to think that the Pope is so far from what we in England are made to conceiv of him, that he is the only man that hath fought in all times for the unity of faith, for concord and the good of all Christendom; when other byshops and believers under him began many of them to revolt and disturb our welfar. Nor had we had any thing left us at this day either of truth or unity, humanly speaking, had not he been set over us and watched to make and keep us happy even against som of our wills.

1. Arrius a priest in Alexandria had seduced many priests, deacons, nuns, byshops, and prin­ces to beleev amiss against the divinity of Jesus [Page 344]Christ our Lord, when Pape Sylvester rose up against him and fought stoutly, for the honour of our Messias in his general councel at Nice, in the year 325. and so did other Popes his suc­cessours after him for som hundred years toge­ther.

2. Pape Damasus in the second general coun­cel at Constantinople with the like spirit of for­titude maintained as valiantly the divinity of the Holy Ghost, against Macedonius priest and byshop of Constantinople, and Eunomius that insolent Cappadocian, and all their retinue, as he did likewise that of Christ an. 381.

3. When Nestorius a byshop with his priest Anastasius gave great scandals in Constantinople by denying the virgin Mary to be mother of God, for that in Christ they said were two per­sons, and one of them was the son of the vir­gin, the other son of God; Pape Celestin stood up and quelled them and all their adherents in his councel at Ephesus in the year 430.

4. Pape Leo in a fourth generall councell at Chalcedon an. 450. stopped the mouthes of Eu­tyches an Abbot in Constantinople, and Dioscorus deacon in Alexandria; who by their great dislike of Nestorius opinion ran into the other extream, and affirmed Christ our Lord to have not only one person, but one nature too; which was as scandalous and as much against the faith of beleevers as was the former.

5. In the fifth general councel at Constanti­nople an. 553. when all the oriental part of the Church was in a combustion about the three heads or contents of Theodore byshop of Mop­suesten, an epistle of Ibas, and Theodoret by­shop of Cyrus his writings against S. Cyril, who had been all three honourably mentioned in the councel of Chalcedon, and yet their wri­tings were then found very scandalous and faul­ty; Pape Vigilius though very sick and weak, yet by his writings from his chamber he labour­ed abundantly and to good effect to asswage the feud.

6. Pape Agatho in the sixth general synod at Constantinople an. 680. when Cyrus, Sergius, Macarius and many other learned unquiet priests and byshops monothelites, had spread the Eutichian heresy under other notions, and taught that Christ had but one will and operati­on, with much offence to the people; he rose up and manfully resisted and subdued them.

7. Pape Adrian combated no less for the use of images and crucifix against Gregorius Neocae­sariensis, Paul patriarch of Constantinople, and several other Iconoclasts, who tore and preached them down contrary to the judgment and pra­ctis both of the Christians then living and all their predecessors, in the seventh general coun­cel at Nice an. 787. And in one and the same place was maintained by the whole catholick [Page 346]world both the images and divinity of the cru­cified Messias.

8. Not long after in the eight general coun­cel at Constantinople an. 869 Pape Adrian the se­cond defended the innocence of the great pa­triarch Ignatius whom suttle Photius by the help of some potentates in Constantinople had expel­led his byshoprick, and put himself in his place, miserably harassing and vexing both the good prelate Ignace and all his adherents, to the great disturbance of the East who were all in a hot feud about it.

9. In the ninth general councel at Lateran an. 1122 when after infinity of troubles the Church had recovered her peace, pape Callix­tus the second like a good vigilant pastour la­boured to restore the antient disciplin much abated by wars and factions; recovered the ex­clesiastick investitures out of the hands of empe­rour Henricus who had invaded them, and mo­ved Christian princes to a war in the holy land, for the caus of Jesus Christ there blasphe­med where he should principally be honoured; and the assistance of distressed Christianity against the Turk: good works all, and which none but he would have heeded to effect.

10. Pape Innocent the second, when Peter de Lions his antipope had filled Christendom with wars and factions, and Peter de Bruis had no less corrupted their judgments with heresies, [Page 347]against baptism, temples, almes deeds, and of­ferings; rose up and manfully fought them both, for the recovery of truth and peace of Christianity, in his tenth oecumenical councel at Lateran an. 1139.

11. Some while after in the time of pape Alexander the third, the Christian world was no less rent asunder both by the faction of a competitour of his called Victor the second, and the heresies of the Waldenses or Albigenses: against both which the said Pape called his eleventh Councel at Lateran an. 1179 and made provision there most carefully against any the like disturbance upon such occasion.

13. Pape Innocent the third did the world no les good service in his twelfth general councel at Lateran an. 1215 where he judged and condem­ned the heresies of those times which infected and troubled the world, censured abbot Joachim his book against Magister sententiarum, and wicked Almaricus who denied the real presence, and resurrection, &c. and exhorted all Chri­stian princes to the recovery of the holy land, which had been regained by the joint endea­vours of the Christian world in Pape Ʋrban the seconds time, Godfrey of Bullen being there made king of Jerusalem, but after 90 years was lost again in the daies of pape Ʋrban the third, whose successour Gregory the eight and his followers till this Innocent the third did [Page 348]much lament and labour to help the loss, but Innocent had more hopes by reason that Bald­win earl of Flanders was then made emperour of Constantinople.

13. Pape Innocent the fourth found a great deal of trouble in the world, and to heal the malady he called a general synod at Lions an. 1245 which was the thirteenth oecumenical councel against the cruelties of emperour Fre­derick who filled Christendom with wars and bloodshed, whence arose the faction of the Gwelfs and Gibellines, against the tirrany of the saracens the perfidiousnes of the greeks who plotted at Constantinople the destruction of all the Latines, and against the irruption of the Tartarians who ruined Poland and Hungary.

14. A little afterwards, when now Michael Paleologus had got the empire of greece by the expulsion of Baldwin, and the greeks began to fall back to som of their former errours, denying the Holy Ghosts procession, sacrifice in unleavened bread, and some fasts: so that much combustion happened upon this occasion in the oriental Church, Pape Gregory the tenth called the fourteenth councel at Lions an. 1274 for the healing these disorders, recovery of the holy land, and union of the Greeks.

15. In the year 1311 when the knights Tem­plers began to give some offence in the Chri­stian world, or at least the king of France and [Page 349]other princes pretended so, and the Bogards and Beguines a kind of religious people in Germany sowed some errours up and down, to the great scandal of people. Pape Clement the fift called a councel at Vienna to rectify both, as also for recovery of the holy land and reformation of discipline then much decayed in the Church.

16. But still there was much division in the oriental part of the Church among the greeks, who denied many of them the procession of the Holy Ghost from the second person of the Trinity, the felicity of the blessed, and purga­tory in the Churches antient sens, and the pri­macy of the Roman See, which although they held in the primitive times for many ages toge­ther, yet they sank into that dangerous errour by degrees; for after that they had got an em­perour in Constantinople absolute and inde­pendent, they motioned in councels kept in those times for the most part in the oriental parts, first that the byshop of that Sea for the honour of the empire might be made a Patriarch, then afterwards that he might have place before other antient patriarchs who had the right of precedency before him, and then at last they would have him independent as the emperour himself was in temporals: thus by degrees running themselvs into schisms. To prevent these errours and factions Pape Euge­nius the fourth called the sixteenth general [Page 350]councel at Florence an. 1439 where by means of Josephus patriarch of Constantinople and other grave grecian prelates there assembled, the union betwixt the greeks and latins was made up.

17. In the year 1512 was kept the seaven­teenth councel at Lateran under Pape Julius the second and Leo the tenth to mitigate a great schisme raised by means of an episcopal conver­sion at Pisa called together by cardinal Cara­vaial and Sanseverin without the Papes autori­ty, both which came in here and submitted, as also to bring Christian princes to mutual con­cord, to stop the frequent argumentations that were too vehemently urged in schools out of Aristotle against the souls immortality, and to hasten an expedition against the Turk.

18. And lastly three Popes one after an­other, Paulus, Julius, and Pius fought succes­sively with equal resolution against Luther and Calvin and several others of their apostate priests, for internal justification, the possibili­ty and merit of doing well, the truth and effi­cacy of the seaven sacraments, prayers for the dead, intercession of saints, and indulgences, in the great oecumenical councel of Trent.

There have been in the Church besides these greater councels six hundred other national, provincial, diocesan synods, over and above those which S. Peter kept with the apostles in [Page 351]Jerusalem; which being called together upon several occurrencies were all licensed guided and directed by the Papes of those times, who kept continual correspondence with the prelates while they sate in councel: and if any synod ei­ther opposed him or swarved from his directi­ons, it was looked upon by the rest of Christen­dom as reprobate on that account.

I should be too tedious, if I should declare the indefatigable industry, high wisdom and piety of Popes, in steering the Ship of the Church both in the calms of peace that she might not then lye hulling and idle, but make good progress towards bliss; and also in the strang storms and tempests that the malignity of this world hath raised against her, which have been so great and various, that one would have thought by the many leaks that sprang in her at times, the excessive beatings of decuman bil­lows upon her sides, the dangerous hidden rocks on which she has dasht unawares, and the great­er apparent ones she has been carried upon by the violence of wind and weather not humanly to be avoided, that she could never have lasted to this day. But thanks be to Him that provided a wise and vigilant Pilot, with whom he sits himself invisibly at the stern to guide him and such as voiage in the same ship with him unto all truth even to the consummation of the world.

Histories will tell us how careful and more then humanly happy Popes have been in all ages, in reconciling Christian princes, and resol­ving difficulties between them, in examining of doctrines, in counselling and perswading high spirited children ready to fly out into he­resies to humility and resignation, in governing so many bodies of Religious which be all sub­jected under him as other parts of the Church be, and are so numerous that one would hardly beleev ther should be so many religious houses in the Christian world, all serving God night and day with that silence order and cleanlines every one in his way and institute, that it is the goodliest thing in the world to behold. St. Bennet rose in the sixth age of the Church about the year 529. and yet about the year 1480. it is written that ther were then of his order fifteen thousand monasteries in the world: and the other families of S. Francis, S. Augu­stine, S. Dominick, the Society and others, are none of them much less numerous: and all these families have still recours to the Pope both for their rule and statutes, and for all difficul­ties that may occurre in their spiritual govern­ment. And who can be sufficient for all these things? None surely, but he that is singu­larly assisted from heaven: and Christ our Lord in my judgment hath no less shown his divinity and power in the Pope, than in him­self, [Page 353]as much in his spirituall and mystick as he did in his natural body: and the life indeed which by his Spirit he livs in his Church is in a manner the very same with his naturall one: now praying, now disputing amongst the do­ctours, now fasting, then watching, then heal­ing the sick, and working miracles; then per­secuted, maligned, envied; somtimes at a feast, somtimes hungrying, somtimes making merry with a loaf of bread and few fishes, the dis­ciples now defending their maister, now the maister defending his disciples &c. for so the Pope protects innocent beleevers, and these again defend him. But of all those glorious things our Lord did in his life time, conversion of people, confutation of pharisaical opposers, releeving of poor, healing of diseases and the like, he hath shown greater abundance in his Church than in himself, according as himself promised; Ye shall do greater things than these. Which confutes the antient calumny of our old adversary the Jew, who ascribed all our Lords miraculous operations either to som gipsie tricks he learnt when he was in Egypt, or to som evill spirit he had got to attend his person: either of which had it been true had failed with his pe­son, and his power had not extended to his Church. And all things considered I think I may truly say that Christ in the Pope and Church is more miraculous than he was in his [Page 354]own person: and I doubt not but the nativity of his Church, and miraculous conversation, passion, resurrection and ascension shall be the same with his. So that he who contemns the Pope contemns Christ who presides in him, and he that contemns the Church villifies his spirit which lives and movs and animates that body.

I could be very copious in this subject; but I must not be prolix in any thing. I only desire my reader to consider this one thing, which af­ter serious thought he will find to be true, that if there had not been Popes in all ages both to conserv and propagate faith, we had either ne­ver heard any news of Christianity here in Eng­land, or not kept it undisturbedly so long. All the whole gospel and body of Christianity is his, purely his, and from him we received it. Nay the first great fundamental of Christian religi­on which is the Truth and divinity of Christ, had it not been for him, had failed long ago in the world: and what then had becom of all the rest? For after Pope Sylvester according to the faith of his ancestors had by means of his three Legates great Osius bishop of Corduba, White and Vincent two priests, established in the first councel of Nice the said divinity of Christ our Lord, wherein he is consubstanti­al to that almighty One who made the earth and stars, against Arrius and his allies, who be­gan to teach the contrary, it is incredible to [Page 355]say what frequent murmurations resorts and conciliar meetings were made afterward up and down the world by the priests and byshops who had drunk in the contrary opinion, and in that point deserted him, against their Pope and Pa­stour for three or four hundreed years toge­ther, till in a manner all the whole Church not only clergy but laiety and the princes of Christ­endom opposed him in it, while the Pope now left in a manner alone, or with a very thin re­tinue of beleevers, and all his successors one af­ter another fought even to sweat and blood for the vindication of that great Christian article even against the whole world. And he so far overcame at length, that there be scarcely in these dayes any that doubt of that, which the Pope only by the authority of his place and ti­tle wrought out of the very fire: Whence I may truly say that Christ is the Popes God; for if the Pope had not been, or had not been so vi­gilant and resolute a pastour as he is, humanly speaking, Christ had not been taken for any such person as he is beleeved this day. And let men talk what they will by their vain philoso­phy, this I will boldly say and am assured of, that if the Pope be not an unerring guide in matters of religion and faith, all is lost A man once rid of the controul of his autority may as easily deride and as solidly confute the incarnation, as the sprinkling of holy water: [Page 356]nor could the reason of the whole earth be able to convince him.

And after all this shall children and boyes jeer and revile in our streets and pulpits this sacred majesty of the Pope, whom the vertue, wit, valour and nobility of all Christendome hath ever so highly honoured; and we if we consider things as we ought can never love too much? shall we cast unjust and vile contume­lies upon him who holding a solicitude for all the Churches of Christs, has so many millions of the greatest spirits in the world depending upon his lips for direction and truth; with whom and under whom have concurred in his general councels so many thousands of renown­ed prelates, venerable byshops, princely cardi­nals, grave patriarchs, subtile divines and do­ctours, Abbots and Generals of orders, ora­tours, chancellors, knights and barons sent to his assistance by the Kings and Potentates of Christendom, the very stars of our earthly he­misphere, met together either to make up or grace and strengthen his great counsell conve­ned in subordination to his legates: nay empe­rours themselves have thought it an addition of honour to sit in that solemn and thrice venera­ble assembly, though in a separated place: Shall we I say, mock, and revile this sacred per­son? Let not such a thing be said of us any more! let it not be told in Gath, or the streets [Page 357]of Askalon, that we use any such rude behavi­our; lest the very uncircumcised Philistins con­demn our vast inexcusable incivility. Nor yet let us either envy or malign the respect which Pappists give to Him from whom they received their Christianity, and by whose vigilance and care it hath been kept inviolate amongst them from its first ingres into the land even to this very day. Shall our eye be therefor evil becaus theirs is good.

§. 30. Popery.

IN the more flourishing doctrins of the Ca­tholick Church I could be largely copious: but I have said as much as may suffice my inten­ded purpos, which was so far to excuse even that religion also, that if all do not embrace yet none may persecute and hate it. Wherefor I do purposly omit to speak of other more plausible parts of Popery, viz.

• 1. The obliga­tion which all who beleev in Christ have to at­tend unto good works, and the merit and be­nefit of so doing.
• 2. The possibility of keep­ing Gods commandements with the assistance of divine grace.
• 3. The liberty and freedom of human will either to comply with grace or resist it.
• 4. The sacred councel and excellency of divine vowes.
• 5. The right and obligation [Page 358]to restitution when any one shall have wronged his neighbour, either in his soul or body, fame, goods or estate.
• 6. The power and autority of of the Church in her tradition and decisions.
• 7. The fasts and abstinence at certain times from som kind of meats, which is all the religion we read Adam was injoined to observ in Paradise, that we may therby be more apt to acknowledg Gods gifts and goodnes at those times we en­joy other good things of his bounty and at other times them, and to sanctify our spirit for divine retirements.
• 8. The divine ordination, and unspeakable comfort and benefit of Con­fession.
• 9. The caelibate and single life of the clergy who thereby freed from much solicitude of this world, though not without som trouble­som struggling against unseemly lusts of youth, may approach the altar like angels of God who neither marry nor are given in marriage.
• 10. The doctrin of indulgencies, which be nothing els but a releas from som temporal penalties due to sin after repentance and remission; which the Church does generally bestow by commuta­tion; as when for example an indulgence of such penalties for so many daies or years is granted unto such as upon the time appointed shall re­pent and confess, fast, pray, give almes, and communicate for the Churches preservation and concord of Christian princes; which is a do­ctrin as rational and well grounded as any in [Page 359]Christianity though we in England will not un­derstand it.
• 11. Finally, the ecclesiastick hierar­chy and supremacy, whereby catholick religi­on like a flourishing fair tree, spreads his boughs in several kingdoms of the earth even from sea to sea, so united all of it in all its parts and connexed together, that ther is no catholick upon earth but is under som priest, all priests subordinated to their byshops, these to their metropolitan, all metropolitans to the Patri­archs, and Patriarchs united in the Papal cone: every leaf cleavs to som twig, every twig to som branch, every branch to som bough, every bough to the bole, and the bole to the root.

And several other such like points of the Roman religion which coming all together from once hand have stood unchangeable in all ages the same, and depending all upon the verity of the first revealer have an equality of truth though not of weight.

These and several others, with the other half dozen more offensive doctrins I have cleared and explicated, our reformers cut off at one blow; when they taught us that it would suffice to salvation only to beleev in Christ, without any more ado: and that other things were po­pish superstitions: whereby we became a strang kind of servants that beleev their maister, but heed not either to fulfil his orders or do his commands. For they told us and we have hi­therto [Page 360]beleeved it: That ther be no such things as good works pleasing to God; but all be as menstruous rags, filthy, odious and damnable in the sight of heaven: That if it were otherwis, yet are they not in our power: That with the assistance of any grace to be had Gods com­mandements are impossible to be kept, and it would be therefor vain to attempt it; especially sith we have in us no strength of free will to act any thing but evil: That it must needs be foolishnes to vow unto God, sith we can do no­thing we ought to do, and no less foolish if we have vowed to pay it: That what wrong so­ever we do to another, God is merciful and re­stitution fruitles, both becaus one sin cannot make satisfaction for another nor any thing clear us but the blood of Christ alone, unto which if we should concurr our selves by doing good works or satisfying for ill, we should be half our own redeemers: That the Church which presumes to teach other things than we allow is a fals mistres, distracted, and knows not what she sayes: That to fast from sin is fast enough, without depriving our stomachs of good flesh when we have a mind to it; and yet becaus we sin in every thing we do, neither is that fast possible to be kept: That confession is needless, How can man forgive sins: That our clergy find themselvs men and not angells and love women as well as others, and first re­volted [Page 361]from popery principally for their sakes, preferring a good wife before the whore of Ba­bylon, and the altars that kept them asunder are thrown down, the honest pulpit standing now solitary speaks for them and brings them happily together: That of indulgencies there is no need, since obligation to penalties is sha­ken off long ago by our own autority without any indulgence from another: That papal su­premacy is the only obstacle to our liberty, and therefor it must be abolished: And let popery hang together as close as it can, it shall go hard but we will find a battery to shake it.

So much indeed hath sophistry and continual clamour against popery, and state punishments lying ever most heavily upon the professours of it, prevailed over our judgments that now ther is no goodnes, no worth, no truth in it, no none at all: it is all naught, all and every part of it naught, nothing but naughtines, superstition and vanity. All that I will say for the present is this: If popery be a bad religion more is the pitty; for the professors of it suffer as much for it as might well serv for a good one. Mil­lions of people for the beleef they have in it and the love they bear its holy counsels and promises of future reward, do voluntarily and of their own accord forsake the world and all worldly pleasures to serv God night and day in poverty, humility, and chastity: and multi­tudes [Page 362]of others of a secular condition in seve­ral parts of the earth have rather chosen to live an afflicted life in this world, contemned, abu­sed, pillaged, beaten, put to death by their per­secutours, than to forsake that religion; and these too as noble and wise persons many of them as any the earth hath had.

But if any will yet be contentious, and main­tain his hatred still against Popery, I earnestly request he would seriously ponder these few fol­lowing Queries which I borrowed of a friend.

It will not be deny'd but that the Church of Rome was once a most pure, excellent, flourishing, and Mother Church; for this is not only by good St. Paul amply testified in his epistle to the said Romans, but acknowledged also by Whitaker in his answer to Dr. Sanders, by White in his defence of his way, by Fulk and Reinolds; and also by K. James in his speech to the Parliament.

This Church could not ceas to be such, but she must fall either by Apostasie, Heresie, or Schism.

I. Apostasie is not onely a renouncing of the Faith of Christ, but the very name and ti­tle to Christianity: No man will say, that the Church of Rome had ever such a fall, or fell thus.

II. Heresie is an adhesion to some private and singular opinion, or errour in Faith, contrary to the general approved Doctrin of the Church.

If the Church of Rome did ever adhere to any [Page 363]singular or new opinion disagreeable to the com­mon recived Doctrin of the Christian world, I pray satisfie me as to these particulars, viz.

• 1. By what General Councel was she ever con­demned?
• 2. Which of the Fathers ever writ against Her? Or,
• 3. By what authority was She otherwise re­proved? For,

If seems to me to be a thing very incongruous, that so great a Church should be condemned by every one that hath a minde to condemn her.

III. Shisme is a departure or division from the Ʋnity of the Church, wherby the Band and com­munion held with som former Church, is broken and dissolved.

If ever the Church of Rome divided her self by Schisme from any other body of faithful Chri­stians, or brake communion, or went forth from the Society of any Elder Church: I pray satisfie me as to these particulars.

• 1. Whose company did She leave?
• 2. From what body did She go forth?
• 3. Where was the true Church which She for­sook?

For, it appears somwhat strange to me, that a Church should be accounted schismatical, when ther cannot be assigned any other Church different from her, which from age to age, since Christ his time hath continued visible, from whence She departed.

If these Queries were well pondered; or if men would once beleev, as most true it is, that by irrefragable principles which all must needs acknowledg who will own a Christianity in ge­neral, Popery may be proved to be as good a re­ligion as the best, then Facta est Lux. But this is a little beyond my intention, which aims no further than only to put our passions to a demur; for which it may suffice us to think that Popery is not ill. And if I should yet say more and endeavour to prove it good, those that be of that Way will say I speak too little; and they who be not, will think I say too much. I had a purpos in the three last dialogues of my Reclaimed Papist, to make Popery appear not only a good religion but the best, and not only the best but the only sole Christianity which Christ planted upon earth, and which every right reason that admits of Christ must needs approve. But I hope I was therfore discouraged and hindred in that work, that it might be left for som better hand; and I should my self ve­ry much rejoyce to see it don. It is now besides my purpos, my paper also is already too much swelled, my mind calls for freedom, and my pen is dulled.

Acta est pars acroamatica, sequitur moralis.

§. 31. Conclusion.

AS without the indifferency and mode­ration I have hitherto laboured to implant, ther cannot be in us any ca­pacity of a right understanding: so ther be yet som moral topicks remaining which are apt to implant this moderation and indiffe­rency; as to consider first, the sad precipices men have run themselves and others by their headiness and temerarious obstinacy in their opinions and conceits about religion: second­ly, that the connatural excellency of a good Christian consists not in finding new waies to the reformation of other mens thoughts, but putting in practis the old received well known dictates of sobriety, justice and piety in our selves: thirdly, that charity, which the apo­stle makes to be the end and highest perfection of religion and indeed all vertue, suggests good and moderate thoughts of our neighbour, &c. But these and such like topicks be a subject fit­ter for a pious preacher than a civil logician: and so leav them. What I should speak at this [Page 366]time unto any such purpos, take it in the gol­den words and phrase of the honourable Lord Chancellour, the Oratour of the Land.

Gentlemen, the distempers of religion which have too too much disturbed the peace of this Kingdom is a sad argument indeed; It is a con­sideration that must make every religious heart to bleed, to see religion which should be the strongest obligation and cement of affection and brotherly kindness and compassion, made now by the pervers wranglings of passionate and froward men, the ground of all animosity hatred malice and reveng. And this unruly and unmanly passion (which no question the divine nature exceedingly abhors) somtimes and I fear too frequently transports those who are in the right as well as those who are in the wrong; and leaves the latter more excusable than the former, when men who find their manners and dispositions very conformable in all the necessary obligations of humane nature avoid one anothers conversation, and grow first unsociable and then uncharitable to each other; becaus one cannot think as the other doth. And from this separation we intitle God to the patronage of and concernment in our fancies and distinction, and purely for his sake hate one another heartily.

It was not so of old when one of the most antient Fathers of the Church tells us; that love and charity was so signal and eminent in the primitive Christians, that it even drew admiration and envy [Page 367]from their greatest adversaries, Vide, inquiunt ut invicem se diligunt. Their adversaries in that in which they most agreed, in their very pro­secution of them had their passions and animosities among themselvs; they were only Christians that loved and cherished and comforted and were ready to dye for one another. Quid nunc dicerent illi Christiani si nostra viderent tempora, sayes the incomparable Grotius. How would they look upon our sharp and virulent contentions in the debates of Christian religion and the bloody wars that have proceeded from those contentions, whilst every one pretended to all the marks which are to attend upon the true Church, except only that which is inseparable from it, Charity to one another.

My Lords and Gentlemen. This disquisition hath cost the King many a sigh many a sad howr, when he hath considered the almost irreparable re­proach the Protestant religion hath undergone from the divisions and distractions which have been so notorious within this Kingdom. What pains he hath taken to compose them, after several discour­ses with learned and pious men of different per­swasions you may see by a declaration he hath pub­lished upon that occasion by which you see his great indulgence to those who can have any protection from conscience to differ with their brethren. And I hope God will so bless the candour of his Majesty in the condescentions he makes, that the Church as well as the State will return to that unity and [Page 368]unanimity, which will make both king and people as happy as they can hope to be in this world.

If aught yet remain to be said, in the heaven­ly words of blessed S. Paul I shall conclude it all. Quosdam quidam posuit deus, &c. Some hath God set over us in his Church, first apo­stles, secondly prophets, thirdly doctours, then virtues, then graces of healing, opitulations, gubernations, sorts of tongues. Are all apo­stles? are all prophets? are all doctours? are all vertues? have all men the grace of healings? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret? But do you emulate the better graces. And I do yet show unto you a more excelling way. If I speak with the tongues of men and angels, and have not charity I am but as sounding brass, and tingling cimbal. And if I shall have prophe­sy, and know all mysteries and all sciences and if I shall have all faith so that I can translate moun­tains, and have not charity I am nothing, &c.

This is the great rule of our happines and square of all perfection. Et quicunque hanc regulam secuti fuerint, pax super illos & su­per Israel Dei.