CHAP. 1. My intent and reason of the Title.

THe Cause for which I plead, is the Innocency of the Roman Ca­tholick Church, wrongfully ac­cused of heinous Crimes: The concern I have in this Cause, is my Duty to a Pious Indulgent Mother, odiously [Page 6]traduced with virulent Calumnies: My End, is to wipe off her Face the Dirt you cast on it: The means I use to attain this End, is sincerity in ex­plicating what She believes, and rejecting what is untruly, and by consequence, unjustly charged on Her: You, Sir, are the Plaintiff, I the Defen­dant, and the Reader, our Iudge. My Hope is not in strength of Wit or Learning, in which I will not contend with you; but in the justice of my Cause, the equity of my Iudge, and above all, in the help of God, the Protector of the Innocent: who as he promis'd to assist his Church to the end of the world, will not be wanting to those, who defend her. Your quality of Plaintiff obliges you to prove, what you charge on us; and unless your proofs be convincing, they are insignificant, our bare denial acquits us: For In doubtful Cases, the Defendant ought to be favoured rather than the Plaintiff. And, Each one is to be thought good, till he be proved naught. Which are two Rules of Ca­non Law, so conformable to Natural Reason, that they need no proof to confirm them.

Your Title is, Saul and Samuel, at Endor. Very mysterious! But what you mean, who can tell? The History you allude to, is known to every body; Saul, a lawful, but unfortunate King, en­gaged in a dangerous war, strongly attacked by his enemies, weakly assisted by his subjects, and (which is worst of all) abandoned of God; had recourse to Samuel, in the best, and it may be, the onely manner, he thought on, to know [Page 7]his Fate from that Oracle, which had given him the first Tydings of his Kingdom. With this in­tent he goes to Endor. This is the History. But what is this to our present Times or Controver­sies? Who is the Saul you mean? Who is Samuel? Where is Endor? What War? If we consider the date of your Book, we may guess, that is was composed aboud the time of the Holland War 1672. or 1673. I dare not say you mean that, for the Honour due to Persons concerned. But tell what you mean, and apply your persons to our purpose, or acknowledge your Title to be nothing to the purpose. Until you explicate your meaning, we will admit, what you give us: We will not refuse Saul and Samuel: Whereof the one was a true Priest and Prophet, and both died in Communion of the True Church: both were sound in Faith; although one of them for diso­beying God's Commands, and not hoping in God, deservedly lost his Kingdom, and probably his Soul too. So he may be a Type of such Catholicks, who entirely believe all which God revealed, but live not according to their Belief: & Samuel is a Type of those whose Faith is animated with Charity, and both are Friutful of good Works. But seeing you personate us under those names; be pleased to give us leave to represent you by the Name of Goliah: for Goliah was in a party cō ­trary to that Church they were of, so are you in one contrary to ours: He was a profest Enemy to Saul and Samuel, so are you to us: He chal­lenged [Page 8]all the Isralites, so do you all us: He re­proached them, for not accepting that Challen­ge, so do you us, with not incountring your Books: your insulting Language shews you to be animated with a Spirit of Vanity, of Self-con­ceits, of too great esteem of your own Abilities, and Contempt of others, not unlike that which appeared in Goliah. Infine, To accomplish the Paralel, we shall find you alledging reasons, which destroy your own Cause; as Goliah brought a sword to cut off his own Head.

For these reasons I call this Pamphlet Anti-Goliah. I do not presume to take to my self the Name of David, who was the Champion of God: There were others who bore Armes in that War against Goliah and the Philistins; and their quality satisfies me,

You add in Title, The new ways of Salva­tion, and Service, which usually tempt men to Rome. Those you mention are indeed New ways to incite Men to Rome, and so New, that I am perswaded no catholick ever hearde of them, but from your Book. I know no other exte­rior ways to convert Men to Rome, but the Motives of Credibility, which are briefly related by St. Austin. l. Cont. Epist. Fundam. c. 4. and more largely by Bellar. Lessius, & Divines, Tract. de Fide, viz. the Vnity, Sanctity, Excellency of Faith, its Propagation in so short a time, and the manner of it, its effects which followed it. The perpetual succession of lawful Pastors from [Page 9]the Apostles, till our days. The Testimony of Martyrs by their Blood, and of God by his Works, which are Miracles: The consent of Nations, the Fulfilling of the Prophesies, &c. Infine, the very name of Catholick, which mau­gre all pretences of Hereticks and Schismaticks, This Church only retains, as St. Austin writes it did in his time, and we see it doth in ours. These are the Motives alleadged to invite Men to enter into the Communion of that Church, in which they are found, and of which they are verified. But I never heard any discourse thus: Be of the Communion of the Roman Church, because it adores two Christs (as you say c. 1.) giveth the scapular of S. Simon Stock (as c. 13.) says the beads of S. Dominick (c. 14.) uses consecrated Images (c. 16.) If you know any who use such induce­ments, name them: If you can name none, ack­nowledge that your Book in its fore-head bears a great Calumny, an unexcusable untruth: This is an Omen, of what sincerity we are to expect in your whole Treatise.

In your Preface, Not to be my own witness, say you; I make the case of Papists such as I find it in their own Authors. It is harde measure when eve­ry slip of a private pen, is charged on the whole Church, which often dislikes, and sometimes condemns it; yet had you kept to this Rule, you had been less blame worthy. I shall have occasion, more than once, to mind you of it.

CHAP. II. Your General Account of New Ways.

PAge 1. What the Church of Christ hath single, that of Rome hath double, the eternal God, and à mortal woman, two sorts of Christs, two sacri­fices, two Mediators, two different wayes to obtain pardon of sins, two Ladders to get up to Heaven, two sorts of spiritual kindred, two Heads of the Church, and two different and sometimes contrary words of God. When you writ this, sure you had been in good company, and thence, geminis surgebat mensa lucernis: All things seemed double. It was well for us, that at that time, Hell, Heaven, Purgatory, Pope, the soul of Man, the Person of Christ, and the Nature of God, did not occur to you, otherwise you would have enlarged our Accusation, and said we believe two Popes, two souls of men, two Hells, two Heavens, two Purga­tories, two Persons of Christ, two Divine Natures.

Here is an accusation of as heinous a nature as any can be: On What is it grounded? Whose Testimony is produced to prove it? See the Text, see the Margine, not one single man named. Have you so soon forgotten your pro­mise, Not to be your own witness; but to cite our Authors? We will use the right of Defendants, [Page 11]and to a groundless false accusation, return a flat denial oft its Truth. And, when you please, we will shew you, That we believe onely One God, one Christ, one way to obtain Pardon of Sins, the Mercy of God, one Way to Heaven, the Cross of Christ, &c.

CHAP. III. How the Church can be Roman and Catholick?

PAge 8. Papists, say you, are well pleased with calling themselves Catholicks. We are so; and so were Catholicks in S. Austin's time, as we see l. cont. Epist. Fund. c. 4. That being one of the greatest Motives of retaining him, S. Austin, in the Church. Hereticks both then, and now, would arrogate to their Congrega­tions that Title; yet could never compass it. No great wonder we should glory in that Name, seeing, as you say, Catholick Doctrine and Servi­ce, is the most essential Iewel, and the Soul of True Churches. You cannot give so great Praises to Catholick Doctrine (which is Faith) taken of it self, but it will deserve greater. Yet if compared with Charity, it must yield place; as you see 1. Cor. 13. But because the matter is of consequen­ce, and not rigthly understood by you, I will enlarge a little upon it.

It is an error as great as it is common, to think, that Faith in Christ (which is Christian Doctrine) began with the preaching of the Apostles, or of Christ himself: that Faith being as ancient almost as the world. For no sooner had Adam, by breaking the Commandment, contracted the guilt of temporal and eternal Death to himself and all his posterity, but God the Father decreed to send his only begotten Son, to blot out the hand-writing of the Decree which was against us; Col. 2.14. and to recon­cile us again by that blood, which was to be shed for us. And revealing that Decree to man, raised him to hope for pardon by the merits of the Messias, a Mediator, who was then promis'd, in whom he was commanded to believe, and from whom he was to expect his Redemption. From that moment we may date the beginning of Faith in Christ: although the Name he was to bear, was not then known, nor the time when he should come, nor the place where, nor the Family of which he was to be born. And all those persons who lived well, and were saved, either during the Law of Nature, or under the writ­ten Law, Abraham, Iob, Isaac, Iacob, Moyses, David, Hieremy, &c. as well as we, received of his fulness, and were cleansed in the blood of the Lamb; who for that reason, Apoc. 15.8. is said to be slain from the beginning of the world,

S. Austin ep. 157. Eadem Fides est, & nostra, & illorum ......... Our Faith, is the same with that [Page 13]of the Saints before Christ; for they believed that to come, which we believe past. And he proves it out of S. Paul, 2. Cor. 4.13. where having spoken of the faith of the Israelitical Ministers, he adds, We having the same spirit of faith; that is believing the same things. And Tract. 45. in Joan. Temporavariata sunt; non sides ........ Times are altered, not Faith; the sound of words is chan­ged, He is to come, and He is come; but the same faith united both those who believed him to come, and those who believe that he is come. Epiph. l. 1. con­tra Haereses, The same faith which now is preser­ved in the Holy Catholick Church, was before Christ in vigor. Hence Iustinus M. Apol 2. Eusebius l. 1. Hist. c. 4. & l. 1. de Demons. Evang. c. 5. & 6. say, there were Christians long before Christ. Thus all faithful believers both before and after Christ, make up one Mystical Body, whereof Christ is the Head.

Two difficulties against this Doctrine occur, whose Explication will clear the mist, which Mr. B. casts before his Readers Eyes. The first, Ephes. 3.5. S. Paul says, The mystery of Christ was not made known in other ages to the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his Holy Apostles. The second, We have another Priesthood, another Altar another Sacrifice, other Rites, &c. Ergo another Religion.

I answer to the first, The different manner of announcing Christ, makes no change in Christ himself: as the different manner of explicating a [Page 14]Mathematical Demonstration, alters not the Demonstration, or thing demonstrated. The Scripture is the same when cleerly and when obscurely understood; and Faith is the same when it is more and more explicated, provided it change not its object, It may be said to alter its state, when its object is altered in quality; but it remains the same in substance, as long as its material and formal object subsists. Thus the same person, when Minor, is undera Tutor; from whose power he is exempted, when Major. Now the Law was our Tutor, Gal. 3. under which we were kept till by the coming of Christ, Faith was revealed, id est, explicated more cleerly.

To the second difficulty, S. Austin answers ep. 49. Dispertita divinis eloquiis sacrificia, ..... By the Divine Spirit sacrifices were appointed, proportio­nable to the times, that some should be offered before the New Testament was revealed... and same other now since its revelation ...... For as one and the same man, offering to God one thing in the morning, and another in the evening, cannot for that be said to change God or his Religion, so in several Ages, al­though some things were offered anciently, others at present, yet we have neither changed God, nor our Religion. Thus S. Austin. Which Doctrine well applied, will cleer all you say in this Chapter.

Page 8. You say, The first Title the faithful had after the Ascension, was to be called Christians. The thing was long before, even from the be­ginning. I wish you had proved that name to be [Page 15]the first Title after the Ascension; for I think it certain, they had another name before that. The name Christian was first known at Antioch, Act. 11.26. which was many years after the Ascension, as is gathered out of the first Chap­ter to the Galatians, for it was after the Conver­sion of S. Paul, his retreat into Arabia, his return to Damascus, his Journey to Ierusalem three years after that; and then at his excursion into Syria, and preaching at Antioch, that name was taken up Is it credible, that a Congregation of men should be so long together, and have no name to be known by? This might suffice, though no name had been left on record, as there is one, Act. 6.1.2.7. where the faithful are three seve­ral times called Disciples.

Page 9 No Philosophers were ever able with all their wit, to extend their opinions beyond their Schools nor the greatest Kings settle their Laws, beyond their Dominions; say you very falsly: for Aristotle and Cartesius divide all the Philosophers of our Na­tion, in which neither ever had a School. And Iustinian's Laws are settled in Spain, in America, and for some Cases in England, where his na­me was scarce know during his life. See, Sir, how dangerous it is to follow your fancy! But let us admit what you say, and we shall find you Goliah-like armed with a sword to cut off your own head; not to hurt your enemy. What say you, Hereticks cannot spread their errors much beyond their own abode: God alone, can create a new light, [Page 16]which shall spread a bright day over the world. Where you condemn your own Reformation, which is scarce known out of the British Iles; and make a Panegyrick of Rome and Popery, which is spread over the world, and fills the East and West Indies with the light of the Gospel; which, as you say, God alone can do. Truth extorts this testimony from your pen. God grant you grace to profess with sincerity of heart, what you unwittingly said with your mouth.

Page 11. Many wise men take Roman Catholick for a Bull. The Planets have their Ecclipses, the Sun it self his spots, and the wisest men their follies. Such is childish quibbling upon words in serious grave matters. But why is it a Bull? Be­cause, forsooth, Catholick signifies Vniversal, and Roman imports something particular. Do those wise men, think it a Bull, to call the Catholick Church, Apostolick, from the Apostles, who were singular men, or Christian, from Christ, who was but one man? Aud if we may call the Ca­tholick Church Christian, and Apostolick; without being censured for incongruity of speech (though those names be taken from single per­sons) why not Roman Catholick, although that name be taken from one place? Such a Church hath more of universality than any single person.

God forbid I should make comparisons bet­wixt Christ and the Roman Church, which adores him as her God. I intend no more here, [Page 17]than to shew by this undeniable instance, that a denomination taken from à particular body, thing, or person, may be given to a universal Congregation. So those wise men are much out in this censure.

But why is the Church denominated from Rome, rather than from any other place? Answ. Because as the Poliglott acknowledges, Prolog. 10. It was alwayes held to be the Principal Church, and most constantly adhered to ancient Tra­ditions. Because it presides over the rest, as the Head over the Body, says the second General Council to Damasus. Because in it S. Peter pre­sided, who received the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, was the Rock on which the Church is built, is the foundation of Jurisdiction, and the Center of Ecclesiastical Unity.

Page 22. If the Pope be the Roman Church's Head, Masse is its Body. Very witty! Here is a new way to unchurch all Papists, who can be no part of the Roman Church, which contains the Pope, as Head, and Mass, as Body: and we are neither Pope, nor Mass. I am perswaded wise men will pity your labours, so ill spent in studies, seeing after all you cannot distinguish betwixt a Church, and her Religious Service, or Lyturgy.

Ibidem, Enquire of all the Fathers, when and where they, the Apostles sung Mass publickly. A search worhy of your self, to seek whether they sung Mass in Market-places, when their [Page 18]Meetings were Antelucanis horis, says Pliny. Whē the Christians, to save their Lives, were for­ced to wander in deserts, and mountains, and dens, and caves of the earth, Heb. 11.38.

Pag. 24. Purgatory, that Subterranean Rome: Rome sends down Masses to that; that helps Rome with wealth, honours, and riches. The Primitive Christians had Mass for the Dead, as well as Rome, as you may see in S. Austin l. de cura pro mortuis c. 1. & Enchir. c. 110. in this later place, he says. Neque negandum est. It ought not to be de­nied, that the deceased souls are eased by the piety of their surviving friends, when the sacrifice of the Mediator is offered for them, or Alms given in the Church. That these things ease those souls, who du­ring the course of this life, lived so as to merit it. For there is a manner of life, neither soo good, as not to need those helps, nor so bad, as to receive no benefit by them. And there is another so good, as not to need them; and a third so bad, as to be incapable of ease even by them. Thus S. Austin.

You see in these words, 1. Mass, Sacrificium Mediatoris: The sacrifice of our Mediator. You see 2. Mass for the Dead; Pro illis offertur: It is of­fered up for them. You see 3. Alms given in the Church for them. Pro illis Eleemosynae in Ecclesia fiunt.

You see 4. Purgatory, Hell, and Heaven, three distinct states of faithful souls departed. Those soo good, as not to need help, are in Heaven: those so bad as not to be capable of [Page 19]ease by suffrages, are in Hell: Those so bad as to need them, and so good, as to receive ease by them, are in Purgatory.

Take notice, That the Saint here doth not speak as of a doubtful matter, or on his private opinion, of what may be done; but as of an un­deniable truth and a common practice of the Church. So what you reproach to Rome, was the practice of the purest times.

And as for the substance of Mass, you find it also in S. Austin ep. 49. q. 3. where he speaks of a sacrifice in Christian Religion, which succee­ded those of the Synagogue. This sacrifice was instituted and commanded by our B. Saviour in his last Supper, and no doubt but the Apostles obeyed that command. Therefore they said Mass.

If these clear convincing Proofs of those pri­me and capital Mysteries of our Religion, do not prove that Popery was from the beginning, tell us when it began?

Pag. 333. You say, The ninth Century, the worst, the saddest, and the ignorantest Age of the Church, drowned the Gospel with Popery, and began in good earnest to set up the Abominable desolation in the Roman Church. So that there you assure us, that, till then there was no Popery, seeing that then it began to be set up. Yet see how inco­herent your assertions are. P. 105. and 340. you make S. Iohn Damasc. a Papist, who lived in the Eighth Age. P. 46. you make S. Gregory [Page 20]the Great and S. Gregory of Tours Papists, who lived in the beginning of the Seventh Age and later end of the Sixth. P. 95 you make S. Chry­sostome declaim against papists; there were then Papists in the Fifth Age. P. 149. the building of S. Mary Majors in Rome, in Liberius his time (who lived in the Fourth Age) is charged on Papists. P. 328. Papists are charged for using Oyle to cure Diseases, which was used for that intent in the first Century by the Apostles themselves; Mar. 6.13. They anointed with oyl many that were sick, and healed them. So the Apostles were Papists, and Popery was extant even in the First Age; and this by your Confession. Consider hereafter a little better what you write, if not for Truth's sake (which you seem to regard very little) at least for your own reputation, which cannot but sink very low, when such palpable Cōtradictions are discovered in your Writings.

CHAP. IV. Of Miracles and Visions.

MIracles alwayes are effects, which surpass the force of Nature, whether it be for the substance of the work, as the raising of Lazarus, Iohn. 11. who had been four daves buried; or for the manner of it, as health restored to S. Peteer's Mother-in-Law; on a sudden, without Physick, [Page 21]to such strength, as to be able immediately to serve them; Mar. 1.31. This was a Miracle, because although it may be, she might have naturally recovered, yet that she should recover in an instant, is impossible to Nature or secunda­ry Causes.

The Magicians had therefore reason to say, Digitus Dei est hic. This is God's Finger; Exod. 8.19. Whether they found that the force of Na­ture could not reach the production of those flies or that Nature's Activity (when applied by the Magicians) was suspended by God: which are two manners of Working Miracles. For it is as miraculous to suspend the Action of Nature, when Agents are applied to Subjects duly dis­posed; as to raise it to produce, what of it self it cannot. Miraculous was the preservation of Three Children in the Furnace, Dan. 3. as well as the opening of a Rock with the stroke of a Rod, to give Waters, Num. 20. yet in a diffe-manner, one by breaking the Action of Fire, the other by giving grearer strength to that stroke, than that of Cannon-Bullets.

The end of Miracles, is not only to declare God's infinite Power and Dominion over all Creatures, which by Natural Reason, without Miracles is sufficiently known: nor always the sole easing of a person in distress; although this is sometimes the Motive, as when Oyl was mul­tiplied, to relieve the poor Widdow: and very frequently in the Desert. They are moreover [Page 22]Declarations of Gods mind unto us, and a kind of Language of God, so peculiar to himself, that although every body understands it, yet no Man, no Angel can speak it for want of its only Ton­gue, God's Omnipotency. Men speak by words, says S. Austin ep. 49. q. 6. God by Actions. Divina potentia etiam factis loquitur. And before him Origen l. 2. cont. Celsum, Christ our Lord not only tanght with his words, but also with his works By these God confirmed the Word, or Preaching, of the Apostles, Mar. ult. & Heb. 2.4. He is said to have born witness, with signs and wonders, and divers miracles and gifts of the Holy Ghost. Hence it is, that Miracles ary by some Fathers called the Seal God, which comparison you use p. 41.

Page 34. All Christian Miracles are ...... for con­firming, and authorizing true Christian and Catho­lick Truth amongst Infidels. That many have been made for that end; I grant; but that none are ma­de but for that end, you say it, but can never pro­ve it, because it is not true. For the budding of Aaron's Rod, Num. 17. was to confirm to him and his posterity, the Priests Office. The Dew on Gedeon's Furre, Iud. 6.6. was to encourage him against the Madianites Sampson's Force was to humble the Philistins, and protect the Israelites. That Salt thrown into a Fountain, should change the nature of its Waters, 4. Reg. 2. was for the comfort of the Neighbours. The vertue of the Waters causing a Curse, Num 5. was to ease the Husband of his Jealousie; which [Page 23]vertue was doubtless miraculous seeing all the Priest did to them, could not so much alter their nature, as to give them a putrifying quality. Or if it could, yet such an inanimate Creature could never distinguish betwixt the Guilty and the In­nocent, so as to do no hurt to the guiltless, and rot the guilty. Several others occur in Scripture and elsewhere, made for other private ends, com­monly in confirmation of some Vertue, some­times for even Temporal ends. The Vestal car­rying water in a Sive, or leading a Ship with her Girdle against the stream, was in confirma­tion of her Innocency. That Vertue in our Kings to cure a Disease, either in testimony of the Vertue of S. Edward, from whose time they en­joy it, or to shew that Regal Power is from God; or for other ends unknown to us. Out of these Examples it appears, that your assertion, that, All Miracles are wrought for confirmation of Faith amongst Infidels, is untrue, and undefensi­ble. One great fault is observable in your whole writing, some particular instances occurring to you, you presently frame out of them general Axioms; which precipitated Judgments are often very erroneous. We have seen one Exam­ple of it; here follow others.

P. 38.39.40. God, say you, proceeds in the New Law, as he did in the Old: In the beginning of both he doth undeniable wonders, and restrains the Devil and his Ministers from doing any. After a time, when each Law was establisht, God ceases [Page 24]from working Miracles, and the Devil is let loose to act as he pleases. Thus you. That God acted in both Laws in some manner alike, confirming both with Miracles, is very true: But that the Devil was restrained and tied up from acting, at the beginning of either; or that God ceased from them in both, after some time, is most false.

It is false, that the Devil was restrained from acting things, which to men seemed miracu­lous; for in the beginning of the Old Law, the Magicians for some time contended with Moses, and did things like his Miracles; Exod. 7. And immediately after the coming of Christ, Apollo­nius Tyanaeus is an instance, that the Devil had then as much liberty as ever, for there scarce ever was any Magician, who equalled him in seeming wonders.

But, say you, Oracles were supprest, Elimas struck blind, Demoniacks silenced, Simon Magus beat down by S. Peter. What then? Ergo, the Devil was tied from all false Miracles Pag. 39. Thus you draw a general conclusion out of some particular instances, although there are others as evident for the contrary, as those of Vespasian and Adrian, of whom you your self speak; Pag. 36. prove there were seeming wonders wrought at that time, and we find in S. Chrysostom and Theodoret l. 3. Hist. cap. 16. a pratling Oracle of Apollo near Antioch, whose mouth was stopt by S. Babilas his bones.

It is also false, That Miracles ceased, when [Page 25]the Old Law was establisht; for the vertue of the Cursed Waters, Num. 5. continued to the end; that of the Sheep Pond, Iohn. 5. also; which two are recorded in Holy Scrip­ture: As also those of Elias and Elizeus in the 3. and 4. of Kings. The Old Law was esta­blisht when Hieroboam set ut his Calfes, yet 3. Kings 13. three Miracles were wrought to confound that beginning Idolatry, and crush the Infant Schisme in its Cradle. I say nothing of several other Miracles, not recorded in Scrip­ture, which yet are mentioned in other Fathers, to have continued to Christ his time; viz. that no fly should be found in the Temple, nor any noisome smells, notwithstanding so many Burnt Offerings: that the Wind should not blow away the Ashes of the Altar, which stood in an Open Court; that no Enemy should infest their Countrey, whilst they went thrice a year to Hierusalem, &c. which were continued till Christ's death, and that of the Synagogue. When you have considered these things, you will say that your assertion of Miracles ceasing, when the Law was setled, was very rash.

Seeing then, that God (as you say) proceeds in both Laws alike, Miracles having not cea­sed in the Old Law till the Death of Christ, and the end of the Law, they are not to cea­se in the New. But, say you, God ceased from Miracles, when there were Christian Princes, to whose care he committed the Church, as willing to [Page 26]ease himself of the trouble; being tired with the labour. But your sword will here do us ser­vice again: for p. 44. you acknowledge the Miracles by the Relicks of S. Stephen in Africa, and S. Gervasius, and Protasius at Milan, which being done in S. Austin's time, you acknow­ledge Miracles long after Christian Princes were Nurses of the Church. Such a perpetual com­bat there is in your Writings, and will be, while fancy fights against Truth, in one of a weak memory.

Another Contradiction I find p. 37. where to shew your admirable Erudition, you say, that the Primitive Ermits retired to Deserts to convert the Barbarous Inhabitants. Very rare! the world hath been hitherto in a great error, all univer­sally believing, that Ermits went to the De­serts, not to seek, but to flie all men; and it is evident, that S. Paul and several others, past a long age of most men, without seeing any man at all; which is so evident, that you could not but say and own it in this very place. Deserts, say you, the refuge of Primitive Christians from the face of their enemies: They went then to the Deserts, to flie from their enemies; not to seek them there. So incoherent are your fancies, you say and unsay the same thing within six lines; let me advise you not to relie on every fancy, which presents it self; otherwise, it may be the ignorant may admire you, but certainly the learned will laugh at you. We have exa­mined [Page 27]your Assertions, we will now hear your Proofs.

Pag. 37. The World being sufficiently called to the Christian Faith, say you, the Holy Fathers tell us that Miracles ceased, that they were unnecessary, that to expect other then the old ones, was to tempt God. And you cite S. Chrysostom & A. Operis Imperf. & qq. ex Nov. Test. You might as well have cited S. Austin l. 1. de Vera Relig. c. 25. Cùm enim Ecclesia Catholica, The Catholick Church being spread all over the world, and founded, it was not permitted that those Miracles should last till our days. These words are as full as any you can produce, yet they do not oblige us to say, there were no Miracles wrought in that great Saints time. Let him explicate his own mea­ning, l. 1. Retract. c. 14, Verum est quidem, That which said is true; for in our days the imposition of hands upon persons baptized, dos not give with the Holy Ghost the knowledge of Languages, neither do Preachers cure the Sick with their shadow. But my words ought not so to be understood, as if no Miracles at all were done: For I my self knew of a blind man cured at Milan; and such like things are frequent, etiam istis temporibus, even in these dayes, that I can neither know them all, nor relate all that I know. Thus S. Austin. You see, Sir, an Eye­witness above all exception, of not a few, but many Miracles wrought in those dayes, when you pretend Miracles to have ceased. If we co­me nearer our Times, we shall find very many [Page 28]recorded in the two S. Gregories the Great, and of Tours. And so on till this Age, God's hand being not now shortned, or disabled to do them, and man's wants requiring them, chiefly to nourish in him that lively Faith in God, and hope of his help in our wants, and to encou­rage us to have recourse with confidence to the Throne of Grace. I could bring a Cloud of Witnesses, but that in reality you acknow­ledge what I intend (which is another of your contradictions.)

For you say, p. 35. That God is pleased to shew his Power, Justice, Mercy, or Divine Being, in all Ages, by some supernatural Effects. That there is no Nation, whose Chronicles do not testifie this; nay scarce any private man, but may observe some of these in himself. Magna Veritas & praevalet. Truth forces this testimony from you, even when you impugne her, to shew how, Goliath like your sword is still at hand, to dispatch you. For you pretend there are no miracles in these later ages in the whole Church: yet you admit them, even in favour of private persons. O, but, say you, these are not miracles, because not done in Confirma­tion of Faith. Very good! at if the same worke, when done in Confirmation of Faith, were a miracle: if on any other Score, were none. At if you should say: the same seale, is tbe King's broade seale, when applyed to Greene wax; but is not such, when it is put to Red, or yallow wax. [Page 29]These are distinctions worthy of D. Brevint!

Pag. 51. Those of Christ, & his Apostles were 1. wor­kes convenient to promote the glory of God, & the good of men. 2. to confirme men in Faith. 3. Freed from all mixture with Lying wonders. Be it soe. Such are the miracles wrought in the Catholick Church, viz: that of Faire weather in the yeare 1675. obtained in Paris, through the interces­sion of S. Genovef, Patronesse of that greate towne, which was obtained assoone as her Shrine was uncovered, & the Prayers begun: & no rayne fell till the Prayers were ended. This I mention, because it is knowne to many of our nation, of both Professions, & even Pro­testants owned the worke to be very extraor­dinary. Many likewise remember, that long since, when the King's most excellent Majesty was at Paris in alike publicke necessity, they had recourse to the same Saint for rayne, in an exceeding greate Drouth; & that Rayne fell on the very day of the Procession. Which of your three Conditions are wanting in these workes?

Page 52. Moderne Roman miracles are prancks becoming Hobgoblins, & fayryes. And then you fall on the visions of our B. Lady? Which I am perswaded no body before you ever called mira­cles. Soe your discourse is the same, as if a man should say: Nireus was nohandsome man, be­cause Thersites was deformed. I know not whither to admire more, your Divinity, or [Page 30]your Logicke: the first furnishes you with the oddest notions, which ever entred into any so­ber man's head: the second draws them into as odde formes. Both together make you a worthy champion, of the cause you pleade.

That some Spirits have appeared, is a thing soe cleere in both old, & new Testament, that none, who are not strangers to both can deny it. What is more cleere, then the apparitions of Angels to the Patriarck, to the Israelits^a, to Gedeon^b, to Manue & his wise^c, to David,^d to Daniel^e, & to Zacharias^f. And in the new Testament, to another Zachary^g, to our B. Lady^h, to Philip the Deaconⁱ, to S. Paul^k, & to S. Iohn in the Apocalypse severall times. Now if Angels appeare, why not Blessed Souls, Who are like Angels in Hea­ven ^l? S. Austin^m says it may seeme Impudence to deny that souls appeare. Andⁿ assures that he had learnt not by uncertain rumors; but by certain witnesses, that whilest Nola was besiedged, S. Fe­lix appeared to many both cittizens, & strāgers. Now if Saints appeare, why not our B. Lady?

Pag. 54. She appeared to S. Alain, who had beene a filthy companion before. What then? Christ appeared to S. Paul, who had beene a Persecutor before. The change of Saul into, Paul a [Page 31] Persecutor into a Preacker, was a convincing argument, that it was truly Christ which appea­red to him. And the change of that S. Alanus proves it was a good spirit, which appeared to him. Now a good spirit could not tell a Lye, & say he was the mother of God, without being soe Can sweate grapes be gathered of thor­nes? Or figs of thistles? Mat. 7.16. Spirits may be knowne by their fruites, as well as men.

Pag. 60. Roman miracles looke another way, then those of Christ: They are brought to prove other doctrines, then his. This is easily sayd, & as easily denyed. Your Sincerity hath not appeared soe greate hitherto, as that now we should take your word, & grant that we have changed the Apostolicall Faith for a compliment, in civility, not to gain say you. Prove: or be silent.

Page 66. How is this change imaginable, that shee who did not appeare in the primitive times should doe it of late? S. Austin as well deserved her Protection, when he was besieged by Barbarians, as S. Dominick. Thus you very Judiciously! As if God were always bound to give equall tem­porall blessings toall, who deserve alike! Our B. Saviour deserved as well fire from Heaven up­pon those, who came to apprehend him, as Elias, 4. Reg. 1.10. & an Army of horses, & fiery charrets, to defend him, as Elizeus, 4. Reg. 6.17. yet had them not. You have seene out of S. Austin, that S. Felix appeared at the siege of Nola: if the like did not happen ot Hippo [Page 32]regio, what then? Our Redeemer during his life cured many sicke; not all, (Io. 5. we find many sicke Lying about the sheepe pond, & but one cured) he raysed some to life; not all. Why not S. Iohn Baptist, as well as Lazarus, seing he deserved it as well? This is a presumptuous question: it ought to satisfy us, that the thing being due to nether, myght be granted to ether, or refused without any wrong. And the will of God ought to put some bounds to the curiosity of man. But our B. Lady did not appeare hereto­fore. How know you, shee did not? Are all things written, which hapned? or have you reade, all that was written? or, when you writ this, did you remember all that you had read? Refresh your Memory, & you will find that you have reade of an ancient Apparition of our B. Lady: you your self are, my witnesse, for p. 149. you say she appeared to Liberius the Pope, & Iohn a rich man of Rome, to order the building of S. Mary Major.

It is a greate misfortune, for a man to have an Itch to write, & that in odious matters, who hath a strong fancy, a weake Memory, little understan­ding, & no Iudgment. Examin your conscience uppon these points, & see how much of them belongs to you.

I cannot omit an impious, (I might say Blasphemous) hint, you make, that it is some bad Spirit, which appeares with the tittle of our B. Lady, or our B. Saviour. Because, say [Page 33]you, they appeare only since the Divil is let Loose; not whilest he was bound up in the pri­mitive times. Your old erroneous fancy workes still. To correct it, know, Sir, that in the Apostles times, (when you fancy the Divil to have beene bound up) Satan transformed himself into an An­gel of Lyght. (2 Cor. 11.14.) Be ashamed of your ignorance, if you did not know this: & of a worse fault, if you did know it, & yet assert the contrary. And that it is no bad Spirit, which in later times appeares, is Evident by the frui­tes it produces, Humility, Meeknesse, Patien­ce, Peace of Conscience, a contempt of tem­porall, & an esteeme of spirituall things, in a word, charity to their neyghbour, & a Love of God above all things, even themselves. These vertues are planted, watred, & encreased, by these Apparitions in those souls, to whome they are granted. Are these the fruites of a bad Spirit? Doe such grapes grow on thornes? Such figs on thistles?

But she (the ever B. Virgin) admits of Ho­nour, say you, p. 68. She does soe; & Ho­nour is due to her, first, because she is ful of Grace, (Luc. 1.28.) Secondly because she is the mother of God, (Conc. Ephes.) the hyghest dignity any pure creature is capable of. Thirdly for the benefits we receive by her intercession.

CHAP. V. Of the Protection of Saints.

IN your 4. Chapter having for 8. whole pa­ges declamed against our Prayers to Saints, from p. 71. to. 79. you draw at length your discourse to this conclusion: The tru reason why praying to Saints is called Idolatry, is not because they cannot heare, for this would make praying to them no more, then an Idle, & uselesse act: but mainly-because Prayer, vows, & giving of Thanks, is a main part of God's service Scripture, & the An­cient Fathers, still reckon Prayer, & Thanksgi­ving amongst the truest sacrifices, & which can be­long to none, but God. Soe calling on them, who are not Gods, is downeryght Idolatry. Thus you. And having breathed a while you say: The truth is, you may call uppon a Saint, without any danger of Idolatry, if he be in such a distance, whence in­telligent creatures may without Miracle Heare one another. Which words destroy your former as­sertion, being contradictory to it. The truth is, (if I may conjecture) when you advanced the first Proposition, your Imaginative faculty had beene over heated with your forgoing discourse: & soe represented things amisse. But before you writ the following part, it had time to coole, & returne to a rationall temper, & then the [Page 35]Truth as it is appeared, & that Action, which before seemed Idolatry, was knowne to be Inno­cent. Thus you condemne, & absolve us, ac­cording as you are disposed. We are sure God hath more constant measures, to Judge by; which is our Comfort.

I will leave you to reconcile your disagreeing thoughts, & take what you grant: viz. that it is not Idolatry, to pray to Saints, provided they be not out of hearing. Moreover you say p. 80. It is not Idolatry to pray to your freinds by letters at what distance soever. Soe it is no Idolatry by setter to pray to one in the other hemisphere. Nay you grant the same to a Saint in Heaven, if we have Expresses, to carry our letters. Which are your owne words. Soe that S. Paul, in desiring the Romans to pray for him, had beene guilty of Idolatry, had he not found an Expresse, Phebe, to carry his letter: & the Prayers of Papists to Saints are Idolatry, because they have no Expres­ses for Heaven. Rare discourse!

But seeing the distance of the Saint from us, is the thing which makes Prayer to him Idolatry, shew your skill in Metaphysick, & teach us what that distance is: In which Scripture, & fathers, as well as Divines, are silent. Is it a Bow's-shoote? a league? ten leagues? A Diameter of the Earth? the latitude of the whole world? The reason of my doubt, is because Bodys have certainly a more narrow Sphere of Activity, then Spirits: yet it is not easy to determine the [Page 36]Sphere of Activity of one of our senses, Seing, which discovers stars in the firmament at an unconceavable distance. And were there other luminous bodys ten times more remote, with a bignesse proportionably greater, & a more vivid lyght, our Eyes would discerne them. Soe it is not the distance alone, which hinders our discovering some objects; but it is ether their obscurity, or their position out of a streyght Line, or their framing too little an Angle in the Retina, or the bad disposition of the eye it self. You see, Sir, it is no easy matter to determine the Sphere of Activity of one of our corporall senses: & who will then presume to determine that of a Spirituall creature, which is much more unlimited, as drawing neerer to the Di­vine Being, which is unlimited in all kinds? now unlesse you can resolve this doubt, & mo­reover shew us at what distance the Saints are from us, your charge of Idolatry will fall to the ground, because you cannot convince, that the Saints, we pray to, be out of hearing.

Whilest you study an answer to this unans­werable doubt, I will teach you, what I learne out of Scripture, that the Saints doe know in Heaven what passes on Earth. For luke 15.7. our Saviour says, Ioy shall be in Heaven, over one sinner, that repenteth. That Repentance is then knowne in Heaven, for there can be no Joy, for things unknowne. And if this, why not other things? Are there setled some Expresses, to carry [Page 37]tidings, of the Repentance of a sinner; & not of the Prayers of the virtuous? Againe Abraham knew what had past in the times of the rich man, & Lazarus: that one had received good things, the other evill things: Luke 16.25. The rich man saw Lazarus, Lazarus saw him: & they saw their different conditions of blisse, & misery: & they could speake to one another. Soe souls in Limbo Patrum, as we say, (or as you say, Saints in Heaven) & Damned souls in Hell see, know, & converse with one another. The rich man knew he had in the world five brethren whose wicked life would bring them to the Torments, he endured, if they did not amend it. Abra­ham knew the same, & that they had Moyses, & the Prophets. How can all this stand, with that darke Ignorance of things of this world in which you fancy the deceased souls to live, even in Heaven? Produce your doughty argu­ments against Christ himself; say it is impossi­ble the glutton should see Lazarus, or speake to Abraham, or Abraham reply. Alleadge Distance; the danger of Idolatry, & what else you please: For all these things ether prove nothing against us, or convince our Saviour's words to be im­proper; or worse: Unlesse unto your other in­ventions, you adde that of Expresses setled bet­wixt Hell, & Abraham's bosome.

As for the meanes, by which the souls know what passes here, it is not materiall: whither it be by the mediation of Angels, or Revelation, [Page 38]or seing things in the Divine Essence, as in a voluntary looking glasse, or by the force of their understanding, which having no dependance onsenses, can reach to all places, or by severall, or all these together, or by any other way unknowne to us. Each hath severall good Au­thors, none is impossible, or improbable. But the thing is not worth the while, to examin: it belonging to Metaphysick; not to Divinity, much lesse to Faith. Yet it is considerable, that Divines find greater difficulty, to show how the secrets of harts are concealed from Angels, then how the rest are made knowne to them. See S. Tho. 1. q. 55.

Page 81. This is to fancy in Saints an Om­niscience, if they know what passes in severall parts of the world. My answer is obvious: there being severall priviledges of the Divine understanding, not communicable to creatures. 1. that God understands all things possible, & existent: Saints only the later. 2. God understands all to come; they only what is present. 3. he un­derstands by his owne essence; they by species. 4. his knowledge embraces all absolutely; theirs reaches not to secrets of Harts. 5. His is unli­mitable; from theirs severall things may be restrained when God pleases. 6. His is inde­pendent; theirs depends on God, without whose concourse they can doe nothing. See, Sir, whither you have Metaphysick enough, to prove that knowledge to be the Omniscience of [Page 39]God, which is clogged: with soe many Imperfe­ctions? I would know of your Doctors, why it should not be blasphemy to attribute to God such imperfect knowledges?

Page 94. You acknowledge Miracles of the [...] saints, in the frist three hundred yeares. Which, say you, tempted Christians no further, them to goe, & pray to God in those places where they were wrought & where Payers had sometimes very extraordinary returnes: there they wisht to God, that he would heare in their behalfe, the generall Prayers, which these souls offer to God. Where you expresse the full sense of the Prayers to Saints, in our Missall, & Breviary. But the faith full being perswaded, that God through the Prayers of those Saints granted their requests, & releived their wants, & knowing that the Saints know what Prayers were offred up to them, why myght they not say, as we doe in the Lytanyes: Saint Peter pray for me? Is it not lawfull to say so, to a Saint alive in this world? & why not to one living in Heaven? the reason is, say you, because Prayer, & prayse is a sacrifice, which no body offers to Peter, Paul, or Cyprian sayth S. Austin. Doe you think what you say? Prayers & Prayse a sacrifice? Can we not then without Idolatry Prayse S Paul, or S. Peter? I cannot accuse you of that fault: though I am­perswaded you never reprehended as Idolaters, those who praysed you, & offred up that Sacrifice on your Altar. Prayer is like wise Idolatry! Was it Idolatry in S. Paul to Pray Saints on Earth to [Page 40]pray for him? why then should it be such to pray Saints in Heaven to pray for us? Are they lesse Saints? This is a mystery, which we long have desired to see revealed, & long may, for you nether will, nor can explicate it.

Pag. 95. Observe the wiles of Satan, Christ employes both at once his Apostles, & his miracles, to destroy all Idolatry from among men: & Pagans & Papists make use of both, to bring it in. Unlesse the Reader be attentive, he will think you speake sense; which is not tru. For tell me, I pray you, what use did Pagans make of the Apostles, whome they slaught erd like sheepe in the shambles? How could they use the Apostles name, which they knew not, but to hate it? Where are those Pagans? what miracles do Pagans pretend to, to bring in Idolatry? what Idolatry doe Papists bring in? How doe they use the Apostles to compasse that? your Period seemed to you full, it sounded well in your eare: you thought it pretty, to mingle Papists & Pagans, & oppose the wisdome of Christ, to the wiles of Satan: soe you writ it downe, without regarding or exami­ning how all could hang together, or be veri­fyed. The bast excuse I can find, is to lay the fault on a defect of nature. It is unreasonable to exact a rationall discourse, from one who seemes to want common sense. He may be advised to si­lence: which is the best counsel I can give you.

But, say you, these are the words of an anciēt father, & cite S. Chrisos. hom. 1. ad Pop. Ant. In whome [Page 41]there is not one word of Papists, the only material point to our purpose. Whose wiles are these, to falsify Fathers, cite theim for what they thought not of, & corrupt their texts, to prove what you please? In malâ causâ non possunt aliter, S. Austin. Your bad Cause is capable of no better defence. I will give you your choyse, whither S. Chris did, or did not mention Papists here? that you may the better see how wrechedly you entan­gle your selfe in the nets, you cast for others, & fall into the pit, you dig. Did that Saint not men­tion Papists? You wrong him very much in saying he did. Did he speake of them? they were then in the world early after Christ, much sooner, then you, & your brechren will ad­mit. Still what you say is against yourselfe, you carry about you your sword.

CHAP. VI. Of worship given to our B. Lady.

IN your 5.6.7. & 8. Chapters you very odiously represent, what hath beene sayd, or done, to honour the ever B. Virgin, cutting the words which seeme harsh from others, which correct them, & adding malicious glos­ses, & interpretations, to make them sound yet more harshly. It would be tedious to reply to each particular. Soe I will deliver, what the [Page 42]Church professes & the ground of her practice, & then take notice of some remarkable faults in your discourse.

Esteeme, Honour, Prayse, & Glory, consi­der, at their proper object, some person endo­wed with some good qualitys, not in a meane; but in an excellent degree. Esteeme is the in ward value, or respect we beare it. Honour is an outward expression of our Esteeme. By Prayse we endeavour to communicate both to others: & Glory is the union of many persons in the same sentiments of Esteeme, Honour, & Prayse. It resides not in the person honoured; but in the Honourer, Honor est in honorante; yet it takes its species from its object, which gives it its being, as all other morall habits, & Acts doe.

There are two sorts of Honour, answering to two sortes of Excellency, the one naturall, the other supernaturall. By naturall Excellency I understand all Gifts of this life, whither perso­nall, as science, Art, valour, &c. or Reall, as to be borne in a good country, of a noble fa­mily, heyre to a greate estate, &c. which are called goods of fortune; but are Blessings of God, not depending on any industry, and therefore are distinguisht from personall endowments. By supernaturall I understand all gifts exceeding the force of nature, which leade men to their first principle, & last end, God: viz, Grace, & Glory: all supernurall vertues [Page 43]Theologicall, or morall. Item, those instru­ments, which God uses for our sanctification: as the Bible, Sacraments, Churchs, sacred vessells, & vestments, Persons Consecrated to God: item Saints Bodys, as having beene Temples of the Holy Ghost, & living members of Christ. There is athird kind of Excellency which par­takes of both these, it being a meane bet­wixt them: viz that of Kings, which is called Sacred, as coming from God (Prov. 8.15. Rom. 13.1. & 1. Pet. 2.13.) Yet it partakes something of the other Excellency, because God used the wills of men to establish it. This worship stops not in the person of the Monarck; but spreades from him to all employed by him, (1. Pet. 2.13.) even to the meanest, propor­tionably to the authority communicated to them. This worship we call Civill: that of su­pernaturall things, is called Religious: that of naturall may be called Merall.

God, containing within himself all Perfec­fections, which can move esteeme in amost Eminent degree, being the fountaine of all na­turall Goodnesse, & all supernaturall gifts, the supreame Lord of all Creatures, & King even of Kings, is the Prime object of worship, of Adoration, of Prayse of all Creatures in all kinds. The splendor of the Sun is darknesse, the riches of the Earth, Poverty, the wisedome of the wisest, folly, the power of the Myghty, wea­kenesse, the Majesty of Kings, contemptible, the [Page 44]Justice of the Ryghteous, as filthy rags (quasi pannus menstruatae, Isa. 64.6.) if compared with the Lyght, Riches, wisdome, Power, Ma­jesty, & Justice of God. The Islands compared to his greatnesse, are like dust: & the whole world a drop of a Bucket, gutta situlae, Isa. 40.15. All creatures are as if they had no being, when set before that Essentiall Being Esse per Essentiam. Hence no Prayse, no Honour can equall him. Quantum potes, tantum aude, quia major omni lau­de, neclaudare sufficis.

This is an undeniable truth, which yet is abu­sed, to establish two pernitious Errours. For hence Protestans deny, that any Religious cult is due Saints: & our later sectaryes, their breth­ren, refuse all Civill worship to Magistrates. Both alleadge that saying. Soli Deo: to God alone Honour & Glory, not minding, that the same Apostle Rome 13.7. commands us to render to all their due, Honour, to whome honour, & S. Peter teaches us first to feare God, next to Honour the King. 1. Pet. 2.17. which places may stop the mouths of sectarys, shewing an honour due to Kings: it may likewise open the eyes of Pro­testants, shewing an esteeme due to superna­turall gifts. Nay their owne practice convinces their errour: seing they shew some more res­pect to the Bible, then to a Romance; to a Church then to an Alehouse; to a Saint, then to a theife; to S. Paul, then to Iudas. And call this respect as you please, we call it Religious, & [Page 45]the dispute about that name, will be [...]: In which we have the advantage because our worship of Saints ends not in them; but in God, who is admirable in them: as all Civill worship ends not in the subordinate officers of state; but in Kings, for whose sake alone others are respected, & obeyed.

Supposing then some Honour due to Saints, as they partake of God's goodnesse we shall find ground enough for the like, & greater in the Mother of God. The Angel called her full of Grace (Luke 1.21.) she was sayd to blest amongst all women (ibid. v. 42.) & she by divine inspira­tion foresaw she should be called Blessed by all Generations, by reason of the manifold gifts of the H. Ghest. No doubt but that Grace, with which the Angel found her, was much encrea­sed by a perpetuall practice of vertu. Her Hu­mility in stiling her self the hand may de of God, when she was called to be his mother was of soe greate merit, that its quantity without temeri­ty cannot be determined.

It is her singular prerogative, to be the mo­ther of God. Her fullnesse of Grace raysed her above all men: this rayses her above all Saints and Angels, none being soe related to God. Wherefore a greater honour is due to her, then to them.

Wherefore there is an honour due to Saints, to the mother of God, & to God: which being different, are exprest by different words, that of [Page 46]Saints we call Douleia, that of ouw B. Lady. Hyperdouleia: & that of God Latreia. The mo­derne reformers dislike these words, for their Etymologye: but their doubt is not worth the answering, seing use & custome gives, or chan­ges, the signification of words.

But say you pag 101. She is called a God­desse. Ans. it may be, as God is sayd (psal. 82.1.) to Iudge the Gods. And againe: I have sayd: you are Gods. Now if he called them Gods to whome the word of God Came (John 10.35.) why not our B. Lady, in alike sense, to whome the tru eternall word came, & dwelt in her? This you wil say is only a metaphorical Divinity; & I say so too; & I anathematize any, who shall say, she is a Goddesse properly. But the ground of this calumny is very childish, becau­se, forsooth, she is called Diva: which title every Grammarian knows, to be given to all Saints, & used promiscuously with Beata, or Sancta. In the Civill Law you may find it given promiscuously to all Emperours, even Pagans: whome no Christian ever thought to be Gods.

Pag. 142. We keepe, say you, holy days to her Honour: a thing due only to God. Ans. we doe So. And you keepe Holy-days to the honour of the Apostles: & why this, if Holy-days be due only to God? your sword is never moved, but to your prejudice, it never strikes at us, but through your owne sides.

CHAP. VII. Satisfactions, & Indulgences.

IN your 9. Chapter you declame against the treasure of the Roman Church: & in your 10. against Indulgences. Which having greate affinity, I will treate them together. I will be­gin with an explication of the doctrine, which the Church oblidges her children to beleive, & as for other points, as she doth, soe will I leave their discussion to Divines, whose opinions they are, rather then Doctrine of Faith. And that my Explication of Faith in these points may be more authenticall, I will deliver it in the words of a worthy Prelate the Bishop of Condom, Preceptor to the Dolphin, publisht lately in our language.

It is not only Iust; but beneficiall unto us, says he, that God forgiving us the sin, & remitting us the eternall punishment, we have incurred, should impose some temporall penalty, to retaine us within our dutyes, least being delivered too soone from the bonds of his Iustice, we should abādonour selves unto a temerarious Considence, abusing the facility of his Indulgence.

It is therefore in order to our discharging that obli­gation, that we are subjected to some workes of Pen­nance which we are bound to performe in the Spirit [Page 48]of Humility, & Repentance: & the necessity of these satisfactory workes was the motive, that in­duced the Primitive Church, to impose uppon Peni­tents those Pennances called Canonicall.

See that when the Church inflicts uppon sinners Painfull, & laborious injunctions, & they under­take them with Humility, that act we call satis­faction: & when ether in regard of the Zeale, & fervour of the Penitent, or other good work perfor­med, which the Church hath prescribed, she relea­seth some part of the Pennance, which was Owing, this remission is called Indulgence.

The Council of Trent proposeth no more to our Faith in the point of Indulgences, then this, that the power of granting them hath beene given the Church by Christ Iesus: & that the use of them is beneficiall. Where unto the Council addeth: that the grant of them ought to be dispenced with caution, least the Ecclesiasticall discipline should be weakened, & enervated by an excessive facility, which advice de­clareth that the manner of disposing of Indulgences appartaineth to church discipline. Thus far out of this greate person. What have you to say against this Catholick doctrine?

You employ one & fifty pages declaming against this Treasure, & these Indulgences: viz from the 189. till the 240. yet in the midst of all this transport, we find a lucid intervall, where Truth (against which in the rest you discourse) forces you to depose in her favour. For pag. 216. I find these words: It was the practice of the [Page 49]Holy Church to expell from their society scandalous, & knowne sinners. They were enjoyned to pray, to fast, to curb, & to mortify their flesh, to afflict their souls for their sins, & to apply themselves to all such workes, as myght both improve, & declare their in ward sincere Repentance. These long, & holy exerci­ses did passe among all Christians, for SATISFAC­TIONS to the Church, & in some manner to God too. Before the Church most properly, because that was all which Church discipline required: & before God in a lower, yet a very tru, & proper sense: because it is the main condition, which God requires of Offenders which he is in his mercy both satis­fyed, & pleased with, when they Sincerely performe it. They were to doe it alōg while, some a whole yeare, some two, some ten, some according to the enormity of the sin, all their life long. Thus you, of satisfaction by Penitentiall workes.

Pag. 218. You continu your explication of this matter. There now and then hapned, say you such causes, as moved them (the Bishops) to be more free, by shortning the time of sinners Pen­nance: As when the sinner gave signall proofes, of an extraordinary sorrow: when he stoutly owned, & defended the Christian Faith, when in times of Per­secution, they were to be strengthned to Martyr dome: when valiant Confessors did interceede for some of their freinds: on these, & other like rationall, & pious Inducements, the holy Fathers thought they myght ether ease such Penitents of the length, or some times quite discharge them of the whole bur­then. [Page 50]then. And this Relaxation of Ecclesiasticall Seve­rity, some Latin Fathers (Tertullian, & S. Cyprian) call in their writings by the name of Indulgence.

Here you soe exactly agree with what I have written out of our Bishop de Condom, that you may seeme to have copyed him, or both to have taken your sentiments out of some third.

At least this is evident, that you owne as much as that Authour teacheth to be the Faith of the Roman Catholick Church, & consequently your Censure on our Faith in these points of satisfaction even to God, & Indulgences, is a con­demnation of your self. Magna veritas, & praevalet.

CHAP. VIII. Confraternityes.

CHapter 11. you traduce our Confraterni­tyes, c. 12. you play with the girdle of S. Francis. c. 13. you deride the Scapulary of S. Si­mon Stock &c. 14. make your selfe merry with the Rosary. All which being no points of our Faith, I do not think my selfe oblidged to assert them in this pamphlet. Yet I will tell you, what you know already, though you Slily insinuate the contrary pag. 300. that we preach Faith, Repentance, Perseverance in well doing &c. more [Page 51]then Protestants: seing we hold them absolu­tely necessary to salvation, Faith without workes being dead, as we teach with S. Ja­mes; & you teach Faith alone to Justify: we exhort People to them with hopes of a reward, they being meritorious; & you deny all merits.

We use, indead, those things you speake of, as helpes of our Faith, exercises of our devo­tion, & meanes to strengthen our frailty to Persever in well-doing. It is a Calumny, to say, we think Faith, Hope, & Charity unne­cessary, or, that we teach, any can be saved without them, even when we invite men to these Gilds, or Confraternitys, into which men enter only with intention to encrease those vertues in their souls. We feele, we know, we owne our inclination to Evill from our Infancy, we are convinced, that our Will, of it self is insensible, nay stupid, as to all Good: that words have little force uppon it, but that ex­amples are much more powerfull. Hence ap­peares the first advantage of those, who are incorporated into those Congregations, which consist of men, who forgetting those things. which are behind, & reaching forth unto those things. which are before, presse towards the marke. Philip. 3. such men, who consider one another, to provoke to love, & good workes, Heb. 10.24. This ap­peared in the Confraternity of Charity, begun by P. Vincent de Paul: which with the Almes it [Page 52]gathered, releived all the poore of Loraine, Champagne, & Picardie, many Ladys of the best quality after entring into that Congregation, turned to the releife of the poore, what before they spent on vanity, or lost by gaming: & changed their chambers, & Closets, into well stored wardrobes filled with sutes of Clothes of all bignesses, for both sexes, which they bestowed uppon the naked Poore, in whose persons they they were taught to consider Christ himself.

Another advantage is, that our Prayers are more efficacious when offred in company, then when single. All the vertu of our Prayers is derived from that of our B. Saviour now he assures us, that where two, are assembled in his name, he is there in the midst of them. (Mat 18.20.) And he assists there, not as an Idle spectator, (as many Protestants goe to Church, to see, & be seene;) but to enlyghten the mind of the persons assembled with divine inspirations, to enflame their Will, with the love of God, & their neyghbour: To incite them to Pray; to represent their Prayers to his Heavenly Father, & second them with his owne: to powre into their harts the Blessings he obtaines, through the merit of those Wounds, he once endured for our Redemption, & ever since retaines, to shew them to God the Father, in whose presence be appeares for us. These are the designes of Con­fraternitys.

We know, Sir, that the Honour of God, & tru Religion consists in Faith, Hope & Charity. These are nourisht by the Concourse of many Persons to encrease these interiour vertues, by exte­riour exercises of Piety, & Mortification. To call these together the Rosary, Scapular, & Gir­dle are used, with Indulgences, to make the call more efficacious. Now whither is more to bla­me, we, for using these helpes, or you for reje­cting them?

CHAP. IX. Images.

YOur 16. Chapter is spent in declaming against our Images: which some other lear­ned persons having in hand, I wil leave to them, least I myght seeme to thrust my sickle into others harvest. Probably I may shortly have oc­casion to treate of it at large, on my owne Score: & there I hope to convince the unjustice of the charge of Idolatry put up against our Church. For the present I will only take no­tice of some greate untruths, peculiar to your self.

Pag. 332. This Experience is most certain, that, the People of God excepted, all the world besides hath bindrawne to their respective Religions by the help of these gross Images. Answer: this [Page 54]is a most certain untruth, as appeares by the Turkes, who have none: & if we beleive Varro, the Romans were a long time with out any.

Pag. 337. The main motive, which drives Pil­grims to those Churches, where Images are, is to find, not the Resemblance, but the very presence of the Saint. This is untru: we nether beleive, nor teach any such thing, nay we teach the quite contrary, as you may see in all our Catechismes.

Pag. 402. I do not love, say you, to ag­gravate burthens, which of themselves are too heavy: but without aggravation, it is most certain, that the Roman Church serves more Images, then all the Heathens did together. You could not have found a fitter conclusion of your booke, then this. At least you have observed that Rule of the Poet:

For the same Spirit of falshood runs through all. You began with an untruh, as I have shewed: I have likewise taken notice of many untruths all along, & without aggravation, what you say here, is as greate, & as evident an untruth, as ever was spoken in matter of Hu­mane hystory. It is impossible to reckon up all the Gods, which the Pagans adored, when (besides dead men) beasts, fishes, fowle, & Elements, were adored: when every Plant, & [Page 55]Tree was thought ammated with a Divinity. What say I, one? Each Plant had many. For Corne alone S. Aug. (l. 4. de Civ. Dei cap. 8.) reckons up twelve, (& yet he professes he reckons not all) viz, Seia, Segetia, Tutilina, Proserpina, Nodotus, Volutina, Patelena, Hostili­na, Flora, Lacturcia, Matuta, & Rumina. In the same place, he says, that one Porter, (one man) is sufficient to keepe one dore; & the Pagans put three Gods to each dore, viz, For­culus, Cardea, & Limentinus. And as if these were not sufficient: on some occasions three more are added to them, (when a woman was delivered) to wit, Intercidona, Pilumnus, & Deverra, to keepe out Silvanus, a dangerous God. This as also four Gods for every marriage, Iugatinus, Domiducus, Domitius, & Mantur­na. Item six, others, who Preside in the nuptiall bed, with their names, & offices, you may see in S. Aug. l. 6. de Civ. Dei c. 9. And should I reckon up all the Gods who succeede one ano­ther in the care of every man from Iugatinus, till he be brought before, Minos, Aeacus & Rha­damanthus, and to the Elysian feilds, I should spend more paper, then in all this pamphlet, now if the Romans, & Grecians had such a numberlesse number of Gods, who can give account of all the Gods, of other Pagans, all over the world?

If notwithstanding all this, you still think your assertion tru, & that without aggravation, [Page 56]Papists, adore more Images, then Pagans had Gods, I shall think your Arithmetick equall to your Logick, & Divinity: & that you neede more, to be Prayed for, then Disputed against.