Exomologesis: OR, A Faithful Narration OF The Occasion and Motives of the Conversion unto Catholic Unity OF HUGH-PAULIN DE CRESSY, Lately Deane of Laghlin, etc. in Ireland, and Prebend of Windsor in England. Now a second time printed; With Additions and Explications, by the same Author, who now calls himself, B. Serenus Cressy, Religious Priest of the holy Order of S. Benedict, in the Convent of S. Gregory in Douai. Luc. cap. 22. vers. 32. Tu aliquando conversus, confirma fratres. A PARIS, Chez Jean Billaine, Rue S. Jaques à l'Ensigne S. Augustin. MDCLIII. To the Honourable, Walter Montagu, Esquire. Sir, IN this happy retrayt of a voluntary banishment from the world, (which by God's goodness I have made choice of) one principal design of my thoughts is not to think of the world; yet this cannot justify nor excuse me, if I should endeavour or be willing to forget such a Person, as you, and one to whom I have so great obligations. Indeed I should not comply with this my Vocation, if I did not oftentimes remember you. To think of you, to write to you, or converse with you, are not worldly businesses: they may become, and cannot but be advantageous, even in matter of spirit, to the most abstracted persons: for what will such an object represent to them, but a true esteem of heaven, gracefully set off by an heroical contempt of earth; and this exemplified to the best advantage by one, who in the midst of the greatest affluence of all worldly contentments, in the strength of his age, and vigour of capacity, when he was most disposed and enabled to taste whatever was gustful in them, yet had the successful courage to despise and renounce them: And which is more admirable, one that still maintains a fearlessness of their skill to recall his liking of them; since out of pure charity to God, and his distressed servants, he dares yet live in sight of them, a stranger to them; one that (with himself) consecrates all his own riches to God, and only interesses himself in the wealth of others, to the end that he may procure supplies for those that want, and to enrich those, who by supplying such wants, can be persuaded to purchase eternal treasures? To you, SIR, therefore I address myself, willing to take any, even this poor occasion, by a very mean Present to testify to the world my cordial affectionate esteem of you & my thankful acknowledgement of your great goodness and charity towards me, expressed by a considerable pension, without any intercession of friends, voluntarily offered, and out of your own prison and straightness freely sent me immediately after my Conversion, though a mere stranger to you, yet sufficiently recommended by relinquishing of Friends, Estate, and Country, for that Religion's sake, which before had made the same conquest over you: And since expressed by many testimonies of your friendly benignity and confidence. I take leave therefore to present unto you this Book, as it is now a second time published. The subject of it is the story of my uncertainties and wander; and in conclusion, my fixed establishment in the same solid foundation of Truth with you, which gained ●e first the happiness of your affection. And I pretend in this second publication to a further entrance into the same affection, not for any worth of the Treatise, but only for the testimony that I, of mine own accord, give publicly of my declining, to consider mine own fame or esteem with men, in a matter that respects, though only the circumstances of divine Truth; Since the ground why I renew the impression is to signify, that I detest to maintain, with a perverse constancy, even the smallest phrases or words, which I could suspect might be obnoxious to offence or misconstruction. I cannot call it a Book of Controversies, though the essential points of Catholic Religion be asserted in it: or if of Controversies, it is principally against those that unnecessarily multiply them. Whatsoever it is, a poor Present it is, God knows; and yet even in that respect less unacceptable to you, who despise riches; and more becoming me, whose profession is poverty. I pretend to no reward, or if any, I am content that your pardon should be my reward: Yet I must recall my words; I do indeed humbly expect and beg a great reward, no less than the richest kind of Alms, Prayers: and the best of that best sort of Alms, your prayers; mine for you have been always due, since I knew you; and, God willing, shall be most faithfully paid at God's holy Altar; for I am, in truth of heart, Paris, 21. Octob. 1652. SIR, Your Servant in our Lord, most affectionately devoted, B. SERENUS CRESSY. To the Right Reverend Fathers, the Father's DD. Religious of the Holy Order of the Carthusians in the English Convent at Newport in Flanders. Right R. R. Fathers. SInce it was the eminent sanctity of your Order (in vain endeavoured with greater care by you to be hid from the observation of the world, then by others their hypocrisy) which contributed much to put me in a condition of writing a discourse of this nature: And since it was by the command, and for the satisfaction of certain Superiors of your Order likewise, that contrary to my Resolution I adventured upon this work: and lastly, since it was by the advice and encouragement of certain of your Father's Religious, that I took the confidence to publish it, being written; therefore in strict justice it ought to return and address itself thither, from whence in so many respects it took its original. But whereas the language made it uncapable either of the censure or apology of those persons who had the greatest and immediate influence upon it, and besides, though it had been Translated, it would not have procured that effect which I infinitely desire; Therefore it may seem that mere necessity hath cast upon you this trouble and charity. Though the truth is seeing the almost only argument of this Book is to maintain Catholic Unity against the sacrilege of Schism, there could scarce be chosen fitter Patrons for it ' then such persons, who are the true successors of those Innocent Martyrs, with the effusion of whose blood, both Catholic Unity expired in England, and that Sacrilegious Tyrant K. Henry 8. dedicated his accursed Idol of Schism; an act, which alone may be able to rectify the judgements of the seducing & seduced World: for can any man think otherwise, but that Catholic Unity is a daughter of heaven, whose Victimes have been the lives of persons so only heavenly in their conversations and how could that infernal, monster of Schism prove her original, better, then by being the design of that Prince ●● abandoned to all impiety, as that he made choice to establish this his darling by sacrilege and murder: Saeriledge most palpably against his conscience, since in that regard be always continued a Catholic: and murder of a most studied beyon●sness being committed upon persons so innocent● that they that hated them, must thereby have professed that they hated innocence and Christian 〈◊〉 itself; and so far from provoking him, that they had no other commerce with mankind, but only in praying for it? But has not almighty God given a success answerable? For what remains of that impious King, after six marriages (lawful & unlawful,) and innumerable 〈◊〉, but only the issue of a wicked Soul, viz. God knows, how many seditious, murders, sacrileges, schisms, & be●●s●●r● Whereas on the other side those innor●●● Martyr's d●● no doubt, from heaven 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with joy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you a lawful seed propagated in an uninterrupted succession in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 way, & continuing in the same Faith, Piety, Charity, & devotion, which the●●●●●●lif●ed with their lives and sealed with their blood; a blessing, 〈◊〉, 〈◊〉 all other Religious English Orders of men, only allowed to you, though contrary to all humane judgement and probability; You being persons wholly uninteressed in secular designs, unknown to the world, and, by reason of your solitude and never-discontinued devotions, uncapable of soliciting for the assistance of others. Be pleased therefore (right RR. FF.) with your natural benignity and charity to admit this discourse into your peaceful solitude: A blessing which the Author (alas!) dares not promise to himself, since by himself he is judged unworthy, and by others uncapable of it. He does notwithstanding with the greater confidence expect this favour of your charity to his Book, because he may pretend in some degree to deserve it, since by presenting this Narration to your view, he shall afford unto you, who live the life of Angels, the pleasure of Angels; viz. an occasion to rejoice at the conversion of a sinner, and the exercise of Angels too, which is to procure, at least by their prayers, a continuance of divine Mercy to him. Which if by being remem, bred in your devotions, he shall obtain he will think that he has prudently chosen to prefer your Patronage before that of the greatest Princes. Your RR. Fatherhoods Most humble and devoted servant. H. P. de Cressy. APPROBATIO. NO● Fr. Placidus Gascoigne, Benedictinorum ●ongregationis Anglicanae Praeses Generalis, Librum hune, inscriptum EXOMOLOGESIS, or a Narration, etc. à duobus Congregationis nostrae Theologis à Capitulo Generali ad id deputatis, lectum & approbatum, typis excudi permittimus. In quorum fidem nomen nostrum subscripsimus. Datum in Conventu nostro Parisiensi, 10. Augusti, 1652. Fr. Placidus Gascoigne Praeses, qui supra. APPROBATIO. EGo subscriptus in sacrâ Theologiâ Facultate Parisiensi Magister perlegi Tractatum hunc, cui titulus est, EXOMOLOGESIS, or, A Faithful Narration of the occasion and motives of the Conversion unto Catholic Unity of HUGH-PAULIN de CRESSY, etc. Quem & Catholicae Fidei consonum inveni, & veritati revelatae Catholicè credentes certissimis inniti principiis ad summos rationis apices ostendentem. Hic etenim Libellus evidentissimè demonstrat Exotica & petulantissima Socinianorum posita (qui tamen soli eorum omnium qui ab Ecclesia desciuêre videntur aliquatenus ratiocinari) ipsiusmet Religionis fundamenta subvertere: Quos verò haud jam diu Protestantium nomine notatos habuimus, Anglos nominatim, quantúmvis Veterem Ecclesiam & antiquos Patres crepent, Novitatis, Schismatis & erroris manifestissimè evinxit. Quapropter typis utiliter mandari posle judicavi. Datum Parisiis 15. Junii, 1647. H. Holden. PERMISSION. VEu I'Approbation de Monsieur Henry Holden Docteur en Theologie, permis d'imprimer, le premier de juillet, 1647. Signè, Daubray. APPROBATIO. HVnc, quem jam ab aliquot annis diligenter perlegi & approbavi Librum (cujus titulus est Exomologesis, etc. ut suprà) iterum libenter approbo. Ea vero loca, quae ab aliquibus vel ex inscitia, vel ex pravo affectu malè intellecta audiverit Author, clariori modo, aliísque verbis in hac secunda Editione explicuit; qui nedum infirmis voluit scandalum praebere. Appendiculam etiam adjunxit, quâ heterodoxi cujusdam anonymi leviores quasdam in doctrinam s●●am & Catholicam objectiunculas dissolvit ac pessundedit. Quae omnia testor esse Catholicae Ecclesiae fidei & pietati congrua, ac proinde Librum hunc dignissimum judico qui denuò typis promulgetur. Datum Parisiis 12. Octobris, 1652. H. Holden. APPROBATIO. LIbrum (cuititulus Exomologesis, etc. unà cum Appendice) legi, in quo nihil Orthodoxiae aut Christianae pietati dissonum deprehendi; imò methodo facili, compendio sa, vincéque secura, veritas verè Catholica Catholicis fundamentis stabilitur, omnésque simul Haereses solidè, modestè & eruditè refelluntur; ideóque dignum judico, qui in communem utilitatem saepiùs imprimatur. Datum Parisiis 20. Octob. 1652. Fr. Paulus Dei Custodiens. S. Theologiae Doctor & Diffinitor Congregationis Anglo Ben. Ad Dignissimum Authorem. LEgi & perlegi Exomologesim tuam (ô verè Seren●) & magnopere delectatus cum Orationis facilitate & Methodi luce, tum multò magis & animi candore, & sulco luminis, quo viam è periculosissimo Errore ad constantissimam veritatem penitus instravisti; neque, quin tibi gratularer & Editionem commendarem, neque si quos, mei nominis quam desideras ad scriptio, movere potest, iis illam nè acceptissimam facerem, me potui continere. Datum è tuguriolo meo pridie Kalendas Octobris, Anno Salutis suprà millesimum sexcentesimum, quingagesimo secundo. Thomas Albius. S. Theologiae Professor. APPROBATIO. ACcepto Theologi, viri docti ac side digni, testimonio (cui librum hunc inscriptum EXOMOLOGESIS, or a faithfull Narration, etc. perlegendum commisi) nihil hoe in opere contra fidem ac bonos mores; quinimò plurimum utilitatis, ad reducendas intra gremium Ecclesiae oves perditas, eásque veritati pristinae vindicandas, contineri; Librum istum meritò imprimendum, ac fidelibus summè commendandum censeo. Datum è Musaeo nostro 1. Octobr. 1652. H. Metham. E. C. V. G. & olim S. Theol. Professor. APPROBATIO. EXomologêsim hanc, antiquae Fidei vindicem, ab eruditissimo Domino D. Sereno Cressy, viro Novatoribus invidendo, conscriptam, non tam oculis hominum orthodoxè Sapientium quam animis imprimendam judico. Dignum siquidem ut Sphaeram planè candidam inveniat silius lucis emancipatus ex regno tenebrarum. Prodeat igitur è coelo suo sidus suum, & ut palàm in terris radios videant ultro-coecutientes, Opus typis evulgetur. Dat. 3. Kalend. Octob. 1652. T. I. sacrae Theologia Professor. S. AUGUSTIN. Ep. ad Fund. c. 4. OMitting therefore that wisdom which you deny to be in the Catholic Church; there are many other things which most justly retain in in her b●●ome: The consent of Peoples and Nations retain me there: Authority begun by Miracles, nourished by hope, augmented by charity, confirmed by Antiquity, retain me there: The succession of Prelates ever since the scat of S. Peter (to whom our Lord after his Resurrection consigned the feeding of his Sheep (to the present Episcopaecy, retains me there; Lastly, the very name of Catholic retains me there, which, not without cause, this Church only, among so many and so great Heresies, hath in such sort maintained, that when a stranger demands, Where men meet to communicate with the Catholic Church; there is not any one Heretic has the confidence to direct him to his Temple or house. S. AUGUST. de Unit. Eccles. c. 19 I Suppose if there were extant any wise man to whom our Lord Jesus Christ had afforded his testimony, and if he were consulted with by us concerning this question, we should by no means doubt to do that which he should determine; and this left we should be judged to oppose ourselves not so much to him, as to the Lord Jesus Christ, by whose tectimony he was commended. Now Christ has afforded a testimony to his Church. THE PREFACE. 1. I Had no intention at all to write, much less to give to public view this account of the Reasons and Motives of my relinquishing Error and Schism, and rejoining myself to Catholic Unity. Not that I preferred mine own ease before the endeavouring to contribute, though in the smallest degree, to the spiritual good of others: But me thought a writing of such a nature would seem to argue that I judged myself a person of such consideration, as that men would expect from my hands such an account: A conceit, which truly I never entertained, neither had I any reason so to do. 2. Yea afterward, when some men (I am confident, without any visible grounds either from my conversation in times past, or late proceedings) did assume to themselves the authority, or rather, licence, to judge of my inward thoughts and intentions, charging me with worldly ambition, discontent, or melancholy, and attributing to such unworthy Principles that change, which was only the effect of Divine goodness and mercy implored with earnest and continual prayers: Yet other men's injustice to me did not make me injust to myself, so far as to think that that could qualify me so as to be fit to appear in public. All the effect it had upon me was, in regard of myself, a secret joy to suffer any thing for so blessed a cause, as Catholic Unity; and in regard of the authors of such aspersions, a secret grief and compassion, that they would needs declare themselves ill-willers to me for endeavouring, without any others hindrance or loss, to save mine own Soul; or that (resolving to be so injust) they would make choice of such imputations, which (though they had in themselves been true, yet) no man could believe them to have been competent accusers and informers of thoughts, known only to almighty God. 3. But, what neither the just contempt and disesteem which I had of myself would permit, nor the unjust calumniations of others could extort from me, a command intimated from certain virtuous worthy persons Superiors of the Holy Order of the Carthusians (whom I thought myself in some sort obliged to obey, though as yet my Superiors only in desire and reverence) gave me the assurance to adventure upon. They, judging it requisite that I should give some proof both of the matute advice, and also of the reasonableness of my change, made me consider myself only as fit to obey them, without altering in any degree the mean esteem I had of myself: And the same persons advising the publication of what I wrote, have thereby made me by this in genuous declaration of what I knew of myself (almost against my will) to answer the aspersions; which those that, I am sure, knew me not so well, have published. 4. Now I do not pretend by this Narration to deprive them of their liberty of calumniating me still, since they may, if they please, say, linguam nostram magnisicabimus, labia nostra â nobis sunt: quis n●ster Dominus est? Psa. 11. 5. After this profession of the occasion and progress of my enquiry, and resolution in point of Religion, which I here make in the presence of God, and before the world, protesting that I do myself believe this history of myself which I now publish, I assure them I shall not put myself to the trouble of saying any more for mine own vindication in this respect. Neither here do I answer their calumnies any other way, then by discovering myself naked to my very thoughts. 5. They may hereafter, if they please, continue to traduce me more probably and ingenuously, for no doubt I shall in this writing give them many advantages against myself: yea I must tell them my intention was to do them this pleasure; and for that reason I called this Narration an Exomologesis, and that with reflection upon several notions of that word: For first it is a public Confession, and that not only of my former errors and Schism, but withal joined with a discovery of, no doubt, many imperfections in searching after truth, during the twilight of my doubtings and uncertainties, and many weaknesses in defending the truth, after I had found it: So that they have confitentem reum, and such an one as will be glad to have discovered unto him whatsoever is disproveable in this Treatise, to the end that, when he is convinced, he may satisfy for them also. Besides, this is called an Exomologesis in as much as it is intended to be a public Confession or thanksgiving, a Tabula votiva representing to the world the tempests of Schism and Heresy, from which I could not have escaped the utmost danger of shipwreck, had not almighty God (the lover of souls) provided a secure haven for me in the Catholic Church. And therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etc. I give thee thanks O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, for that thou hast hidden these (mercies) from the wise and prudent, and revealed them unto babes, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Even so Lord, for such was thy good pleasure. HOSANNA IN EXCELSIS. The first Section. Containing an Historical Narration of the Author's occasion of doubting, and method in searching satisfaction. CHAP. I. The occasion of my departure out of England. Bloody commotions of Calvinists there. The horribleness and strangeness of them. 1. IT was in the month of June in the year of our Lord 1644. that those most unnatural bloody dissensions in Great-Brittaine, universally spread through all the Provinces of that unhappy Nation, constrained me (not so much to avoid my personal danger, as out of the horror to be a spectator of such inhuman Tragedies, as were every where daily acted) to forsake my native country, to recreate myself with a voluntary exile, & to follow the conduct of the merciful hand of God, which provided for me not only an opportunity & convenience of subsisting in foreign countries, but likewise means of diverting in some measure my mind from the sad remembrance of the miseries I left behind me, and, by a retreat into places less frequented by passengers, of withdrawing mine cares from being wounded with fresh relations of new bloodshed and massacres. 2. I confess that war was to me an object not only of horror, but even astonishment, as having never read or heard of any other that could enter into any comparison with it. 3. Now that which astonished me in the present Commotions was, 1. To consider, that fatal concatenation of a world of dispositions and circumstances preceding this war, so strange that no humane prudence could have foreseen or suspected them, if any of which had not happened, there had been no possibility of any prosperous success to the Anti-Royallists. 2. To observe an event incredibly successful to designs the most unreasonable and seemingly ridiculous that ever were. For, for example, who could imagine that an inconsiderable number of peevish ignorant Presbyterians should ever come to be able to constrain a whole kingdom to forswear the Religion, in which they had been bred, and to subvert their own Church upon a groundless suspicion that the King had a design to change his Religion, who yet was almost the only person that remained constant in it, so as to hazard not only the ruin of his estate, but the loss of his life also; For the time was, when (if he would have given up Episcopacy) he might have obtained in all other respects very tolerable conditions; Whereas several of the wisest and learnedst of his Clergy, have been content to buy their security with a voluntrry degrading of themselves from their offices and titles; yea it may truly be said, that though many of them have suffered in extremity, yet it was not properly with an eye to their Religion, but rather their fidelity and loyalty to their Prince; or upon quarrels against Episcopal Tyranny, to persuade a Nation to accept of Presbyterian Tyranny, infinitely more unreasonable and intolerable: And which is beyond belief, that they should be persuaded to embark themselves in a war, wherein so many myriads of Souls have perished, when the only differences (by the confession of the chief incendiaries, the Calvinist-Ministers and their partisans in France) were only trifling inconsiderable ceremonies and circumstances: Blessed God, what a strange furious spirit is this, which has from Calvin descended upon his followers, that moves them to such horrible resolutions and extremities even for matters in their own opinion of no considerable moment, and to the end to enforce their novelties and fancies upon the consciences of others against all justice and reason. For what is more unreasonable than that Sects, whose essential grounds are Scripture alone, with a renouncing of all visible authority to interpret it, should yet assume to themselves an authority to enforce their opinions upon the consciences of others? 4. Was it possible to consider these things without astonishment? Is not the hand of God as manifest to the eyes of men's understandings in this business, as the hand from heaven was to Baltassar, when by the help of Daniel he read the final doom of his own and his kingdom's ruin in those words, MANE THE CELIA PHARES? I must needs confess that, though at my leaving of the kingdom the affairs between the King and Anti-royallists stood almost in aequilibrio, there being no considerable advantage on either party, notwithstanding I could not free myself from grievous apprehensions that God's Providence had not been so busy and vigilant in contriving such a concurrence of ominous and prodigious events, to the end to suffer all things quickly to conclude in peace and tranquillity. CHAP. II. Sacrilege and Perjury acknowledged even by Heathens to be principal causes of public calamities. 1. FRom a view of our present miseries in England, and a sad presumption of yet worse to succeed, I turned my thoughts to a modest consideration and probable divination of what might be supposed to be the causes of so so deign and dismal a change there, that is, what peculiar national sins have lately reigned in that kingdom, and awakened the just severity of God to make it such a spectacle of desolation, and Proverb of misery above any other nation. 2. Even the Heathens themselves take notice of two especial sins so immediately and directly contumelious to the Divine Majesty, and therefore in themselves so heinous, that they never escaped any long time an exemplary vengeance, and the punishment ordinarily enwrapped even the posterity of the delinquents: Yea though they had been committed only by a private person, and that only inwardly and in design, yet the Divine justice did commonly extend the punishment to a whole nation: such sins the Grecians therefore called OF 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is, piacular extermnating crimes: among which the principal were esteemed Sacrilege and Perjury: so that whatsoever calamities seized any time upon any Nation, if it could be found out that either of these two heinous crimes had been committed, though but by a few particular persons, they presently absolved their Gods from any imputation of rigour, and much more of injustice. 3. Of this argument Plutarch speaks excellently in his book de ser â Numinis vindictâ. And particularly of Sacrilege there is extant in Elian (va● Hist. lib. 3 cap. 43.) an ancient memorable Delphian Oracle, to this effect, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is, Divine vengeance delayeth not to pursue those that are guilty of this crime of Sacrilege, neither can they deprecate or avoid it, no not though they were the offspring of Jove himself: but it hovers continually over the heads of the guilty, and their Children also, and one calamity on their family overtakes another. An example whereof we find mentioned by Strabo and Gel●ius, in that so known History of the Gold of Tholouse. Strab. Geogr. lib. 4. A. Gell. lib. 3. cap. 9 4. Then concerning Perjury, there is a remarkable example in Herodotus of Glaucus Epicydides, who could not escape punishment for having only deliberated and in his thoughts designed the forswearing a thing committed to his trust: where likewise this Pythian Oracle is mentioned, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is, To a perjured person there is an offspring given obscure, without name, maimed in hands, and lame in feet: and this judgement seizes upon him suddenly and irrcsistably, never quitting him till it have brought to desolation all his flock and family. CHAP. III. England prodigiously guilty of Sacrilege since the Schism. Visible judgements have continually pursued this crime there. 1. NOw how dreadfully and universally the two Kingdoms of England and Scotland have been guilty of these two scandalous, and even to Heathens abominable crimes, Sacrilege and Perjury, since the time that the schism from Catholic Unity began, is notoriously apparent to all the world, and with a secret remorse bewailed even by the English Protestants themselves. No man therefore can jnstly blame me as a discoverer and publisher of the faults of my beloved country, too far spread already, and too much boasted of by that infamous faction of Calvinists, heretofore the chief authors of these sins there, and now the avengers of them. It is Schism only to which I impute these prodigious crimes: for before the birth of that monster, I appeal to all manner of ancient Records, if ever there was any nation more abounding in holy Offerings, or more exactly obscuring a sincere fidelity and simplicity. I may therefore without blame set down the dire effects of the most pernicious sect that ever was, which is able to convert Paradise itself into a savage wasteness. 2. In the first place then, what a ravage of holy Offerings did that unsatiable gulf of luft and avarice King Henry the VIII. of England make at the beginning, and for the justifying of his Schism? How did he at one fatal swoop, snatch away all the goods and revenues, drive out all the consecrated servants, and with axes and hammers hue down all the houses of God in the land belonging to all Religious Orders? A crime the more horrible in him, in as much as he professed at the same time, and made that profession good by his cruelty that (excepting his withdrawing himself from his Obedience to the Pope) he continued in the belief of all other Catholic Doctrines, preserving likewise in the Calendar, and celebrating the memory of those Saints, S. Benedict, Saint Bruno, S. Dominick, S. Francis, etc. whose Religions he utterly demolished. 3. In the days of his Son and Successor King Edward the VI a Child, the then- Pro●ctour and Governors adding complete Heresy to the former Schism, continued likewise the Sacrilege, sweeping some few glean that had escaped, and upon a ridiculous pretence of superstition devoured even to the very Hospitals, Colleges, Schools and some Parish Churches. Even Qu. Elizabeth herself, how generous a Princess soever, could yet strain herself to swallow down many goodly Manors belonging to her own Bishops. 4. Since her times, even till this fatal age, Sacrilege has much languished there: But now the present bloody Presbyterian Reformers intending as it were to fill the measure of Sacrilege to and above the brim, and envying the pleasure of this sin to the successors of this their new Schism, do labour to dig up the very roots of all Ecclesiastical revenues, violently ravishing whatsoever belongs almost to Almighty God in the Kingdom, the design of many of them being not to spare even the tithes of Parishes, which they intent to exchange into narrow and scandalous stipends. 5. Now to justify that observation of the Heathens touching Gods revenge continually attending this sin of Sacrilege, and to demonstrate that God has showed himself at least as sensible of this affront done him by Christians, as heretofore by Idolaters, I adjure all the inhabitants of England to witness with me, if a continual curse has not pursued and rested upon the families and estates of those, who have thought to enrich themselves by adjoining the possessions of God's Church to the inheritance of their Ancestors; if those holy things have not continually cankered and consumed whatsoever temporal goods or lands have been annexed to them; In a word; whether that may not be verified proportionably through that whole Kingdom, which to this purpose was observed by that learned Antiquary Sir Henry Spelman, who discoursing of this argument, and bewailing, as oft he did, the insensibleness of his country to this visible curse of God, took a Map of his own Province, and opening a compass to the distance of about twenty English miles, fixed one foot upon his own house, with the other drawing a circle about it, and protesting that within that circle there had anciently been (as I remember) near thirty Monastries, Priories, Nunneries, and other Religious houses distributed to several families there: Withal that within the same compass there were about as many ancient Families that had had no portion in those Sacrilegious Spoils; and that of the former kind there were not left above three Religious houses and Manors which continued in the same families to which in the age immediately before they had been given: and of the later sort there were not above three families and estates that had failed and changed Masters. 6. Now can any one possibly expect that Almighty God will be moved to repent himself of the plagues destined to that unhappy Kingdom, or that he will make use of such unchristian Reformers to procure the peace and tranquillity of it, when so visible examples of his curses upon Sacrilege are not only despised, but even a defiance is made against his severity, by persons, who most blasphemously style it an honour done to Christ, only to reverse the sacred truths by him left unto his Church, and the Holy Orders by him established in it, but also to despoil him of his coat after the loss of his cloak, and to expose him almost naked, in his Ministers, to the miseries and scorn of the world? 7. Can any thing else be expected for a proof that our English Reformers are arrived to the height and perfection of this crime? Yet even something beyond this may be added. Let this age of Christians take notice, and let them not forget to tell it to their Posterity (if they can believe it) that concerning Sacrilege, Order is taken by a public law: And this, not to confirm the possession of Church-lands in those sacrilegious hands, to which they have been given, not to afford them indemnity and security against any claim of God or his servants: (for how poor and inconsiderable an attentat is that to the impudence of our Reforming Calvinists!) But Order is taken by law against any man's repentance hereafter for Sacrilege, against fear of divine vengeance, against avoiding such visible curses from heaven: it is a crime for any man to cease to be Sacrilegious, or to presume to restore unto Almighty God those things which he is persuaded belong unto him: it is not permitted to such a man to restore to the Priest to whom the care of souls is committed, the tithes, which certainly are either Gods due, or no man's: Before this can be done, allowance and indulgence must be had from all the three Estates of the Kingdom, they must all agree, as it were to their own condemnation before such a man can be allowed to ease his tormented conscience, by freeing himself from such accursed spoils. My dear country, I hope, will pardon me, if I profess that I could not free myself from grievous apprehensions that a fearful account will be exacted by Almighty God for a crime so continually and heinously committed, at which even Hitherto themselves would tremble. CHAP. IU. Perjury how frequently, and how heinously committed in England since the Schism. 1. THen for the crying destructive sin of Perjury, the guilt thereof so often, so heinously, so manifestly against conscience repeated hath almost universally seized upon the whole Kingdom. Indeed this sin, as well as the former of Sacrilege, is the ordinary and almost necessary attendant of Schism and Heresy. That great Patriarch of both, Calvin, would not vouchsafe to impart his skill in these two qualities to them of Geneva, till they had by a solemn public oath obliged themselves indispensibly to embrace whatsoever doctrines he should establish among them, and till they had charged a curse upon themselves and their posterity for ever, if afterward they did repent themselves of that Perjury and Rebellion against their lawful Prince and Bishop. 2. Concerning England, the poor subjects there, ever since Schism and Heresy found entrance, have been as of course accustomed to be constrained to forswear themselves by public Order and in a most solemn fashion, whensoever either the lusts or interests of their Princes have moved them to introduce any novelties among them. First, Henry the eight, without giving his subjects leave or space to study the point of Controversy (which yet indeed was then no controversy at all) with forced consent of his Parliament constrained them generally to renounce one Article of that Faith (namely, Obedience to the Visible Universal Pastor of the Catholic Church) wherein they and their Ancestors for many ages had been bred, a doctrine introduced, and generally embraced there ever since the Nation was converted from Heathenism by their glorious Apostle S. Augustine, the Benedictin Monk delegated thither by the more glorious Pope S. Gregory the Great. To effect which Perjury, the meaner sort of people were forced by Tyranny, and the Great-ones alured by partaking in the spoils of Sacrilege. 3. After his death, those sacrilegious persons who governed the Kingdom during the reign and minority of his Son, caused the Parliament a second time to impose upon the whole Nation a yet greater Perjury, namely entirely to swear away a great part of that Faith which made them Christians. And though they willingly repented their former Perjuries and impieties, returning to their ancient Belief and Obedience during the short reign of that Catholic Princess Q. Marry: Yet, the interests of her sister & successor Q Elizabeth prevailed so far, as to make them repent their repentance, and to swear over again all their former Perjuries, her cunning Counselors by all unlawful ways of violence and allurements surprising the Parliament, corrupting the Clergy, and violencing the consciences of the subjects, and so contriving their designs, as that they confidently imagined that Schism and Heresy were established in England irremoveably, being settled by a law, as irrevocable, as that of the Medes and Persians. 4. But in vain: For Schism and Heresy, wanting firm and real foundations, and being built only upon secular interests, when those interests come to fail (as all worldly things must in time) naturally sink lower and lower into that gulf which hath no bottom. For it is remarkable that Heresy being the ruin of Faith, as Schism is of Charity, all changes that are made in them are still to the worse. Faith is continually more and more undetermined, and Charity more and more cried down and made unlawful. A fearful example of this hath been represented to the world in this late Schism in England from a former Schism: For heretofore the English Protestants pretended that by their Separation from the Catholic Church there was made a rent only in the semelesse garment of Christ, but yet so that the parts hung together still, allowing the Catholic Church to be a true Church of Christ, but preferring their part of it as better cleansed and washed than the other. But now Christ's garment is torn by them into I know not how many rags, all plucked entirely from one another, and this with such violence and injusitice, as Mahomet himself would have abhorred. 5. But to return to Perjury, a most useful and necessary engine in Schism; certainly never any Carthaginian or Barbarian hath given such prodigious Examples, as the Presbyterian Calvinists. For Persons, who make it a foundation of their Sect to acknowledge a private spirit to be the only judge of Scripture and points of Religion, renouncing all external Ecclesiastical authority as to such a purpose, for such men, I say, to force other men without any new information or instruction to forswear whatsoever the law of God (as they believed) and most certainly the laws of the Kingdom then in force obliged them to, is an attentat most horrible: But by a new oath, and that explicitly commanding persons to preserve their loyalty to their Prince, and to maintain the Laws and Religion of the Kingdom, by such an oath I say, to oblige the same Persons at the same time to seek the destruction of their Prince and of the same Laws and Religion, and to spend their fortunes and lives in the defence of a Religion not yet in being, but promised to be contrived no man knows when, nor by whom, and to swear that that unknown Religion yet in the forge was true and only conformable to the word of God: What name can be found out for such 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an execrable renouncing of God, as this? And yet all this hath been in the face of the sun, and this must in England be styled a Reformation, and such an one as might deserve to be purchased with that Sea of blood which hath lately flowed there. 5. Surely this one example alone may suffice to advertise all those who have separated from the unity of Christ's Church, what are and probably will be the dire effects of Schism. Let them not cast their eyes so much upon those frequent seditions and Rebellions, and those rivers of Christian blood, which under a pretence of Reformation have been shed in Christendom since Luther's Apostasy: But let them rather consider this as a judgement more terrible than all the former, namely that for a punishment of Schism, and such crimes as are the natural fruits of it, Almighty God has given up England to this more than Atheistical, wanton, petulant contempt and defiance of his heavenly Majesty. 7. Therefore such abominations as these, Sacrilege and Perjury, than which no Heathen could imagine any more abominable, and these so great abominations exalted to the utmost degree and circumstance of aggravation, having thus universally infected and envenomed all the several Orders and degrees of men in England, could I possibly, remaining a Christian, or not becoming a professed Atheist, escape fearful apprehensions that the end of such things would be yet more terrible, and that such execrable crimes would require a long time for expiation? CHAP. V. The sanguinary laws, and cruel execution of them upon Catholic Priests in England. 1. THere was one sin more of which the English Government since the Schism there was guilty, which God seldom leaves unpunished, and for which, even during the time of my being a Protestant, I apprehended some time or other as a sharp visitation; which was the enacting and putting in execution those bloody laws against poor Catholic Priests, against most of whom there was not the least pretence of any charge of sedition or Treason? But for this only crime of being of that heavenly Vocation, to which the Spirit of God had called, and the sacred authority of the Church had exalted them; And for a conscionable discharge of that calling, they were arraigned, condemned, dragged to the place of execution, there ignominiously hanged (among thiefs and murderers) and their half-living bodies most inhumanely quartered, and exposed to the sun and weather. 2. This crime was the more inexcusable, because committed by Englishmen, who (though violent enough in their passion when it is provoked, yet) are apt in a short time to relent, and by English Protestants, a Sect pretending above ordinary to moderation and clemency. But the truth is, the calvinistical Spirit has been working in that state and government ever since the beginning of Q. Elizabeth's reign; for the Calvinists were the Councillors that first suggested, those cruelties, which their descendants have since eagerly pursued and acted by the hands of others, till (their so long projected designs succeeding) they might have the pleasure to glut themselves with Christian blood even to vomiting, as they have of late done. 3. Now that this is no false character of that calvinistical Spirit, (besides many woeful experiences in other countries) our great Presbyterian contrivers, and managers of the late war have given several testimonies irrefragable, who (whensoever they were pressed with want of treasure, knowing the complexion and temper of their own faction in London, how delightful a spectacle of blood would be,) had no readier ways to extort supplies of money from them, then by feasting and regaling them with the cruel execution of a Catholic Priest, or shedding the blood of their own Archbishop, or of some other considerable Royaltist. I beseech almighty God, that when the time shall come that he will make inquisition for blood, he would sever the innocent from the guilty, and not impute to the whole Nation the cruelty of that one bloody Faction there. CHAP. VI The Author's sadness for the sins and miseries of his country. What remedies and lenitives he found for this sorrow. 1. A Sad meditation on such arguments as these was the exercise of my thoughts at my departure out of England, and a good while after, during my first abode in France. And though, God be thanked● I could not accuse myself of having contributed any thing directly, or otherwise, than all other sinners before Almighty God do, to the present desolations of my poor beloved country, and there ought to have contented myself with an entire resignation of the whole matter into the hands of a most merciful, however infinitely provoked God, praying for the peace of that jerusalem, without unnecessary afflicting mine own soul: Yet I willingly deceived myself into a kind of pleasure of grieving, with this false belief, that in such circumstances to do any thing but grieve were to renounce not only humanity, but likewise that duty which the Law of Christ obliged me to perform in the behalf of his Church. 2. But time and better instruction from spiritual Persons, especially Catholics (whose counsel in matters of practices in such cases I thought it not unlawful to hearken to) did at length reduce my mind into a more calm temper, toward the tranquillity I was much advanced by an obstinate resolution not only not to be inquisitive after news good or bad, but to avoid those conversations where I might be in danger of such a mortification, and withal by employing my time and thoughts in that charge which I had undertaken, and in mine own private studies. CHAP. VII. A Scruple suggested to my mind, viz. To the Communion of what Church I should adhere upon supposition that the Church of England should fail. 1. NOt long after this there was, I know not how, suggested to my understanding a thought, which I could not at pleasure silence, and which interrupted much my extreme eagerness of reading; it was this, A supposition being made that it should please Almighty God to put a period to the Church and Ecclesiastical government in England, to what Churches Communion I should then adjoin myself! 2. It was not any reason I had to despair of the King's condition that occasioned such an inquiry (for at this time he was in a state to dispute upon even terms the victory with his enemies) nor any jealousy of the truth of the English Religion: But knowing that the English Church, considered as distinct not only from the Roman, but from all other Sects in separation likewise from it, was not, nor ever pretended to be either indefectible or infallible: Nay more, considering that the Ecclesiastical government in England depended absolutely upon the firmness or weakness of the King's authority there, by whose absolute power only and according to whose interests it was framed at first; And perceiving but too well that for many years there had been a powerful, malicious, contriving faction of Calvinists, equally enemies to Monarchy and Episcopal Government (as they have given proof to the full) and which had intruded themselves and were generally incorporated both into the inferior Clergy, Universities, chief Bourgeosies, and places of Judicature, whose design received from their forefathers it had been to omit no occasion to ruin both the civil and Ecclesiastical State, whereto the whole Kingdom of Scotland would be sure to give their brotherly assistance: Lastly, being assured that the main thing, and to me the most considerable advantage which the English Church had above all others pretending to a Reformation, namely a succession and authority of Bishops and other Ecclesiastical Orders received from the Roman Church, was never confidently and generally taught in England to be of divine right, and by consequence took no firm rooting in the consciences of English subjects; Upon which ground I easily foresaw that though perhaps many would adventure far to support the Real authority, yet if ever the title of Episcopal Jurisdiction should be separated from the Rights of the King, there would but very few appear that would hazard their fortunes or lives for that which though they preferred infinitely before the Presbyterian Tyranny, yet they had never been taught that it was an essential condition of a Church. Yea on the contrary they had seen both King and Clergy, and generally the whole Kingdom look upon the Calvinist and Lutheran Churches, as brethren of the same Religion in substantials, sending Bishops and other ecclesiastics to sit with them in their Synods, maintaining their quarrels, commending their principal Authors, harbouring, relieving and preferring their exiles, In a word, upon the title of Brotherhood assisting them with treasure and forces in their Rebellions. 3. Upon such grounds as these, considering the unsure foundation of the English Church, I thought it not unreasonable to spend some thoughts upon that enquiry, viz. To what Churches Communion I should adjoin myself upon supposition that the English Church should come to sail. I thought myself the rather obliged to pursue such a provisionary enquiry, because I remembered that M. Hooker, one of the most learned judicious writers that ever that Church had upon such grounds as are before mentioned, especially having an eye unto the sacrilegious spirit of Calvinisme, his great and almost Prophetical prudence, (for Prudentia est quaedam divinatio) Corn. Nep. in vit. Pompou. Attice. In those very books which he wrote to defend the Church, said that the English Church was in probability a Church not to continue above fourscore years at most. Hooker Eccl. Pol. lib. 5. Sect. 79. CHAP. VIII. A Reflection upon several Sects. And first upon the Socinians. 1. NOw in pursuing this inquiry, it scarce entered into my thoughts to admit into debate the Roman Church, because the main foundation thereof, namely infallibility, I verily believed I could (powerfully armed with Mr. Chillingworths' reason) evidently and demonstratively destroy. 2. Of Sects in separation from the Catholic Church, those which I thought most considerable, and therefore represented them to my understanding, to examine which of them would best approve itself to my choice, were 1. the Lutheran, 2. the Calvinist, 3. the Socinian. For as for those fanatical Sects of Auabaptists, Famulists, etc. they being only confused troops of ignorant dreaming spirits, which hitherto have never been able to convert one Parish or Village entirely to themselves, and the very dregs of all other Sects, where those that were discontented or craised in their understanding ordinarily settled; I could not obtain from myself the patience to examine seriously their grounds, or to put it to the question, whether I should adjoin myself unto them or no. Add hereto that I could not hitherto understand all their grounds distinctly, by reason that I could never meet with any of their writings, so obscure they are, and afraid of the light. 3. Concerning the other three Sects, the temper and morality of the Socinians was much more agreeable to me then that of the other two. But their inexcusable boldness of trampling under foot all authority of Fathers and Counsels, and their licentious introducing blasphemous and long-since-buried Heresies against the fundamental Mysteries of Faith was to me intolerable. Besides, neither France nor Italy being able to afford me books of Socinian doctrines, I was forced to content myself with that curiosity, which I had had a few years before in England (where such books were but too frequent, notwithstanding the care of the late Archbishop of Cant. to hinder the importing them) at which time I read over almost all the considerable treatises of that Sect, both of controversy, and exposition of Scripture. The effect of which my curiosity was only an esteem of the excellency of their natural parts both for the subtlety, and clearness of disputation, and an acknowledgement that though their principles were of all others most fallacious, and their peculiar distinctive doctrines most horrible and intolerable to Christian ears, yet they were far more constant to such their principles, and less encumbered with difficulties and contradictions than the other two: In a word, that the frame of their building was with all its deformity more uniform, then that of other Heretics of these times, & as strong as a building could be that had no better foundation than the moving sand of natural reason: Whereas the other two Sects of Calvinists and Lutherans (to whom I had some jealousy that the English Protestants might be joined) relying principally indeed upon private interpretation of Scripture, but challenging likewise the suffrages of the Ancient Fathers, (especially in some doctrines of mere Tradition, as Baptising of Infants, etc.) by reason of the inequality in the foundation, the building could not choose but have many rents and declinations in the walls, some parts continuing stable, and others sinking by reason of the yielding of the Foundation: which difformities and inequalities the Socinans avoided. This was all the change that the reading of those Haereticall blasphemies wrought in me, none of their subtle wrest, and Chemical extractions of new senses from fundamental Texts of Scripture prevailing against the constant universal authority of God's Church interpreting the same Texts. 4. I conceive it unnecessary, if not very inconvenient to set down here the exceptions I had against the several peculiar doctrines proper to the Socinians, for fear lest by undertaking to confute I should endanger to distil the infectious poison of them in a country, where, God be blessed, they are utterly unknown: remembering how subtly and maliciously the Scholars of Sibrandus Lubbertus in Holland are reported to have abnsed their unwary Master: for they having an extreme itch of reading one of the most pernicious Treatises of Socinus, which was forbidden to be dispersed, knew no better a means to satisfy their unlawful and dangerous curiosity then by persuading their credulous Master that it was expected from his eminent abilities to confute so pernicious a book; which he having, as he thought sufficiently performed; they further told him that it would be injustice, and a kind of confession of guilt to publish his confutation without the adversaries Text, and by that means they made their Master a sour of Haeresy, for every one almost bought up the book for Socinus his sake only, scarce any vouchsafing to cast their eyes upon the heavy unskillful confutation. 5. Thus I make but a small stay upon the Socinians, on whom I looked rather with pity then resentment: Considering withal that they were the almost only Sect which made profession against violence, and active disobedience, condemning war absolutely and upon whatsoever pretences. Notwithstanding observing that one essential mark of that Sect was resolutely to hold no opinion, but in every Synod to give leave to the questioning or altering of whatsoever Articles of Faith had been before decided, I found that seemingly calm and quiet spirit of theirs less alluring; because from their own peculiar complexion and grounds, I thus Argued; Who can tell whether (if they increase in numbers and power) they may not think fit to begin with the alteration of that doctrine? For I have known when even the Calvinists in Holland and the Puritans in England, being in low estate, have preached liberty of Prophesying, & pretended only to desire a freedom of enjoying their Consciences in particular, promising never to molest any others; As by their first published writings, and by several Remonstrances and Petitions by Q. Eliz. to K. james, in the beginning of hisreigne, and to Parliaments in those times; And yet the same men being afterwards become numerous & powerful enough to gain the effect of their Petitions by force, never yet allowed any moderate qualification or toleration to any other. CHAP. IX. Reflection upon the Calvinists and Lutheran Churches. Their first disadvantage in comparison with the English Church. 1. HAving passed with so much speed the Socinian Churches, I fixed my thoughts more seriously upon the Lutherans and Calvinists, to the end to resolve myself whether those points of doctrine, discipline or practice, wherein they differed from, and apparently came short of the English Church, were indeed of so high a nature as to dishearten me from embracing their communion any other way, then by allowing them my Charity, in not condemning them, which I also afforded even to the Roman Church itself. 2. Now among the differences, (where in all other Sects pretending to a Reformation were distinguishable from the English, as wanting certain privileges and commendable qualities which she enjoyed) some I found to be common to all those Sects, (especially the Lutherans and Calvinists:) Others to be proper and peculiar to each. Concerning these latter, I found it to little purpose to spend much time in examining them, because the former common ones did more than sufficiently dishearten me from adjoining myself to their Communion. And those were especially these five, viz. 1. Their grounding their belief both of the books of Scripture, and the true sense of them, not upon the universal Tradition of the Church, but their own private Spirit, which, as they pretended, assured them that the Apostles and Evangelists were the Authors of them, and that the senses, which they collected from them, were the true undoubted senses of them. 2. Their apparent want of a lawful succession of Ecclesiastical Governors and Teachers, joined with an unsufferable presumption in condemning of Tyranny, that Government of Bishops, which had been apparently settled in the universal Church without contradiction since the Apostles Times. 3. Their Doctrines and practices of Sedition and Rebellion. 4. Their professed hatred of peace and Reunion with the Catholic Church. 5. The prodigious personal qualities of Luther, and Calvin, which showed them to be persons extremely unfit to be relied upon, or acknowledged for Apostles, and Reformers. 3. Concerning the first common difference, namely, The Calvinist's and Lutheran's grounding their belief of Christian Doctrines, and their sense of them, and generally of the books of Scripture, not upon the authority and Tradition of the Church so much as upon a private Spirit, testimony or suggestion pretended to be infused from the Spirit of God, by which they took upon themselves to be assured of the truth of Christianity, of their expressions of several Articles of Faith, and of their persuasion that the Apostles and Evangelists were the Authors of those Divine writings: what little satisfaction I found in this main Foundation of their Religion I shall reserve to demonstrate hereafter. For the present I desire that to be mistaken when I call this one of the differences and disadvantages which the Lutherans and Calvinists, etc. have in comparing them with the English Church. For though it be true that by rational consequence from the grounds declared of the English Church, the former position will evidently follow: notwithstanding she has been more moderate and wary then publicly to pretend to such a Private Spirit, and by consequence has left a latitude and liberty for them in her Communion to renounce it, as many of the most learned among them have done. CHAP. X. Apparent want, yea renouncing of a lawful succession of Ecclesiastical Governors and Teachers among Lutherans and Calvinists. I. A Second thing wherein the Lutherans and Calvinists agreed to disagree with the Church of England, was their want of Bishops, and by consequence of a lawfully ordained Clergy. This was an inconvenience so much the more hard to be digested by me, and which deserved neither excuse nor commiseration, because by reason of their want of Bishops, at their first pretended Reformations they came to that shamelessness as to seek to palliate this defect by a desperate condemning of the Order itself, as a tyranny and usurpation crept into the Church against the express Order of Christ and his Apostles: And though they (especially the French Calvinists) might afterward have in some sort remedied this defect by receiving a Clergy by the Ordination of the English Bishops (whereto they have been earnestly follicited, as namely, by Bishop Morton) notwithstanding they utterly persisted in the utter refusal of suffering this important disadvantage to be cured: which perverse Spirit of theirs, Arnobius (cont. Gen. lib. 6.) elegantly describes in these words, Quod semel fine ratione fecistis, ne videamini aliquando nesciisse, defenditis, that is, That thing, which ye once unreasonably did, to avoid the imputation of having been ignorant, ye still maintain. Yea, to that ridiculous impudence have they arrived in Scotland, not many years since, as to admit one to public Penance in the Church only for having been a Protestant Bishop. 2. I cannot forbear to give a taste of Luther's Spirit with reference to this subject, lively represented in a Bull by him published to this Tenor, Anno Domini M. D. XXIII. Ostand. cent 16. pag. 87. pag. 102. Nunc attendite vos Episcopi, imò larvae Diaboli; Doctor Lutherus vult vobis Bullam & Reformationem legere, quae vobis non bene sonabit, Doctoris Lutheri Bulla & Reformatio. Quicumque opem ferunt, etc. That is, Now be attentive O ye Bishops, or rather disguises of the Devil, Doctor Luther will read to you a Bull, which will not sound pleasingly unto you. The Bull and Reformation of Doctor Luther. Whosoever brings assistance, spends Body, Life, and Honour to the end that Bishoprics may be wasted, and the Government of Bishops extinguished, such are the beloved children of God, and true Christians, observing the Commandments of God, and resisting the Ordinances of the Devil. Or if they be not able to do thus much, let them at least condemn and avoid that Government. But on the contrary, whosoever maintain the Government of Bishops, and obey them voluntarily, such are tho very Ministers of the Devil, and resist the Ordinance and Law of God. Hitherto is Luther's Bull. And I desire that any reasonable Christian would confess, whether he can choose but believe that the very same whom Luther himself confesseth to have been his Counsellor and persuader to leave Mass, was his Secretary likewise to write this Bull? And that a man should not think that this was only one of Luther's frantic extravagancies, the horrible effect will demonstrate the contrary, which was a fearful insurrection and Rebellion of a World of Country people combined by Oath to the ruin of several Ecclesiastical Princes in Germany, who were content in that cause to stand to Luther's judgement. Who when he perceived they were unfurnished of arms, and unlikely to prosper in their design, lest their Rebellion and the effects of it should be imputed to him, was content to exhort them to obedience. 3. Calvin and Beza, etc. though more subtle, yet were not less malicious against Episcopacy, as appears in several of their Treatises and Epistles. Yea Calvin ascended to that height of arrogance as to profess that, that Order and Discipline which he had forged in Geneva, and whereof not one single pattern can be given since Christ's Time, was not only justifiable, but necessarily obliging all Christians to conform unto. 4. Whether it may in some measure be attributed to my education in a Church which challenged to itself a privilege beyond all other Sects from a succession of Bishops, or to the evidence of reason and authority which convinced me of the necessity of such a succession; However it came, I found it was impossible for me to suffer myself to be persuaded that Episcopacy was a Government condemnable; or that a legitimate succession of Holy Orders was not necessary to the constitution of a Church; Or lastly, that the supereminence of Episcopacy above Priesthood, the appropriating thereto of the power of Ordination, Confirmation, and giving suffrages in Counsels was an usurpation creped into the Church immediately after the Apostles Times, and contrary to their intention, Considering that the Primitive Churches were extremely and punctually scrupulous in maintaining the very phrases of traditionary Doctrines, and Forms of customapractises; In so much as when the least innovation in either was discovered, all men conspired to condemn the innovatours; Witness the controversies about Easter, Rebaptization of Heretics, etc. Was it imaginable, thought I that those first Bishops, who even by their Officers were more peculiarly Canditati Martyrii, should so suddenly degenerate from the Apostolical Spirit of Humility, as universally to conspire to set up that pretended Tyranny over the rest of the Clergy, and the whole Church? Or supposing that in the midst of such dire persecutions they had the will and leisure to design such ambitious projects, is it credible that the whole Ardour of B●esbyters would suffer themselves to be excluded from their Privileges and Officers so very lately bequeathed them by Christ, and conferred by the Apostles; and this universally through the whole World, and not one single Presbyter appear that should protest against such an usurpation? Certainly it was much more probable that Luther, and Calvin were either deceivers or deceived, then that all Primitive Bishops were Tyrants, and all Primitive Priests fools, or rather betrayers of that power and duty left and enjoined them by the Apostles. 5. But though I could have digested this, what arts or violence could I make use of against mine own reason and conscience to persuade myself to live in a Church, in which there were neither Bishops nor Priests, but a new Order and Title of Ministers made by a conspiracy of ignorant laymen, a Church that took upon her to degrade and annul the Orders of the whole Christian World, because they had not been communicated to her, a Church which (notwithstanding the express words of S Paul, Epb. 4. who tells us that one of the special gifts which o●r Saviour upon his Ascension received from his Father to enrich his Church withal, was that subordination of several Orders of the Clergy, which was to continue till the consummation of the Saints, or end of the World, yet) professeth that there is no such subordination, and that there were no lawful Bishops or Pastors in the Church for many hundred years, before Luther broke his vow of Chastity to make himself fit to propagate them, and before Culvin escaped from Noyon to Geneva, there to maintain the gates against the Bishop, and to create Ministers under himself and in his Prince's place? CHAP. XI. Consent of Fathers against Calvinists and Lutherans. 1. UPon such grounds of Calvinists and Lutherans (if they could possibly appear to be true) what impudence and folly must we needs impute to all the ancient Fathers and Doctors of the Church, who never fail in disputing against all sorts of Heretics or Schismatics to insist unanimously upon this Quere, By what lawful succession, from what Apostolic Seat their first Teacher derived himself? And professing that it was necessary to insist upon the point of succession, as to examine the truth of the Doctrines themselves, according to that Speech of S. chrysostom (Hom. 11. in Ephes.) Suppose you that it is sufficient to say they are Orthodox, and in the mean time Ordination is lost and perished? To what purpose is the rest, this being not made good? For we ought no less to contend for it then for the Faith itself. 2. Witness hereto S. Ireneus, Lib. 4. cap. 45. Where is it then that a Man shall find such Pastors? S. Paul teacheth us when he says, God hath placed in his Church first of all Apostles, secondarily Prophets, in the third place Doctors. There then where the Gifts of our Lord are placed, in the same place must we seek for the truth, among whom the succession of the Church since the Apostles, and the purity of Doctrine is maintained in its integrity. Witness S. Cyprian (in Ep ad Magnum.) Whereas some allege that they acknowledge the same God the Father, the same Son Jesus Christ, and the same Holy Ghost; this can nothing avail them (viz. being a Schism.) For Core, Dathan and Abiron acknowledged the same God that Aaron the High Priest and Moses did, living under the same Law & in the same Religion: They invoked that one and true God who is to be worshipped and prayed to: Yet in as much as exceeding the limits of their Ministry they assumed to themselves the licence to sacrifice in opposition to Aaron the High Priest, who by the ordination of God had before obtained the lawful Priesthood, they being supernaturally strucken presently received the just punishment of their unlawful attempts. And again, Novatianus is not in the Church, neither can be accounted a Bishop, who despising the Evangelicall and Apostolical Tradition, succeeding to no person has been ordained by himself. And again, How can he be acknowledged to be a true Pastor, who, (the true Pastor being alive, and by a successive Ordination presiding in the Church) without succeeding to any one, begins from himself. And again (Ep. ad Flor.) Christ says to his Apostles, and by them to all Prelates who succeed the Apostles by a substitute ordination (Vicariâ Ordinatione) He that beareth you heareth me Witness S. Athanasius (de Synod.) How can they be Bishops, if they have received their Ordination from Heretics, even by their own accusation? Lastly, (to omit infinite passages in Tertullian, S. Augustin Op●atus, &c) Witness S. Hierome, who speaking of H lary the Deacon, author of one of the Sects of the Luciferians (in Dial: cont. Lucifer.) saith, Together with the man his sect likewise is perished, because a Deacon could not ordain a Clerk to succeed after him. Now it is not a Church which hath no Priests. 3. Were such arguments as those, I would fain know, logical and efficacious in the third and fourth century of Christianity, and are they of no force now? When was it that they began to lose their virtue? Did all the Ancient Martyrs, Bishops and Doctors of the Church, Champions of Christian Religion, confound all the ancient Heresies by demonstrating that the Authors of them had no personal legitimate, (nor Doctrinal) succession? And shall we be made believe that such a succession now is not only not necessary, but that it is rather a prejudice, yea that it is an argument for Heresy? That it is a proof of a truly pure Reformation to abjure not only all the ancient Ceremonies of Ordination, but even the Officers, yea the very names of all Ecclesiastical Orders? For mine own part, I must acknowledge my want of courage: I durst not range myself in such a Congregation, where I should be exposed point blank to receive all the shot which so many (by all acknowledged) Saints have darted against the ancient Heretics. CHAP. XII. Seditious Doctrines universally taught by Calvinists, etc. 1. A Third important inconvenience, which I could not see any means to avoid being adjoined to the Lutheran or Calvinist Churches, was the scandal of Sedition & Rebellion. An imputation this was, which I could never perceive that any of those two factions (and principally the Calvinists) took any care to clear themselves of, any other way then by recrimination upon some particular persons among Catholics: Never could I meet with, or hear of any decree Synodical, any treatise or writing by which they pretended to free themselves from this charge, or to give security to Princes in whose Dominions they lived of their intention to be loyal and obedient. 2. Indeed at the end of the Confession of Faith of the French Calvinist Churches, there is a seeming plausible acknowledgement of obligation to submission to laws and Magistrates, but with this express reservation, moyennant que l' Empire Souverain de Dieu demeure en●son entier, that is, upon condition that God's supreme authority remain inviolated: a reservation so large and so ambiguous, that they having both by writings and too frequent practices declared that they conceive themselves in conscience and by virtue of God's law obliged to maintain the pretended-true Religion (not by suffering for it, but) by active opposing whatsoever humane authority shall seek to destroy it; Yea more, that they are obliged to use all endeavours to destroy Idolatry (that is, say they, Catholic Religion) this restriction mentioned in their Confession seems to have been intended on purpose to put them in mind of their duty to rebel whensoever they have opportunity to maintain or propagate their own, or chase out and exterminate Catholic Religion. For mine ●owne particular I profess I never yet conversed with any of them so ignorant, but, when we spoke concerning this argument, was able to say some thing to any objections, and many of them had arrived to the skill to allege the subtlest reasons that that their infernal book styled junius Brutus (ordinarily attributed to B●za) did suggest. And by one trial made since I came into France, I am become confident that if the next Synod of Charenton were summoned by such as might constrein them, to explain themselves, Whether incase of Religion they might not actively oppose the preson: supreme authority, or whether if in France they had the same advantage over Cotholiques, which Catholics have over them, they would allow the same freedom? they would endeavour to give an answer as unsatisfactory as their Confession of Faith. 3. It was not altogether the many seditious passages in Luther's and Calvin's writings which scandalised me so far as to conceive myself by communicating with them engaged to profess, at least not to profess against, such horrid doctrines (for liberty is sometimes taken by them to renounce some particular Texts even of Calvin) but the not seeing any one protesting against or disavowing such scandalous assertions. I confess I wondered how they could hope to make any Christians believe that their pretended Reformation proceeded from the Spirit of Christ, when instead of those spiritual arms of charity, humility, patience & most indispensable obedience even to Nero himself by which Christ enabled his Apostles to conquer the world to the belief of the Gospel; Calvin and Luther put into the hands of their Sectatours malice, pride, hatred to suffer for conscience sake, active resistance against all authority, in a word, the very same weapons that the Devil suggested to Mahomet. 4. Now to make this appear to be no wrongful imputation, besides the manifest experience of all the blood shed in Germany, France, England, etc. and besides such bloody treatises of Beza, Knox, Goodman, and others of these later times. I will produce express testimonies out of the writings of Luther and Calvin, First Luther (loc. come, class. 4. c. 30. directing his speech to one Spalatinus, hath these words, I will not endure that which thou sayest, viz. that the Prince will not suffer that any thing should be written against the elector of Mentz, nor any thing that my disturb the public peace. I will rather confound both thee, and the Prince: For if I have opposed the Pope which is his Creator, why should I not oppose the creature? And, Is it not a pretty opinion of yours that the public peace ought not nion of yours that the public peace ought not to be disturbed, but the eternal peace of God may; No such matter, Spalatinus, no such matter. And again, (cap. de Bapt.) We are exempted from all humane laws by the Christian liberty given us in Baptism. Then for Calvin, Calv. Inst. l. 4. c. 20. p. 10. & come. in Dan. c. 2. v. 39 etc. 5. v. 5. Id. in. Dan. c. 6. v. 2. & 25. it is observable first how in several places he labours to discredit Monarchy in general: then how seditiously he speaks elsewhere, as in this expression, Earthly Princes divest themselves of their power, when they oppose themselves against God, yea they are unworthy to be reckoned in the n●mber of men. And therefore it is fitter that a man should spit in their faces them obey them, when they grow so sawey as to●be willing to deprive God of his right. Lastly D. Bancroft Archbishop of Canterbury (in his Book of dangerous Positions, pag. 9) imputes to Calvin this damnable position, openly both in writing and deeds defended by his followers, viz That it is lawful for subjects, if Princes will not, to reform Religion, and that by force and arms, if it can be done no other way. 5. I should have been willing to let such horrible speeches as these pass for personal faults, and have attributed to them; Luther's frenzy and Calvins malicious spirit, if any of their party would have thought fit to disavow them; or if the yet more horrid books of Beza & other of calvin's disciples had not justified their Masters to have been ● modest in comparison of them; and lastly, if I had not known that when any among them (I never heard that any put it in a public trial, but one) to whom such damnable doctrines have appeared odious, and were willing to publish their detestation of them, had not been interrupted, and publicly silenced in such a dsigne. But to give a proof irrefragable that this Sect especially of Calvinisme is bred and nourished with this poison of sedition, and that even in the infancy thereof not being able to keep in the sting, when it was so weak as that it had no power of wounding, as soon as it gets strength it fails not to dart it out to the destruction of never so many thousands that oppose it, I shall for proof only desire that men would cast their eyes upon the condition of England since the late calvinistical faction there got a fatal opportunity to discharge freely that poison, which for a long time it was forced to keep closed up in its entrails, where after the best enquiry I could make, I could not find or hear of during the time of these late bloody commotions so much as one single person of the Presbyterian-Calvinist party but did actively oppose his King; Nor one single Minister of that party but was a Trumpet io incite to war: And all this not to free themselves from any danger they were in for their consciences (for before the war broke out, his Majesty had offered them sufficient security) but to destroy the present government of that Church, and to set up their own in place of it. And as for their Brethren in France to this day it has been in vain attempted to persuade them to signify the least dislike of these their practices, the most infamous and scandalous to Christianity that ever were. 6. If all these considerations together do not more then sufficiently prove that without partaking of the scandal, I could not adjoin myself to the communion of these Sects, let all the world judge: Especially I being before, (& yet remaining) absolutely persuaded that it is utterly unlawful upon praetence of defending Religion, or avoiding persecution to oppose actively that peaceably settled Government under which I live; Much more to seek the alteration or ruin of that Government, upon design of introducing that Religion, which I think to be true. And truly I cannot but acknowledge it a great blessing of God, that though I had the misfortune to be bred in Schism, yet it was in such a Church, the form whereof having been moulded by authority (if not according to the interests) of the Civil Governors, in which continuing it was, besides the obligation of my conscience, mine own secular interests also to be loyal to the King, with whom that Religion did before stand, and is now in great danger to fall: for by this means I had no tentation at all to study ways to elude those express commands of Christ by S. Paul, (Rom. 13.) to be obedient not only for wrath but even conscience sake to my worldly Governor; and of Christ himself immediately (Mat. 5.) to seek for blessedness by suffering for the righteousness of the Gospel's sake, not by opposing with active violence the Governors that sought the ruin of it, much less under present here of by persecuting and destroying others: Divine Providence seeming on purpose to order the publication of these truly Christian doctrines under the reign of Tiberius, Caligula, and Nero, than which the sun never saw more abominable Tyrants and enemies to Religion, to the end that in future ages no pretence should serve to dispense from Obedience. And this doctrine of Obedience, truly Christian, which I learned in England, being now by God's goodness a Catholic, I do and by the grace of God will to my death retain; and the rather, because I shall now embrace it merely for the authority of Christ, and in imitation of his Apostles and ancient Christians afterward, whose heroical subjection to persecuting Emperors, even then when it was in their power to revenge themselves: among other writers, Tertullian most divinely expresseth in his Apology and elsewhere, and that most victorious Thebaean Legion gave an illustrious example. Whereas in England, that the interest of state had: a great influence even upon this doctrine of obedience appears in this, that when Q. Elizabeth conceived it convenient for her worldly designs to take on her the Protection of the low-countreyes' against the King of Spain, She employed D. Bilsou Bishop of Winchester one of her learnedst Cleargymen to write his book of Christian subjection, in which to justify the revolt of Holland he gave strange liberty in many cases, especially concerning Religion, for subjects to cast off their Obedience. But that book which served Q Eliz. worldly designs, by the just judgement of God hath contributed much to the ruin of her successor K Charles: For there is not any book that the Presbyterians have made more dangerous use of against their present Prince, then that which his Predecessor commanded to be written justify her against the K. of Spain. CHAP. XIII. Protestants recriminating Catholics for Rebellion, answered. 1. I know well that the Lutherans, but especially the Calvinists triumph much that they can find so few Catholics that have been as wicked in this nature, as their best and most authentic teachers: most unjustly imputing to Catholic Religion the most abhored desperate acts of a few Traitors, and the seditious books of a few Authors: Whereas not only all Catholics in general do abhor those Acts, renounce and condemn those Writings, but the whole body of the French jesuits in Paris, (to whom especially the Calvinists declare war in this point) being in the year, 1625. met in a full Assembly, have publicly and unanimously disavowed, condemned and detested such seditious positions and writings, universally agreeing to condemn that scandal, wherein I never yet saw them imitated by any one Calvinist. Particularly for English Catholics, their innocence and clearness in this point of Obedience was to me sufficiently apparent even before I left that Kingdom, besides other proofs testified in a Petition offered to the Parliament immediately before the late Commotions, as in the name of all of that Religion in England, In which the profession of their loyalty, was according to the tenor following. The Catholics of England do acknowledge & profess K. Charles now reigning to be their true and lawful King, supreme Lord, and rightful sovereign of this Realm, and of all other his Majesty's dominions. And therefore they acknowledge themselves to be obliged under pain of sin to obey his Majesty in all civil and temporal affairs, as much as any other of his Majesty's subjects, and as the laws and Rules of Government in this Kingdom do require at their hands. And that notwithstanding any power or pretention of the Pope or See of Rome, or any Sentence or detraction of what kind or quality soever, given or to be given by the Pope, his predecessors or successors, or by any authority spiritual or temporal proceeding or derived from him or his See against their laid King and Country, they will still acknowledge and perform to the utmost of their abilities their faithful loyalty and true allegiance to their said King and Country. And they do openly disclaim and renounce all foreign Power, be it either Papal or Princely, Spiritual or temporal, in as much as it may seem able, or shall pretend to free, discharge or absolve them from this obligation: or shall any way give them leave or licence to raise tumults, bear arms, or offer any violence to his Majesty's Royal Person, to the High Court of Parliament, to the State or Government. Being all of them ready not only to discover and make known to his Majesty and to the high Court of Parliament all the treasons & conspiracies made against him, or it, which shall come to their hearing, but also to lose their lives in the defence of their King & Country, & to resist with their best endeavours all conspiracies & attempts made against their said King or Country, be they framed or sent under what pretence, or patronised by what foreign authority soever. And further, they profess that all absolute Princes & supreme Governors of what Religion soever they be, are God's Lieutenants upon earth, and that Obedience is due unto them according to the laws of each Commonwealth respectively in civil and temporal affairs, and therefore they do here protest against all doctrine and authority to the contrary. And they do hold it impious and against the word of God to maintain that any private Subject may kill and murder the Anointed of God his Prince, though of a different belief and Religion from his. And they abhor and detest the practice thereof as damnable and wicked. And lastly, they offer themselves most willingly to accept and embrace the late Protestation of union made by the High Court of Parliament, excepting only the clause of Religion. Professing that they cannot without sin infringe or violate any contract, or break their words and promises made or given to any man, though of a different faith and belief from the Church of Rome. All which they do freely and sincerely acknowledge and protest, as in the presence of God, without any equivocation, or mental reservation whatsoever. 3. Now I desire to know what security beyond this, any State can expect from any Christian, or indeed any man? What jealousy can reasonably be given by persons, thus clearly and ingenuously professing their consciences and protesting their obedience; yet notwithstanding the English Catholics are ready to give a security even beyond this● the Catholic Bishop pro tempore, formerly residing in England, having (as I have been credibly informed) offered his own person and life, as a pledge of the loyalty of all his Clergy, etc. under his obedience, in so much as if any of them shall be found guilty of disloyalty, the Bishop will be obliged to produce such a delinquent to condingne punishment, or pay the defect of it with the forfeiture of his own life. These things considered I should not deny, even during the time that I was a Protestant, but that it was with great impudence, and injustice that Catholic Relegion was accused by those two Sects of disloyalty, a crime universally and only adhering th' themselves, and abhorred by all sorts of persons, all Orders and degrees among Catholics. CHAP. XIV. A fourth scandal among Calvinists, etc. viz. their aversion from unity. 1. A Fourth great discouragement which I had to join in Communion with the Lutheran or Calvinist Churches, was their manifest renouncing of Christian Charity, and the peace of God's Church, their unwillingness to abate the least point of doctrine even to a very phrase, or to alter any thing in discipline though to gain thereby the greatest good, which is unity and reconciliation, in a word, the Spirit of Donatism, a Spirit of Separation, out of the love of Separation itself. 2. Whether it was a natural inclination in me to hate all quarrels unless most extremely necessary and unavoidable: or my education in the English Church, which of all other Sects doth most profess moderation, I have always dearly esteemed those writers whether Catholic or Protestant, which have endeavoured to lessen the number of differences between Christians, to give the most moderate qualified senses to differing opinions, and to attempt all probable ways of reconciliation, as Hofmeisterus, Wicelius, Franciscus à Sancta Clarâ, etc. among Catholics; And Bishop Andrew's, Montague, Grotius, Monsicur de la Millitiere, Acontus, etc. among Protestants. I was moreover in mine own understanding convinced that in very many points the differences between Catholics and Protestants was only in words, while in the meaning both parties agreed, as concerning Freewill, Predestination, justification, Merit of Good works, sins Mortal and Venial, etc. Nay further, that some negative points of doctrine were maintained even by the Church of England contrary to their own grounds, that is, contrary to the Universal consent of Primitive antiquity, as denying Sacrifice and Prayer for the dead, and by consequence, Purgatory, sacrifice of the Altar, Monachisme, Difference between Evangelicall Counsels and Precepts, vows, etc. 3. Hereupon it was that mine own reason, assisted by my love to Christian unity, persuading me that for worldly respects, or out of fear of consequences ungrateful, even the Church of England had divided itself from the Catholic to a further distance, than justice, truth, and charity would permit, I could not answer it to mine own reason and conscience, if, instead of approaching to the Catholic Church, I should run quite out of sight from it, by communicating with those Churches whose general design and study it is to make the wound of division incurable, and the breach every day wider and wider, among whom it is a crime to talk of Reunion, in a word who call it zeal to profess division from the Catholic Church even in those very points, wherein their consciences cannot but tell them that they do really agree with it. 4. Manifest testimonies of this more than donatistical Spirit have been given by Calvin in his most barbarous censure of that too too moderate condescending book of Cassander D E OFFICIO PII VIRI, and by the Calvinist-Churches in France in their comportments towards M●ssicurs Grotius and de la Millitiere upon occasion of those treatises by them published tending to union. Yea so in love have they showed themselves with Schism, quatenus Schism, so zealous to renounce that precious legacy of Peace, which our Saviour at his last farewell to the world left to his Church, that they multiply division upon division even among themselves, making Frusta de frusto, of the seamelesse garment of Christ, denying Communion to one another even for points in their own opinion of no considerable importance. The Lutherans will not communicate with the Calvinists, nor the Remonstrants, with the Contra-remonstrants, nor the Separatists with the English Protestants, And whatsoever union the French-Calvinist Churches boast of, they owe it entirely to the civil Power there, for if that would allow them the liberty, they would fall into as many devisions, as any of their brethren. 5. If sometimes an extraordinary fit of seeming charity have come upon them, the Circumstances demonstrate, that it was not love of unity or conscience that begat that good mood, but merely temporal hopes or fears. I remember S. Augustin, (Ep. 50. ad Bonifas.) Speaking of those professed Masters of Schisms, the Donatists, gives us this observation, Aliquando autem sicut audimus (saith he) nonnulli ●x ●ip●●● volentes sibi Gotthos conciliare. That is, Time was, as we are informed, that some of them, desirous to gain favour with the Goths, when they began to be powerful, said that they believed the same things (in substance) with them: but the authority of their ancestors confutes them, for neither is Donatus affirmed to have so believed, of whose party they do willingly boast themselves to be. This passage of S. Augustin might likewise have been thus interpreted, In the year M. DC. XXXI. when the King of Sweden (King of the Goths) had made a formidable progress in Germany, A Synod of Calvinists at Charenton in France thought it fit ●● admit into their Communion the Lutherans, saying that they agreed with them in all substantial points of Religion; But herein they contradict their ancestors, who renounced that communion, and particularly Calvin, of whose party they boast themselves to be, affirmed constantly, that the Lutheran absurdities touching Consubstantiation were greater, then of the Catholics about Transubstantiation. CHAP. XV. The scandalous personall-qualities of Luther and Calvin. 1. A Fifth, and which for brevity's sake shall be the last discouragement forbidding my communicating with the Lutheran and Calvinist Churches, was taken from the Personal qualities of Luther and Calvin the founders of those Churches. Our Saviour admonisheth us to judge of true or false Prophets by their fruits: not that Orthodox teachers may not sometimes live wicked lives; and Haeretiques, laudably: But that those who take upon them to be Prophets, that is, persons extraordinarily raised up in God's Church to publish new doctrines, or to reform general abuses, such men in their lives will signify the spirit by which they are moved, God never sending such Prophets, but that he indowes them with a more than ordinary measure of his spirit both of wisdom and Holiness: On the contrary sometime or other discovering the Hypocrisy of those who falsely pretend to his Mission. 2. Now to judge of these two great Reformers by their fruits, I would not build so much, nor be directed by reports of their adversaires, that is the Calvinist writers concerning Luther, nor the Lutherans or Hierom Bolsce concerning Calvin: The Characters and pictures that themselves have made of themselves will show them so unlike those, whose authority and doctrine they pretended to assume, namely Christ and his Apostles, that they will rather appear like persons that had agreed to divide between them the whole Stock of Sin, Luther taking for his share carnal sins, as lust, gluttony, and all manner of intemperance: and Calvin appropriating to himself the sins of the spirit, Pride, envy, malice, contention, etc. 3. First for Luther, this testimony he gives of himself (in Epist. ad Galat. c v. 14.) before he was reform, that being in the Monastery he 〈◊〉 stened his flesh with watching, fasting and prayer: that he reverenced the Pope with great respect for conscience sake: that he observed chastiry, obedience, poverty: this, I did, saith be, with a simple heart, a good zeal, and for the glory of God, fearfully apprehending the last day of judgement, and from my heart thirsting after salvation. This character he gives of himself, remembering the time that he was a Catholic: But being turned a Reformer, what a strange reformation doth he confess that that change made in him, he could not for bear to tell the world such new doctrines as these, (Luther. in Proverb cap, 31. v. 9) There is nothing in the world sweeter and more desirable than the love of a woman, if a man can attain to the enjoyment of it. (id. Tom. 7. in Ep. ad Wolfg. fol 505.) And again, If a man resolve to want a woman, let him put off the name of a man, and put on the nature of an Angel or Spirit. (id. in Ep. ad Phil. fol. 334. and 345.) And again, I burn with a mighty flame of my untamed flesh. I which ought to be fervent in Spirit, burn in the lust of the flesh, etc. Again, These last eight days now past I can neither write, nor pray, nor study, being vexed partly with the tentations of the flesh, partly with other troubles, etc. But saith he, it is sufficient for me that I know the riches of the glory of God, and the Lamb which takes away the sins of the world, Sin cannot separate us from him, although we should commit fornication or murder even a thousand times a day. Sleydan, a very affectionate Scholar of his, (Hist lib. 3. fol. 9) reports that he himself acknowledged his profession not to be of lifcor manners, but of doctrine. And (lib. 2. fol. 22.) that he wished that he were removed from the Office of preaching, because his manners and life did not answer his Profession. Now being reduced to this foul condition, he, forgetting his old Catholic Monkish remedies of watching, fasting and prayer, and having before renounced his vow of Chastity, and cast away his Religious habit, (Luth. Tom. 2. in Colloq. Lat.) gave free scope to his lust, and privately, and (O horrible,) incestuously married Katherine Borrhe, a vowed frofessed Nun: an act that even he himself was ashamed of, and had remorse for. Then to give us a taste of what satisfaction he found even in his belief of his new doctrines, let us hear the report of Joaunes Mathesius a Lutheran; (Orat. Germ. 12. de Luth.) Antonius Musa the Parish Priest of Roclits, saith he, recounted to me, that on a time he heartily hemoaned himself to Doctor Luther that he himself could not believe what he preached to others: and that Doctor Luther answered, Praise and thanks be to God that this happens also to others, for I had thought it had happened only to me. Now who cannot but admire the admirable Providence of God by which this pretended Apostle was thus constrained to discover himself to the world in such a shape, as if he had intended to fright all men from harkening to such a monster so abandoned to all filthiness, such an Apostate, and that against his conscience, not only from Faith, but even humanity? I forbear to let him publish his other vices, of drunkenness, gluttony, scurtility, etc. (for he hath left none of his good parts undiscovered in the world) But one thing I cannot omit, a passage not to be paralleled in any story, excepting only his fellow-reformer Zuinglius, namely, that he should not be able to for bear to tell the world (as if some body had exercised him and forced him to confess) that the arguments which moved him to leave Mass, (Luther. in lib. de Missa priva●â.) were suggested to him immediately and visibly by the Devil himself, And all this described with such particular circumstances as if he had taken care that men should not ascribe it to his dreams or to his Melancholy, or frenzy; in a word, as if he had been concerned in honour to tell who was his Master: a Master that he himself said he was very well and frequently acquainted with, having eaten more than one measure of salt with him, the Devil sleeping with him oftener than his wife Katherine. Such mercy and goodness and care hath almighty God had over his Church to open the mouth of the beast, and by such a miracle to discover the true Author of Schism. 4. Then for Calvin, (Conrade. Schluss●iburg● in Theolog. Calvin. lib. 1. fol 72. and cap. 12. 4.) not to take advantage of the Character given him by a learned Protestant, which will represent him so stained even with fleshly lusts also in a degree beyond Luther, lusts so horrible and unnatural, that I cannot obtain from myself permission to defile this paper with transcribing his words; and not to repeat his forementioned seditious, bloody positions, befitting rather the Alcoran, than writings of Christian Institutions, or Commentaries; to omit likewise any blasphemous Doctrines by which in immediate consequence he destroys the Mystery of the Blessed Trinity, the Justice and Sanctity of Almighty God, making him formally the Author of sin; The only reading of his books against his adversaries, and particularly against Cassander and Castalio, will acquaint any man with what a spirit he was possessed and agitated, a spirit that suggested to him words to express the utmost extremity of Pride, Envy and Malice that a humane soul can be capable of Certainly if that be true (as it is blasphemy to question it) which the spirit of God tells us, That into an unclean soul the spirit of discipline will not enter: and again, That God reveals his mysteries to the humble and meek: it was not without a great care that God had of this part of the world, that he suffered those two great Teachers of Schism to discover in themselves all manner of uncleanness both of the flesh and of the spirit, as if on purpose, to the end that the same persons while they were presenting to the world the cup of their poisonous doctrine, should likewise at the same time give warning that that could be no other than poison, which proceeded from such hearts full of all uncleanness & the gall of bitternisse: For mine own part I confess I had not the courage to follow him who professed that he followed the Devil, and described himself an attendant befitting such a leader; Neither could I be mistaken to such a point as to think that there was any resemblance between the Spirit of Christ and that of Calvin. Though the Devil can sometime transform himself into an Angel of light, and by that means circumvent those whose sins have deserved that God should give leave to such an efficacy of error: Yet here the Devil used not so much cunning, he appears like himself with his natural ugliness and horror, and his Ministers wear his livery: However I am sure it is impossible that Christ should transform himself into an Angel of darkness. Vitium simulari non potest virtus potest. CHAP. XVI. The Author's unquietness not being able to communicate with Calvinists, etc. Reflection upon the several Eastern Churches. 1. HAving proceeded thus far in my search of a Church, and finding after an unpartial disquisition that among all the Sects in the Western parts of the world separated from the Roman Church, I could not find any Congregation, unto the Communion of which I could without hypocrisy adhere, if that Church wherein I had been bred should come to fail (a supposition not only possible, but, as the case began to be e'er this time, even very probable) I fell into a great perplexity of mind, so great that I could not perceive any cure for it, no not though God should bless the King of England so far as to give him an entire victory over his enemies, and a power to restore that Church to its former lustre: For I now plainly perceived that hitherto my title of being a Christian and a member of God's Church, all my interests and hopes of blessedness depended upon a Church, that never did pretend either to indefectibility, infallibility or authority obliging any other then only those that live in her Communion●, and those not in conscience, but only upon penalty of being deprived of certain priviledgess and preferments belonging to English subjects; upon a Church that never pretended to declare or decide Articles of Faith, any other than some few negative ones against the Roman Church, or to fulminate Auathemas against whosoever submitted not to her decisions, as the Ancient Church was wont to do; lastly upon a Church that, as, God knows, it appears now manifestly, hath no surer foundation than the prosperity of the King, and continuance of his civil authority. 2. To gain some ease to my mind, I applied myself to a re-examination of the prejudices I had against the other Reformed Churches: None of which I could clearly take away: and particularly concerning the want of a lawful succession of Pastors, I assured myself it was not possible to be defended or excused, nothing that I could invent myself, or learn from others having any show of the least probability, or deserving to be confuted. 3. When this succeeded not, I traveled in my mind over the Eastern Countries: (for still I was prepossessed that the main ground of the Roman Religion, namely the infallibility of that Church, was as demonstratively confutable as any absurdity in Mathematics: and therefore though in the particular points of differences I approached as near unto its belief as Monsieur Grotius, or Monsieur de la Millitiere, Yet that main foundation being, as I thought, ruinous, it was to no purpose to trouble myself with any debate concerning that Church.) But as ill success I had in the East now, as before, nearer home: For of those Churches, the Maronites I found, were in Communion and belief agreeing with the Roman Church. The Abissives were a schismatical Church divided both from the rest of the Eastern and Western Churches now almost twelve hundred years since, namely upon the anathematising of the Eutychian Heresy: the like may be said of the Nestorians, jacobites and other Haereticall Churches in the Eastern Countries: As for the Grecian Churches they brought almost all the same difficulties that the Roman Church did, For almost in all points wherein the English Church differed from the Roman they agreed with it; in the Article of the Procession of the Holy Ghost the English agreed with the Roman against them, and their assuming equal authority with the Pope was apparently an usurpation. CHAP. XVII. Necessity of the Authors examining the grounds of the Roman Church. Several advantages acknowledged to be in that Church. 1. THus like Noah's Dovo wearying myself in flying up and down, and finding ●● rest for the sole of my foot, I was at last forced to return into the Ark, seeing what ever became of the English Church, I Now found reason enough not to think myself safe enough in it. Yet it was a good while before I got any sight of the Ark, and after I saw it, I did not hastily suffer myself to be received into it, till I saw there was no other way to escape drowning left me. 2. My first thoughts after so successelesse a search of a Church were, not doubtingly, but solicitously expostulating in my mind, where is the effect of that promise of Christ, that the gates of Hell should not prevail against his Church? And, Behold I am with you till the end of the world? I wondered that the Fathers should so unanimously interpret the Church to be that City seated on the top of a mountain: For I had in vain sought both mountains and Valleys, and could not get a sight of it. But I concluded that certainly the fault was in mine own eyes, which some mist or disease had blinded, and not in want of visibility in the Church, since all the Promises of God in Christ are in him, YEA, and in him AMEM. And therefore that no preconceits of assurance or demonstrations ought to hinder me from examining the pretensions of the Roman Church, as well as the rest: That it was utterly impossible that the Promises of Christ should fail, but that it was very possible that both myself and Mr. Chillingworth might be mistaken in believing those arguments to be demonstrations, which were not: That perhaps he did not understand fully the mind of his adversary M. Knot: Or perhaps that the opinion and expression of Infallibility combated by Mr. Chillingworth was but an interpretation given by a private Doctor of his sense of the Church's doctrine, & so the arguments against it not proceeding directly against the Church: However that it was very reasonable, just and requisite seriously and diligently to examine the true state of that question, which if the Roman Church could to my understanding justify that she had not erred in, there would presently be an end of all my travels and doubts about other particular controversies. For who will question or suspect the truth of that Witness or Judge in particular speeches or assertions, that has once in gross approved himself to be Infallible? 3. Had it not been for this point of the Church's Infallibility, and some Philosophical Objections against the Real Presence, etc. I had not lived thus long out of the communion of the Roman Church; for I always acknowledged that there were in it very many advantages and excellencies, to which no other Church had the confidence to pretend. As 1. I could not deny (having withal the Confession of the most learned Protestants) that the Religion of the present Roman Church is the very same Religion which Saint Augustin the English Apostle by the Mission of Saint Gregory the Great planted in England, when he converted it from Paganism; so that me thought it was somewhat an extravagant thing to separate now from Rome for those very points, by the embracing of which England became Christian; Especially considering what persons Saint Gregory and Saint Augustine were, of what sublime holiness, and profound learning, and how that Religion was confessedly conffirmed by Divine Miracles. 2. I could not but admire and infinitely approve the ingenuity of the Roman Church in obliging all her children to interpret Scriptures, and to conform their belief to the general consent of Fathers: Indeed the Protestants, in England especially, made honourable mention of the Fathers, but none but Roman Catholics proceed thus far. 3. That if we defined Heresy and Schism according to the general notion of the Fathers, viz. that Heresy is a misbelief innovated in points of Faith contrary to the Doctrine universally received in the Church; and Schism an uncharitable division of one part from the external Communion of the whole; Of all Churches in the world the Roman could with least reason and justice be accused of these two sins, for first, She only receives and preserves the ancient practice, and all the Counsels and Synods of the Church. Secondly all other Sects apparently broke from her Communion, and all Haeretiques were of her Religion before they innovated and introduced new opinions. 4. That the method by which the Roman Church decided all emergent controversies, namely by the authority of the present Church, however I was then persuaded there was some usu● pation in it, yet de facto ended all disputes, and produced an admirable unity in that Church. A blessing which not only reason, but manifest experience shows to be impossible to be a●ceiued in Protestant Churches, where scripture interpreted by private judgement is the Rule and judge, for hitherto never has there been made an agreement in any one controversy among them: In so much as the proper difference between Catholics and Protestants is; that if two Catholics be in debate about any question, both of them will agree to be judged by a third, namely, the Church; and till that be done they break not Communion: But if two Protestants quarrel, each of them will interpret and judge both for himself and his adversary too, there being no umpire between them, nor any thing to oblige them to Communion. 5. That the sobr●st Protestants sometimes are not without some suspicion of guilt in matter of Schism, acknowledging at least that worldly interests had influence upon those Princes that begun separation first: a case never to be found among Catholics. And when any such scruples arise in the minds of Protestants, they never trouble themselves with seeing themselves divided from the Greek or Abissine Churches, but only the Roman. And very many among them, on their death beds at least, when all secular respects are silent, desire reconciliation with the Roman Churches. Whereas I believe there never was heard any one example of a Roman Catholic, which on his deathbed desired to forsake that Communion to be incorporated into a Protestant Church. And 6. There was a sixth advantage far more prevailing with me then all the former (though at the first I had but an imperfect view of it) namely, the eminent rules of sanctity and spirituality taught by most prudent and pious directors, and practised after a manner, that nothing in any of the Protestant Churches approacheth near unto it. The story and Order of my information in this particular, I will reserve till the Conclusion of this Narration. For the present I will content myself with avowing that every day the more near and fair a prospect I had of the beauty of Holiness, my prejudices and objections against that Church, in which only such a jewel was to be found, diminished, till in the end I could not free myself from partiality, at least so far as to wish that Truth might not be found separated from so heavenly a Companion. This Treatise being a Story rather than a controversy, I thought myself obliged not to conceal my actions, though they might be obnoxious to be esteemed imperfect or faulty: and am content to hear and thank whosoever will vouchsafe to reprove me for them. 4. I will not deny but that these seemed to me very specious and alluring qualities, especially being of such a disposition, that is, one that above all things in the world abhorred quarrelling, one who though he durst not betray necessary truths by professing the contrary, yet in many cases would willingly have purchased peace with silence: lastly, one that always suspected his own reason, and that was desirous to find out authority, which might deserve to have his reason submit itself to it. 5. Yet notwithstanding all these invitations, so prepossessed was I with the invincibleness of Mr. Chillingworth's arguments against the infallibility of the Church, joined with an opinion that it was an essential requisite to Communion with the Roman Church to acknowledge infallibility in the notion that I apprehended it, that it was not without much violence to myself that I could obtain from mine own reason permission to make a serious enquiry into the grounds of it. But at last, because I would not accuse myself afterward of want of ingenuity and fidelity in denying that to the Roman Church alone, which I had performed in respect of all other Churches besides, even to the Socinians, Nestorians and Eutychians: and besides, the affairs of England growing every day in the greater decadency, I found that I was likely to be forced to a real necessity of resolving that that Question, which at first I reflected on only upon an imagined supposition, namely, Supposing the Church of England should come to fail, to the Communion of what Church I should then adjoin myself? 6. A Question this is, which I am confident never any one person of any one Sect of Christians before was effectively forced to determine: For never before was there any Religion so wholly appropriated to any Kingdom or Government, as that such a Government decaying, the whole frame of that Church sunk, the professors thereof not being able to find in the whole world any Church into which, without renouncing their main distinctive principles, they could enter. Since the time that it was Gods good pleasure to rejoin me to the Rock from whence I was hewn, leading me into the unity of his Church, I have conceived that I might attribute this decay, and now almost vanishing of the English Church to a double intention of almighty God, the first, To show that when Religion, in substantial doctrines especially, is framed according to interests of State, it does thereby as it were renounce, and exempt itself from God's Protection, and by consequence not deserving his care, is not likely to be long-lived: the second, to the end to show the curse that lies upon Schism in general, it may seem to have been God's pleasure that that Church which had more show of excuse than any other whatsoever, and that better represented a form of the Ancient and most glorious Church than any other Sect, should be the first that should be undermined, to the end that others seeing what has been done to a tre● which had some greenness in it, might thereby prophesy what shall become of their rotten and dry ones. CHAP. XVIII. Preparations to the examining of the grounds of the Roman Churches authority. 1. Well, at last lifting up my heart in daily and almost hourly fervent prayers unto almighty God for the direction of his Holy spirit (a practice which, God knows, I never discontinued from the beginning of my search, but now a more urging necessity sharpened the intention and fervour of my heart;) and striving all I could to cleanse the scals, wherein I was to weigh this so important a merchandise, from all external prejudices or allurements, or any thing that might hinder my enquiry from being perfectly ingenuous and unpartial; and almost vowing that, if God would be pleased to set me on a rock higher than myself, giving repose unto my mind, that only knew quid fugeret, but not, quò fugeret, I would consecrate the remainder of my life to bless and serve him in the best and strictest manner I could find; and lastly, resolving to purchase truth at the dearest rate possible, though with the loss of fortunes, hopes, friends or Country; I applied my mind earnestly and diligiently to the examination of the authority, and, so much disputed, infallibility of the Roman Church, to Catholics a rock of foundation upon which all Religion relied, but to me hitherto a rock of offence, and the main considerable prejudice, which drove me back whensoever I endeavoured to make any appoaches toward that Church. 2. My next preparation and provision for this business, was to inform myself, not so much from particular Catholic Doctors, as from the Church itself, in the decisions of her Counsels, what was her doctrine in this point, and in what manner and terms expressed: my design being to learn only what was so necessary to be believed in this Article, as that without it, a man could not call himself a Catholic, and with subscription to which alone, a man might sufficiently justify himself against all exception to deserve that title. For this purpose I applied myself to the Study of the ancient received Counsels, I perused diligently the Codex Canonum Ecclesiae Universae, Burchardus Wormatiensis, Caranza's sum of the Counsels, but especially the Council of Trent, and the Bull of Pope Pius quartus, desiring further information from several learned Catholics. If I perused any particular Controvertists, it was with intention to take notice of such unquestioned and unsuspected Authors as had most retrenched from this controversy all particular opinions, and had expressed their understanding of the Church's meaning with the greatest condescendence and qualification. 3. Having made extraits pertinent to my purpose out of the forementioned Counsels and Authors, and having digested them, I deduced corrollaries out of them, importing what authority the Church assumed to herself, whence derived, and how limited. And, distrusting mine own Collections, to confirm myself further, and to assay whether those deductions would be allowable by Catholics sufficiently informed of the true sense of the Church's doctrine, I gathered out of my extraits certain Conclusions, which I digested into a form of Questions; These I sent to a worthy and learned friend a Doctor of the faculty of Paris, desiring his resolution, whether such senses as I had given of the points mentioned, would be receivable among Catholics, or no. His kindness and Charity moved him not only to take the trouble upon him of answering my Questions, but likewise voluntary to publish in print the Questions with his answers, to the end satisfaction might be given that he had said nothing therein that any Catholic would question: Which resolutions of his I thought fit to annex to this treatise. 3. Besides all this, for my further information, and because even during my education in Protestancy I had been advised, and was consequently resolved to embrace those doctrines, which were most conformable to the profession of the Ancient Church, I conceived it necessary to study diligently such Father's writings especially as had been forced to maintain the Church's authority against Heretics. Thereupon I betook myself to the rending of the Ancient-Church History, and besides others, I perused exactly Tertullias Prescriptions against Haeretiques, etc. S. Cyprian, S. Epiphanius, S. Augustine's Epistles and treatises against the Donatists, Manichaeans, etc. Vincentius Lyrinensis, S. Hieroms Books against the Luciferians, jovinian and Vigilantius: I had recourse likewise upon occasion to certain treatises of Saint Basil, and S. Athanasius, S. Hilary, S. Pacian etc. And lastly I judged it an effectual way of attaining to the understanding the opinion of Antiquity concerning the Church, to select the special Texts of Scripture, wherein mention is made of the Church, and to examine how the Fathers interpreted those Texts; and what inferences they drew from them in their Sermons and Commentaries, in which I might be sure they spoke without interest and passion, as having no adversary in sight to combat withal, and therefore were not likely to strain themselves in their expressions. Such Texts of Scripture were these, and the like, Die Ecclesiae, etc. Tell the Church, and if he will not bear the Church, let him be to thee as a Heathen and a Publican. And, Tu es Pertus, etc. Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it. And, Ecclesiae, quae est firmamentum fidei, etc. The Church which is the ground of Faith, and Pillar of truth, etc. CHAP. XIX. What prejudice the Author received by receiving the doctrine of the Roman Churches Authority expressed in School-language. Success of his enquiry into Counsels and ancient Fathers. 1. THe answering of the Questions, and especially the perusing of those books was the business of a good space of time, above twelve months, or more. The excessive pains and diligence employed by me, which otherwise would have burn tedious, was much sweetened by the discovery every day of new light. And I could not but observe the strange effects of education and prejudice, which made me believe myself to be saparated in my belief from the Catholic Church at a distance unmeasurable, when indeed I was even at the doors: and I am certain I had been much sooner a Catholic, if I had thought or rather indeed if I had considered (for if I had considered it well I might have found sufficient ground to think so) that the belief of the Church's doctrines nakedly as she proposeth them, and in the latitude allowed by her, had been sufficient to have gained that title. But I took those to be the necessary doctrines of the Catholic Church, which were only the private opinions and expressions of particular Doctors, And the simplicity of the Articles of Christian Faith was clouded by Scholastical Metaphysical terms, which being abstruse, nice, and unknown to Antiquity rendered the doctrines themselves obscure and withal new and suspected to me. 2. And all this by a very pardonable fault of mine: For from whom should I receive the doctrines of the Roman Church when a Controversy is raised, but from the learnedst Masters of Controversy? And how few among them propose the points to be disputed between them and the Protestants in the language of the Church? Besides how few among them are there, who in disputing will allow that latitude which the Church apparently does? There is scarce any Point of Controversy, which is not severally interpreted, straightened, or enlarged by several Catholics of several Orders and education: and most of them in confuting the Protestants seem very earnest and make it almost their whole design to impose their particular interpretations and expressions for Catholic doctrines. But with very little or no success: For a Protestant will be very ready, and may with good reason say, Though by being persuaded by you I shall become a Roman Catholic, yet I might deny all that you maintain, and yet be a Roman Catholic too, for I can produce Authors which you dare not deny to be good Catholics, that will not receive nor subscribe to your expression and stating of this Point: Therefore seek to convert them first, and then come and dispute with me: Dispute like a Catholic, for the question is not now whether I shall be a Dominican, Jesuit, Scotist, etc. But whethe I ought to be a Catholic, or no. The truth is by these means, disputations are endless, Catholics themselves affording answers and objections to Protestants against Catholics. Whereas if particular Controvertists as were indulgent as the Church is, & would be content to think that the terms wherein She expressed her mind were the most proper, their adversaries would quickly be silenced, Controversies abated, and, by God's assistance, union in a short time happily restored. 3. The great ham which I received by judging of the Church's Faith by particular new expressions of it, puts me into this fit of liberty in censuring thus far the method of those men by whom I have been so long a time so far from being persuaded, that I was rather hindered from my reunion to the Church: And on the contrary, this happy success in following the direction of some few Catholic authors, who separating particular opinions of Doctors from necessary Catholic Doctrines, and urging nothing upon me, but without assenting to which, I could not be a Catholic, makes me judge by mine own experience as well as reason, that that which healed me of my errors and Schism, would not by God's blessing want the same effect in others also, especially among English Protestants; ●nd the rather if (following the advice of the most Reverend the Lord Archbishop of Roven,) Protestant's, in stead of wearying themselves with particular debates, would resolve this in the first place, why they made the Schism at first, and continue in it still: What dispensation they have from the authority and unity of the Church, so unanimously and affectionately reverenced and obeyed by the ancient Fathers? 4. I cannot without ingratitude, in this place and occasion omit a profession of that great obligation I have with thankfulness to almighty God, and respect to his happy instrument, to acknowledge the efficacious influence that one Treatise in special manner had to the furtherance and facilitating of my Conversion, written in French by that skilful and authorized Controvertist, Francis Veron Doctor of Divinity, and entitled by him Reiglè generale de la foy Catholic: In which he delivers the pure Catholic Doctrine in the words of the Counsels, strained and separated from all particular opinions or authorities not absolutely obliging. And this exemplified throughout almost all the considerable points of Controversy, bewteen Catholics and the several Sects of Protestants. Which method of proceeding is approved by several learned Doctors of the Faculty of P●●is, and the general design of it by his late Holiness Gregory the fifth, as was signified to the Author by his Nephew Cardinal Ludovisi●; yea God himself hath approved and recommended the same Method by his numerous blessings on it in the Conversion of a world of wandering perverted souls. From his ground it is especially that I in this book both take this fashion and Latitude of stating doctrines of faith, & recommend it to others, when they treat with Protestants: And particularly from him did I receive Information, that the very express term of Infallibility was not of obligation to be made use of in Disputation concerning the Church's Authority: As likewise that the Doctrines of Faith promulgated by the said Authority in the Decrees of general Counsels, did admit of many more qualifications and restrictions then popular Controvertists do think good to make use of. So that if in this or any other point any expressions found in this book shall seem new or not so relishing to any, I must refer them to the said Author and his Approvers, who no doubt will ease me of the trouble of making Apologies. 5. But leaving this digression, I will at last relate the success I found in reading the Canons of the Church, the forementioned books and treatises of the Fathers, etc. Which was, that I thereby gained a distinct knowledge both of the faith of the present Church, and what those Ancients believed concerning the Church's Authority: and this not by relying upon a few select passages and Texts picked out by late Controvertists, but by observing the main design and intention of those Fathers, when the very like Controversies in their times constrained them to consider and unanimously declare what they themselves thought, and what they had received from their predecessors concerning the Church, Heresy, and Schism. 6. That therefore which I learned from them pertinent to my present purpose I will set down in four Conclusions, relating to four principal heads of controversy, namely, 1. Of the Rule of Faith, that is, Scripture and Traditions unwritten. 2. Of the Judge of Controversies, that is, the Catholic Church. 3. Of the unity of the Church and the danger of Heresy & Schism. 4. Of the perpetual Visibility of the Church. To all which Propositions respectively I will adjoin the doctrine of the present Roman Church, contained especially in the Council of Trent; And likewise the belief of Protestants; Concluding with an examination whether the Roman or Protestant Churches do best conform themselves to the universal Ancient Tradition concerning the Church & her authority, etc. 7. When all this is done, at their peril be it, if any imputing to me sinister intentions, of which they cannot be judges, shall say it was either worldly discontent or ambition, and not an evident conviction of truth, and resolution to save my soul that moved me finally to declare myself rather a follower of that part which, to my understanding, follows an universal and uninterrupted agreement of such Teachers, as both sides agree not only to have approached nearest to the fountain of truth, Christ and his Apostles, & therefore to have had means of informing themselves in Apostolical Tradition incomparably beyond us; But also to have been extremely cautelous and learned, and so not easily obnoxious to be mistaken or deceived, And likewise unquestionably pious and virtuous, and therefore abhorring any intention of seducing others for temporal respects: Rather than three or four new teachers, in whom there is not only a visible want of all these good qualities, but on the contrary such as have not been able to forbear to declare themselves to be worse men, more polluted with Lust, Gluttony, Sacrilege, Pride, Malice, Envy, etc. then without their own confession their adversaries could with a good conscience have accused or but suspected them; And the effect of whose innovations has manifestly been nothing but Atheism, profaneness, bloodshed, confusion and ruin. The second Section. Containing a stating of four fundamental points of Controversy, in four Conclusions. CHAP. I. The first Conclusion, concerning the Rule of Faith. Testimonies of Fathers acknowledging Doctrines Traditionary, as well as Scripture, to be a Rule of Faith. 1. ACcording to my promise in the last Chapter of the former Section, I will consequently set down the fundamental truths of Catholic Religion, in four Conclusions, respecting four general points of Controversy: The sense of which Conclusions I found evidently and uniformly delivered by the ancient Fathers; and by the light of the said truths, through God's grace and goodness, I became entirely undeceived, and by their direction, I was led as it were by the hand into the Gates of that City, which is set on a hill, the holy Catholic Church of Christ. Now of those, this is the I. CONCLUSION. The entire Rule of Faith, comprised in the Doctrines delivered by Christ and his Apostles immediately to the Church, is contained not only in Scripture but likewise in unwritten Traditions. 2. FOr the former part of this Conclusion, viz. That the Rule of Christian Faith (& obedience) is no other than the Doctrines (and Precepts) delivered immediately by Christ and his Apostles to the Church, And by consequence that the present Church pretends not to any new Revelations, or Power to make any new Articles of Christian Faith, or to propose any Doctrines under that title other than such as She has received by Catholic Tradition, it will be unnecessary pains to prove out of the Fathers, since I do not know any Christians, who deserve that title, that doubt of it. Indeed the Calvinists (earnest to find all occasions to heighten their Schism) charge the Catholic Church, as if she admitted within this compass other Doctrines, Decrees and decretals, etc. But most unjustly, since there is no warrant or ground given them to lay this aspersion upon the Church, and all Catholics generally renounce it. 3. But as for that which follows in the Conclusion, viz. That this Rule of Faith is not contained entirely and expressly in Scripture alone, but likewise in unwritten Traditions: In this lies the main difference between the Catholic Church and all other Sects both ancient and modern; They all and always conspiring in this, that the Scripture is to be the only Rule, and themselves judges and interpreters of the sense of it, at least for themselves, or if not they, no body, however not the present Church: and on the contrary Catholics in all ages unanimously joining in the contradiction of that ground, and affirming that all Doctrines of Faith were not indeed, no● ever were intended to be entirely expressed in Scripture; And that Scriptures ought not to be interpreted by any private spirit or reason, any other way then according to the line of Ecclesiastical Tradition. 4. Concerning the Rule of Faith therefore, let us ask our Fathers that were before us how they were instructed in this point, and among them the first testimony will be afforded us by S. Ignatius to this effect quoted by Eusebiu●: (Hist. Eccl. l. 3. c. 35.) Ignatius saith he, exhorted the Churches to hold themselves inseparably to the Tradition of the Apostles, which Tradition for sureness sake he thought good to reduce into writing. Again, S. Polycarpus, saith the same Author, (l. 5. c. 19) taught his Disciples many Traditions not written. Again S. Dyony. Arcop. (Hier. Eccl. c. 1.) at least even by acknowledgement of the most learned Protestants, an Author of the second or third age, Those prime Captains and heads of our Hierarchy thought it necessary to deliver unto us those sublime and supersubstantial Mysteries both in written & unwritten instructions. Again S. Fab. Pope ●● Martyr, (Ep. 1. ad Episc. Orientis.) speaking of holy Chrism to be renewed every year (of which no mention is in Scripture) adds, These things we received from the Holy Apostles and their successors, which we require you to observe. Again Tertullian (de Cor. Mil. cap. 4.) discoursing, as he often does, of several rites and practices not mentioned in Scripture, concludes in one place thus, Of all these and other disciplines of the like nature, if thou shalt require a law out of Scripture, thou shalt find none: Tradition shall be alleged to thee for the Author Custom the confirmer, and Faith the observer. Again S. Irenaeus, (Cont. Haer. lib. 3. c. 4.) What if the Apostles had not left us Scriptures, ought we not to have followed the Order of Tradition, which they delivered to those to whom they committed the Churches? to which ordination give proof many nations of those Barbarous people who believe in Christ, having salvation written in their hearts by the Spirit, without characters or ink, and diligently observing the ancient Tradition. Again the Fathers assembled in that ancient Council of Gangres (Can. 21.) We desire that all those things which have been delivered in divine Scriptures, and by Tradition of the Apostles should be observed in the Church. Again S. Basil, (the Spir. Sanc. to cap. 27. 29.) of the dogmes and instructions (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) preserved in the Church, some we have by written institutions, others we have delivered by the secret Tradition of the Apostles; Both which sorts have the same authority for as much as concerns piety: and there is no man will contradict this that is never so little experienced in the law of the Church. The same Father in the same Chapter, The day would fail me if I should produce all the Mysteries which the Church observes without writing. And a little after, I account in an Apostolic thing to persist constantly in observing Traditions not written. Again, Eusebius Caesariensis, (de dem. Evang. lib. 1.) who having said that Christ did not as Moses, leave his Law written in Tables or Paper, but in the hearts of his Apostles: who likewise following the example and intention of their Master, Have consigned their doctrines, some indeed in writing, and others they have delivered to be observed by laws unwritten. Again S. chrysostom (2 Thes. cap. 2.) From hence it appears that the Apostles have not delivered all things by Epistles, but likewise many things without writing: now both those and these deserve to be equally believed. Again S. Epiphanius, (haer. 61.) We must likewise make use of Tradition, for all things cannot be taken out of Scripture: And therefore the Holy Apostles have given us some things in writing, and others by Tradition. Again S. Augustin (de Bap. cont. Don. lib. 5. cap. 23.) speaking against those that maintained that Haeretiques ought to be rebaptised, The Apostles, saith he, have prescribed nothing concerning this thing: But this custom which was opposite to S. Cyprian ought to be believed to have taken its original from their Tradition, as there are many things which the universal Church observe ●●h, and for that reason are rightly believed ●● have been commanded by the Apostles, although they are not found in their writings. These quotations seemed sufficient to me to show the general Opinion of the Fathers to be consonant to the Conclusion before mentioned. CHAP. II. The Roman Church agreeing with Fathers in the same Rule of Faith. All Sects of Protestants disagree with the Fathers. 1. NOw to the end to confront with Antiquity the present Roman and Protestant Churches, that it may appear which of them are the true legitimate children of those Fathers: We will begin with the Roman Church, whose mind we find clearly expressed in the Decree of the Council of Trent Sess. 4. concerning Canonical Scriptures, in these words, Sacrosan●●a, etc. Tridentina Synodus, etc. Perspiciens hanc veritatem, etc. that is, The most holy, etc. Synod of Trent, etc. Clearly perceiving that this truth and discipline (namely, the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles) is contained in books, written, and unwritten Traditions, which were received from Christ's Mouth, or delivered as it were from hand to hand from the Apostles, to whom the Holy Ghost dictated it, hath arrived even to us: Following the Oxthodox examples of the Fathers, receives and venerates with an equal affection of duty and reverence all books as well of the Old as New Testament, since one God is the author of both, as likewise the Traditions themselves whether pertaining to Faith or Manners, as dictated either by Christ's own Mouth, or by the Holy Ghost, and by a continued succession preserved in the Catholic Church. Thus far the Council of Trent. 2. Whether the Roman Church has indeed made good this her profession, viz. That in this decree she follows the Orthodox examples of the Fathers, besides so many formal proofs before alleged, the confession of many learned Protestants will justify her: As Cartwright (Cartw. Witgift Def p. 103.) speaking of the forementioned or like quotations out of S. Augustin, saith, To approve this speech of Augustin is to bring in Popery, etc. So likewise Whittaker, Fulk, Kemnitius, etc. (Whit. de Laec. Ser. p. 678. 681. 690, etc. Fulk● con. Purg. p. 362. 397. Kemnit. Exam. part 1. p. 87 etc.) for such like assertions of the Fathers condemn then generally; and by name Clemens Alexandrinus, Origen, Epiphanius, Tertullian, Augustin, Ambrose, Hierome, chrysostom, Eusebius, Baesile, Leo, Maximus, Theophilus, Damascene. etc. 3. In opposition to this decreed Doctrine of the Roman Church, and by consequence to the Orthodox examples of the Fathers, a●● manner of Sects that have separated from the Church, or from one another since Luther's ●●me, agree almost in no other point unanimously except in this, That the Scripture contains in it expressly all things both concerning belief and practice, which are necessary or but requisite to salvation. And by consequence that no man is or aught to be obliged to submit to any Doctrine or precept any further than as it can be proved manifestly to him to be contained in the written word of God. 4. The Church of England (Art. 6. of English Church) in particular makes this one of her peculiar Articles, That the Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary for salvation: so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an Article of Faith, or to be thought requisite necessary to salvation. But withal professeth that The three Creeds, Nicene Creed, Athanasius Creed, and that which is commonly called the Apostles Creed ought throughly to be received and believed. Moreover that she receiveth the four first General Counsels: yet not saying that she thinks herself obliged to the one or other for the authority of Tradition or the Counsels, for if so, she would be obliged likewise to accept of and submit to many other Traditions and Counsels, as likewise many points and practices confirmed in those Counsels, besides the Mysteries of the Blessed Trinity, many of which notwithstanding she relinquishes, if not condemns: Yea on the contrary for those three Creeds she gives this reason for her admitting of them because they may be proved by most certain warrants of holy Scripture. And how little or no authority she allows to the Church, or General Counsels shall be shown in the next Conclusion. For the present therefore, taking those words of accepting the three Creeds and four Counsels rather for a compliment of Civility to Antiquity, then as importing any real intention to admit any judge or Rule of Faith, but only Scripture and that interpreted by herself, for herself at least: Come we to consider how rational and safe a ground this is, That nothing is to be believed but only Scripture. CHAP. III. English Protestants unwilling to Justify this Position: and Why. Mr. Chillingworths late book against the Catholic Church: and the Character given of it. 1. THis Position of Scripture being the only Rule of Faith, though it be the main foundation upon which all Heretics and Schismatiques● almost that are and ever were do rely, and therefore in all likelihood, since so many millions of people of all Sects and in all ages have been concerned to study and make it good, should in reason be best upheld: Yet to my apprehension of all other controversies, this is the most weakly grounded, and guiltily maintained. 2. The experience I have of the particular disposition of English Protestanats (properly so called) and the happiness I have enjoyed in the acquaintance and friendship with very many the most considerable persons for Learning, Prudence, and Piety in that Church, gives me warrant to say this of them, that there is no point of Controversy that they are more unwilling to touch upon then this of Scriptures being the only Rule, and no visible Judge to interpret it, I mean, as to the positive maintaining thereof (for as concerning the disputing against the infallibility of the Church, there is none more ready to make Objections than they.) One reason hereof may be, because the English Church, out of gratitude to the Ancient Church and Fathers, which have hitherto maintained their Ecclesiastical Government against the Calvinists, till they came to dispute with fire and sword, professeth therefore greater reverence to antiquity and Tradition than any other Sect whatsoever; And therefore her children are unwilling to renounce or oppose that great army of Saints & Martyrs of the Primitive times, who unanimously acknowledge that besides Scriptures they had received from their Ancestors Traditionary Doctrines and Ritts, and these so universally spread through all Churches Eastern and Western, no man being able to name any particular fallible Author of them, that they were as firmly assured that they proceeded from the Apostles, as that the books of Scripture proceeded from the same Authors. Yea, for many of these Traditions greater proof might be made of their authentic and Divine Original, then of most books of Scripture, in as much as they were from the beginning universally apparent in the Practice of the Church, visibly shining in their Public liturgies, for example, Prayer for the Dead, and by consequence, Purgatory, that is, a State of deceased Christians capable of being bettered and eased by the Charity and Devotions of the living, Sacrifice of the Mass, and Offering it for the Quick and Dead, Adoration of Christ really present there, Baptism of Infants, Non-rebaptization of Heretics, Observation of Ecclesiastical Feasts, Lent-fasts, etc. Invocation of Saints, Veneration of Relics, Images, etc. Practise of Crossing themselves, Rites in administering Sacraments, etc. Whereas the books of the New Testament, especially the Epistles and Apocalypse, being written upon emergent occasions, and for the present need of particular Persons and Churches, were a great while before they could be generally dispersed, and great caution and circumspection used before they would be admitted into the Cannon: and being all, except some few that have perished, received there, it was impossible to prevent infinite corruptions in the writing, since every one had leave to transcribe them. 3. A second reason why English Protestant's (I speak knowingly at least of myself and not a few others) dispense the more easily with themselves for examining the sufficiency of this Rule of Faith is, because there being but two ways imaginable of assigning such a Rule, that is, either express Scripture alone, or that joined with Ecclesiastical Tradition, which is to be received upon the authority, or (as the Schools call it) the infallibility of the Church; and Protestants being persuaded that they can unanswerably confute this fallibility, they take it for granted that the former is the only Rule, and therefore surcease from undergoing the pains of diligent enquiry how firmly their foundation is laid, and what course to take for the answering of those inextricable inconveniences which follow upon that ground, for fear, lest if both these foundations should come to shrink, Christianity itself would become questionable, and a way made for direct Atheism. Hereupon it is that generally their writers have proceeded the destructive way, willingly undertaking to contradict the Church's infallibility; and it is not without extreme violence that they can be brought to maintain their own grounds; Which when the earnestness of Catholics extorts from them, though they must conclude, for only Scripture, and No-judge, yet either shame or remorse makes them defer somewhat to the ancient Church's authority, as it were excusing themselves that they dare not suffer themselves to be directed by her; For if by her as a visible Church, then by all Churches succeeding her to these our times. 4. In these latter times since that great unfortunate Champion against the Church's infallibility, Mr. Chillingworth published his book in defence of Doctor Potter, this guilt of English Protestants has been far more conspicuous. His objections against the Church, that is, his destructive grounds are avowed and boasted of as unanswerable in a manner by all: but his positive grounds, that is, the making only Scripture, and that to be interpreted by every single man's reason, to be the Rule of Faith, this is at least waved, if not renounced by many: But most unjustly: since there is no conceivable means how to find out a third intelligible way of grounding belief and determining controversies besides divine revelation proposed and interpreted authoritatively by the Church, or mere Scripture without any obligatory interpretation, as shall be demonstrated hereafter. Hence the general Character given of himself and his book is, That he has had better luck in pulling down buildings, than raising new ones, and that he has managed his sword much more dexterously than his buckler. And yet as if there were no need either of house or buckler, or as if Protestants did think themselves secure from weather and danger, if Catholics were expulsed and wounded, No man appears with any design to provide himself of any safer way of defence, then that which Mr. Chillingworth hath afforded. Yea Mr. Chillingworth himself (his friends know the reason of it) ●utterly refused to answer those unconquerable confutations of his positive grounds, and those fearful consequences charged upon them: being satisfied, or at least making a countenance before those that knew him not inwardly, that he was satisfied of the firmness of his Rule of Faith, as long as an exact particular answer to all his objections against the Church's infallibility was not published. Those who have had a particular acquaintance with that extraordinary sublime wit and judgement, will, or at least, can, witness with me that thus much as I have said in a seeming censure of him is true. Considering the long and inward friendship, and the many obligations I had to him, I had abstained from this, but that the cause in hand obliged me thereto; and but that his book alone had the principal influence upon me to shut up my entrance into Catholic unity: I shall therefore have frequent occasion hereafter in this Narration to weigh both his proofs and objections, at least such of them as were most powerful with me: yet resolving to be extremely tender of his reputation: But to return to the Story of myself. CHAP. FOUR Inconveniences following Protestant's Position of Only-Scripture. Father's refuse to dispute with Haeretiques from only Scripture. 1. When I was forced to weigh with circumspection and fidelity this main fundamental Position of Protestantisme, viz. That the Scripture is the only Rule of Faith, or, That all things necessary to be believed are contained expressly in Scripture, what a world of unavoidable inconveences did presently throng into my understandiog, and upon how mere sand did it appear to be laid! For the inconveniences. 1. It is impossible upon this ground that ever there should be found a way to end any controversies, as shall be demonstrated in the next Conclusion. 2. There can scarce be named one Haeretique but took the same for a ground of his Haeresy, and generally the Fathers protest against this ground, reducing them to Ecclesiastical Tradition, and the authority of the present Church. 2. For a proof whereof we may consider the particular Treatises and books of the ancient Fathers which they wrought directly for this purpose, namely to show what method and grounds their Ancestors and reason itself dictated to be used and proceeded upon in disputing with any Haeretique whatsoever: and we shall find that the Catholics of these days do show themselves indeed sons of those Catholic Fathers, exactly treading their steps in appealing to Scripture and general Tradition from which there lies no prescription or appeal: And on the contrary, that the Haeretiques and Schismatics of our times have been as exact in pursuing the traces of their Ancestors, pretending only Scripture, but relying upon the Pride of their own hearts, and thinking that their interpretations and wrest of Scripture ought to prevail against all present and past authority how universal soever for place, and how uninterrupted soever for succession: The treatises anciently written for this purpose are S. Irenaeus against Heresies, Tertullian de Praescriptionibus, S. Cyprian de unitate Ecclesiae, S. Augustin de unitate Ecclesiae, contra Epistolam Fundamenti, de utilitate credendi, etc. S. Vincentius Lerinensis his Commonitorium, etc. 3. In particular may be witness of this Tertullian, (Tert. de Praescrip. cap. 19) There is no good got by disputing out of Texts the Scripture but either to make a man sick or mad. And again, There ought therefore to be no appealing to Scripture, nor disputing out of them, since by that means either neither side will be victorious, or it is a hazard whether. And again, But hitherto we have in general proceeded against all Heresies, proving by assured, reasonable and necessary prescriptions against all Heresies, that they are to be excluded from all disputation out of Scripture. Witness likewise S. Augustine, Heresies and doctrines of perverseness ensnaring souls, and sinking them into Hell have risen from no other fountain, but this, that Scriptures which are good, are understood not well, and that which is not well understood in them, is rashly and impudently maintained. Again, the same Father brings in the Arian Bishop Maximinus thus challenging a Catholic, (it con. Maximin. Ar. Episcopum lib. 1.) If thou wilt produce any thing out of divine Scriptures which are common to all, it is necessary we should hearken to thee: But these speeches which are not in Scripture are in no case receivable by us. The same Father in the conclusion of the same books brings in another Heretic using these words, I desire and wish to be a Disciple of the Holy Scriptures, etc. If thou shalt affirm any thing out of the Scriptures, if thou shalt produce a quotation of any thing written there in any place, We desire to be found disciples of the Holy Scriptures. Again several other passages to the same purpose may be seen in several other parts of his works as in Epist 222. and in lib. de Gen. ad lit. lib. 7. cap. 9 and de fide & Symb. cap. 9 and in Joan. Tract. 18. Lastly, the same Father disputing against Cresconius the Grammarian, saith, (id. lib. 1. con. Cresc. Gram. cap. 33.) Yet notwithstanding although there is produced no example of this out of Scriptures Canonical, we do nevertheless observe the truth of the same Scriptures, when we do that which is approved by the Church, whose authority the Scriptures recommend. See suitable passages in l. 5. de. Bap. cont. Donat. cap. 23. and the Unit. Eccl. cap. 19 Witness again S. Hierom, (S. Hieron. dialog. cont. Lucifer.) Neither let them please themselves, if sometimes they seem to make good their assertions out of some Texts of Scripture, for the Devil likewise sometimes quoted Scripture, for Scriptures consist not in the bare words, but in sense. It is true indeed the Fathers sometimes commend the fullness of Scripture, as S. Basil saying, whatsoever is without the Scripture is sin, but withal he gives us a Rule to know his meaning, showing that according to the last quotation out of S. Augustin against Cresco●●us the Grammarian, that may be said to be virtually contained in Scripture, which is delivered by the Church, whose authority is recommended to us in Scripture, so says S. Basil likewise, (id. lib. de Spiritu sancto.) It is an Apostolic thing to persist constantly in Traditions not written, for saith the Apostle, I praise you in that you are mindful of whatsoever thing came from me, and observe the Traditions which I have given you. Besides in some cases there may be controversies about points, which are not grounded upon Oral Tradition but only Scripture. 4. A third inconvenience following the Protestants position is this, That since undoubtedly there were in the Primitive Church Traditions in great number, besides what is expressed in Scripture, I could not imagine what was become of them, or how it should be possible they should come to be lost having been received generally through the whole Church, and most of them shining in the practice of it. To salve this inconvenience, Protestants either impudently give the lie to all the Fathers, and say without the least proof that there were none at all: Or in England there being under-Sects which by Scripture alone could not be confuted, as Puritans, Anabaptists, Sabbatarians, etc. they are forced to acknowledge some few Traditions of such a nature, although thereby they destroy their main foundation of Only-Scripture; For by the Traditionary doctrine of Non-rebaptization they conclude the Anabaptists to be Heretics, that is, erring in a necessary point of doctrine: Yet themselves renounce doctrines and practices delivered by a far more full Tradition; So great effect hath interest in that Church. But what will become of S. Basils' saying before quoted, That the day would fail him if he should undertake to enumerate all the Traditions left by the Apostles in the Church, not mentioned in Scripture? For all, that even the most condescending Protestant's will allow for such, may be reckoned five times over in a minute of an hour. Considering therefore that such Traditions being visibly manifest for the most part in the practice of the Church, are far more easily preserved then any writing can be, it will necessarily follow that the rest of that great number are extant in the Roman Church, as may be proved of most of them before reckoned by testimonies of Ancient Fathers. (Vid. sup. c. 3.) 5. A fourth inconvenience to my understanding, unavoidable by Protestants, and a great proof of the truth of the Doctrine of the Roman Church is this: Though Protestants generally deny that the points of Controversy debated between them and the Roman Church were universally received by the Ancient Church, as Invocation of Saints, adoration of Christ, as present in the blessed Sacrament, Prayer for the dead, etc. Yet they cannot deny but that in many of the Father's proofs of these doctrines may be found to show that such was at least their particular opinions: Now if generally the Ancient Church had agreed with Protestants both in denying such doctrines and practice, received now in the Roman Church, and likewise in making only-expresse-Scripture the Rule to judge by; it could not be avoided but that some Synods or Fathers would have taken notice of such pretended errors in the writings of other Fathers, and likewise would have produced some of those Texts of Scriptures now made use of by Protestants for that purpose: a thing they are so far from, that on the contrary we find that many of the Fathers infer the same doctrines from the same Texts that Catholics now do. And Protestants, though they allege some passages of Fathers, by which they may seem consequently to destroy such doctrines, and to contradict their own formal assertions in other places, yet are not able to produce so much as one Text of Scripture interpreted by any Father to confute any one such pretended error. Which is a thing very remarkable, and will argue either that no man in the Ancient Church took notice of such pretended dangerous speeches of so many Fathers, or that they understood not the plain Texts of Scripture, if Protestants grounds be true: or upon Catholics grounds, since it was impossible, but they must have taken notice of such opinions, and since they certainly did understand plain Texts of Scripture, that therefore not disputing out of Scripture, as Protestants do, they were so far from believing such opinions to be errors deserving a Schism, that they all of them agreed in receiving them as Catholic Truths. Other inconveniences which without hope or possibility of remedy do arise from making Scripture alone (secluding not only Traditions but likewise any visible obliging interpreter) to be the only Rule and Judge of Controversies, shall be reserved to be examined in the next Conclusion concerning the Authority of the Church in this business. CHAP. V. Weakness of Protestants proofs for only-Scripture. Texts of Scripture alleged by Catholics vainly eluded by Protestants. 1. AS I said before, since Protestants and all other Sects do against their nature and custom so unanimously conspire to forsake the old● and good ways, by travelling wherein, even themselves being judges, so many glorious Saints, Confessors, Martyrs, Bishops, etc. were renowned not only in their own, but all succeeding times, dissipated armies of Haeretiques, propagated the Kingdom of Christ over the world, subdued Idolatry, and made it utterly to vanish though supported with the force of the whole Roman world, and in fine arrived to a supereminent degree of glory in Paradise; And since in stead of this so successful a way, they have chosen to walk every man in a several path through those narrow, crooked and at least very dangerous, (because new) ways of a proud selfe-assuming presumption in interpreting only-Scripture each man according to his own fancy & interest, following the example of no antiquity, but only ancient Heretics; in all reason they should have taken order to have justified themselves herein after a more than ordinary manner, they ought to have contributed all the invention and skill of all the best wits in each Sect to fortify this common foundation of only Scripture, and no visible judge, beyond all other points of difference. 2. And so no doubt they have to the utmost capacity of the subject: But no skill can serve to build a firm secure edifice upon sand: and private reason, or fancies of inspiration are more weak and sandy then even sand itself. For proof hereof let us consider the pretended proofs and reasons which they allege to assert this their fundamental position, viz. that the entire Rule of Faith is the written word of God, of which there is not extant any visible authoritative interpreter. Proofs hereof produced by them are 1. Negative, invalidating such Texts of Scripture as are alleged by Catholics, and expounded by Fathers to prove Traditions unwritten: and 2. Positive, drawn from other Texts expressing the sufficiency and perfection of Scripture. 3. Some Texts by Catholics produced to prove Traditions, and those concerning points of Doctrine as well as practise or ceremonies, besides what is written in the Evangelicall books, are among others these following out of S. Paul, (2 Thes. cap. 1. ver. 15.) Observe the Tradititions which you have received from us, whether by word, or by Epistle, And again, (2 Tim. c. 2. ver. 13.) Have before thine eyes the pattern of sound words, which thou hast heard of me in Faith and Jesus Christ: Conserve that good thing committed to thy charge by the Holy Spirit which dwelleth in us. And again, (1 Tim. cap. 2. ver. 2.) The things which thou hast heard of me in the presence of many witnesses consign them to faithful men, which may be capable to teach oth●● also, And lastly, (1 Tim. cap. 3. ver. 15.) The Church (is) the pillar and ground of truth. 4. To elude such Texts as these so express in themselves, so stringent and convincing without any leave given to any rational contradiction, so unanimously acknowledged by the ancient Father● in the plain importance of them (for there was no need to call their commentaries interpretations, there being not the least difficulty or obscurity in them to be cleared) Protestant's, especially the Calvinists (for the Church of England hath been more ingenuous) have been forced to make use of the poorest guiltiest shift imaginable, which is, to translate the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 enseignements, instructions, or by any other word, but what reason and rules of Grammar would require, namely, Traditions. That which moved them hereto was apparently a resolution to seduce the people: for nourishing them up in the hatred of the Church, in contempt of her authority, in rejecting all her Traditions, so far that whatsoever is proposed under that title of Tradition is not only not accepted, but scornfully rejected by them as supposed most certainly false and superstitious; if it should appear that the Scripture itself should refer us to Christian doctrines under the notion of Traditions, the very sound of that word in Scripture would perhaps make them suspect that their Ministers had abused them. 5. But moreover for a help, if this poor subtlety should come to be discovered by their Proselytes, it is further answered by them, that S. Paul might very well refer Timothy or the Thessalonians to the sum of Christian doctrine by him before preached, and not yet reduced to writing, because the entire Canon of Scripture was not yet completed and sealed up; but when that was finished, afterward Christians were not to trust to their memories, but to have recourse to express Scripture, as is employed by several Texts of Scripture denoting its abundant sufficiency for all uses and necessities. 6. For answer to this way of arguing it will be sufficient to say, that whatsoever is here alleged by Protestants is merely gratis dictum, there being not the least intimation given by S. Paul, or any other Evangelicall Author, that the Apostles had any intention to write among them a body of the Christian law, searce any book of the New Testament having been written, but only upon some particular occasion, and for the use of some particular person and Church: and on the contrary it appearing expressly both by Scripture and Tradition that the Apostles, in all the Churches founded by them, left a depositum both of the doctrines and discipline of Christianity uniform and complete, not relating at all to any thing already, or afterward to be written. CHAP. VI Two principal Texts of Scripture alleged by Protestants to prove its sufficiency, and against Traditions; answered. 1. COme we now to consider a while those Texts of Scripture pretended by Protestants to be so express, uncontrollable and pressing, as to justify them from blame in not only opposing the former evident quotations for Traditions, but in dividing from and condemning all Antiquity that taught the contrary, and not only so, but relied upon Tradition alone in several points confessed by them not to be visible in Scripture, and yet condemned, anathematised and utterly vanquished several Heretics, who thought it a sufficient warrant to be dispensed from several doctrines taught, and practices continued in the Church, because the Scripture was silent in them. 2. Of all others the most considerable Text of Scripture alleged by Protestants, and most prized by them as efficacious to prove its perfection, & sufficiency to be an entire Rule of Faith is this speech of S. Paul to Timothy, (1 Tim. c. 3. v. 16. 17) Omnis Scriptura divinitius inspirata, utilis est, etc. All Scripture divinely inspired is profitable for teaching, for arguing, for reproving and for instructing in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, instructed to every good work. Here, say they, it is apparent that S. Paul acknowledges Scripture to be profitable for all kinds of spiritual uses, teaching, arguing, etc. and moreover in such a perfection that by it not only ignorant persons but even the man of God, that is, he who is a Teacher of God's people, who by his office is obliged to a higher perfection of knowledge, may be made perfect, and that, to every good work. 3. To this it is answered 1. That by reading the verse immediately going before, we shall be informed both of what Scriptures S. Paul there speaks, and in what sense and with what conditions they are profitable for the forementioned uses and ends: the words are, Tu verò permane, etc. Do thou (●● Timothy) persevere in those things which thou hast learned, knowing of whom thou hast learned them, and because from thy childhood thou hast known the Holy Scriptures, which may instruct thee to Salvation, by faith which is in Christ Jesus: For all Scripture divinely inspired is profitable, etc. By the connexion of these words it appears that those Scriptures to which Saint Paul gives this testimony and glorious character were the same in which Timothy, now a Bishop, had been instructed from his childhood, that is, the Scriptures of the Old Testament: For how few of the Evangelicall writings were published even now that he was a Bishop, and certainly scarce any at all when he was a child. S● Paul's design therefore in this passage is evidently this, viz. to exhort Timothy to remain constant (in iis quae ei tradita fuerant) in those Christian verities and precepts by the Apostle delivered in trust to him not in writing, but oral Tradition: For which purpose he uses these motives, namely 1. the consideration of the sublime Apostolical Office of himself his instructor, immediately and miraculously called and enabled to that employment by Christ from heaven, therefore he says, knowing of whom thou hast learned these Evangelicall truths. 2● The conformity of these new revelations to those ancient ones of the Old Testament, in which Timothy had been instructed from his childhood, in which he might perceive, though obscurely traced, certain marks and Prophecies of the Gospel, and so be easilier inclined to believe what S. Paul had plainly delivered to him. 3. Upon this occasion he declares the great profit which a Christian may find by having recourse to the old Testament, as having great efficacy to make a man wise unto salvation; but this not of themselves alone, but joined with the Faith, which is in Christ Jesus, and perseverance in believing the Christian verities delivered by oral Tradition. So that the Apostles might very well conclude, All Scriptures (of the Old Testament giving testimony to the Gospel) being inspired by God are very profitable (not entirely of themselves sufficient) for teaching, arguing, reproving, instructing in righteousness; And that by them the man of God, (even a Christian Bishop) may be made perfect or enabled to every good work (that is, as he expresseth the same sense in the former verse, wise unto Salvation; but upon condition that they be joined with the Faith (or Gospel) of Christ jesus, and perseverance therein.) This to my understanding seems to be the proper natural importance of this Text of S. Paul, so far from evincing what the Protestants would collect from it, that it confirms the quite contrary. 4. But let it be supposed (which is impossible to be evinced) that the Apostle speaks here by way of Prophecy of Evangelicall Scriptures not yet written, but with respect to the time when they should be perfectly completed; he says only they are profitable, not sufficient, to produce the mentioned effects and end; He excludes not the Church interpreting them; in a word, He refers expressly to oral Tradition; And by consequence he is far from saying any thing that may warrant the Protestants upon pretence from these words, to relinquish the way which all ancient Christians and Fathers of the Church walked in, and to walk in that which, as hath been showed by irrefragable testimonies, has been traced by all and only Heretics. So far is he from saying, or giving warrant to any to say, Reject all things that you find not expressly contained in Scriptures, though the whole world upon whose only testimony you receive Scriptures affirm that they received other things from the same authority, Keep yourselves close to that sense of Scriptures which your own fancies or interests shall suggest unto you, and admit neither fathers nor Church to interpret them to you, believe your own understandings only, which you may call the inspirations of the Holy Ghost, if you please, And content not yourselves with deceiving yourselves alone with such fancies, take authority upon yourselves to destroy all public authority, and to● obtrude per sas & nefas your interpretations and glosses upon the consciences of others. This S. Paul ought to have said, if he had purposed to justify the grounds of Protestantisme: But this I could not conceive to be his meaning, and therefore I took it to be my best course to be misled by Fathers, Counsels and the whole Catholic Church. 5. A second proof for the sufficiency of Scripture alone to be an entire Rule of Faith, and of great moment among many Protestants is that speech in the end of the Revelation, (Rev. c. 22. v. 18. 19) Contestor enim omni audienti, etc. I do protest to every one that hears the words of the Prophecy of this book: If any one shall add unto these, God shall add unto him the plagues written in this book. And if any one shall diminish from the words of this Prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the Holy City, and out of those things which are written in this book. The weight of this Text is much more pressing in their opinion by reason of the situation of it in the close of the whole body of Evangelicall writings; and likewise by the advantage of a Parallel place in the end of Moses his law. 6. Hereto it is answered that this Text is so far from obliging us to understand it in general of Evangelicall doctrines, that expressly and in terminis terminantibus it restreines itself only to the Prophecies contained in this particular book, for bidding any one to presume to make any change in it, either by addition and interpolation of other Prophecies pretended to be written by the same Divine Author (a thing practised by Heretics in other Evangelicall writings when this book was published) or by razing out any Prophecies herein contained, (as some Heretics likewise had done in other Apostolical books.) So that this author is so far from forbidding any other revelations of divine doctrines besides those already published, that notwithstanding any thing here said, Agabus and Saint Philip's daughters might, if they had pleased, have set forth their Prophecies, so they had done it without injury or disparagement to the Apocalypse. Even as Moses by such like words signified that in his writings were contained the sum of that law delivered by God on Mount Sinai, at least as much of it as was fit to communicate for the present to the people, and therefore forbade any man to change his writings any way: Yet notwithstanding, it is apparent that not only the Jews, but likewise the Ancient Fathers believed that besides this written law, Moses himself delivered to the Priests and Sanedrim many unwritten Traditions relating to the law itself, some of which are mentioned in Evangelicall Scripture, as the institution of the order of Exorcists, the mingling of water with the blood of the Testament wherewith Moses sprinkled the people, Scarlet wool and hyssop to be used in all aspersions, the sprinkling the book of the Covenant with blood, The names of Jannes and Mambres the antagonists of Moses, and the combat between an Angel and the Devil about Moses, his body, etc. Besides, many Holy men published books among the Jews acknowledged of divine authority, wherein were many Mysteries of Faith not only more expressly, but de novo contained, and not at all declared by Moses, many writings of devotion, Precepts of Piety and manners, etc. Only Moses his books have been received to this day under the notion of the fundamental law of the Jewish Commonwealth, a title that other writings never challenged. 7. As concerning the advantage taken from the position of the forementioned Text in the close of the Evangelicall writings, it will be of no force at all to any man that shall consider how it came to pass that the several books were placed in the order as we at this day find them viz. That certain men unknown to us now, but followed by a tacit agreement of the Church, when after the decease of the Apostles they had sought out all the writings that remained and had been occasionally published by them, compiled them in one volume in this order; They begun with the Gospels or history of our Saviour's life and death, as reason was, placing them it may be in the order as they were written, however assigning the first place to S. Matthew, because he having written his Gospel in Hebrew for the use of the Jews and Jewish Christians to whom Christ commanded his Gospel should first be preached, and upon their refusal, to the Gentiles, even for that reason alone his Gospel might be thought to have deserved the first place, the rest following in the order as they were written. Then follows the Story of the Apostles, especially S. Paul, written by his companion S. Luke, and continued till their separation by S. Paul's voyage to Rome. After books of Story follow doctrinal writings, namely Epistles, containing particular doctrinal controversies and precepts of manners, written upon occasion, when false Teachers had sown tares of particular Heresies in the Churches, founded by the Apostles, Among these Epistles, those of S. Paul both for the number, importance and length of them obtained the first place, but disposed not according to the order and dates of time that they were written, but according to the privileges and advantages of the Churches and Cities to which they were sent; the Romans having obtained, as reason was, the first place, than the Corinthians, etc. and after all such, followed his particular Epistles to particular persons, as Timothy, Titus, etc. In the last place, the whole volume was concluded with this single book of Prophecies, as being last written, most difficult, and less necessary. These things being apparent, let all reasonable men judge what just advantage can be taken by Protestants thus to build their main foundation of difference from the Catholic Church upon so inconsiderable, so casual a thing, as the order wherein the bookos of the New Testament have been ranged, no man knows by whom. CHAP. VII. Rnasons and Texts produced by Mr. Chillingworth to prove only Scripture to be the Rule of Faith. 1. BEsides these two so much by many Protestants magnifyed proofs of the Scriptures pretended sufficiency to determine all controversies of Religion with exclusion of unwritten Traditions: There are other arguments, which had greater force with me, produced by Mr. Chillingworth; and which that he might more advantageously enforce, Mr. Chillingw. C. 4. 40. 41. 42. 43, etc. & alibi passim. he lays this first for a ground, viz That no man ought to be obliged upon pain of Excommunication to believe any thing, but what God hath revealed to be necessary to eternal salvation, which is the substance of the New Covenant made by God in Christ, containing points of necessary belief, and precepts of necessary Evangelicall Obedience; For, (says he) why should any error (or ignorance) exclude him from the Church's Communion, which will not deprive him of eternal salvation? Why should men be more rigid than God? 2. These grounds thus laid, and supposed unquestionable: In the next place to prove that this Covenant is entirely contained not only in the whole Scripture but also in the lower Gospels, yea sufficiently in any one of the former, he first alleges these reasons, Because the Evangelists having, as they profess, a purpose to write the Gospel of Christ, or New Covenant, no reason can be imagined why they, who have set down many passages unnecessary, should neglect any necessary: For what supine negligence and indiscretion must that needs be; such, verily, as no man in these days undertaking the same design, would commit? Again, with what truth could they style their books the Gospel of Christ, being but a part of it? 3. After such discourses he brings, in his opinion, two evident and unanswerable Texts out of the Gospels to prove, that whatsoever is necessary for a Christian to believe or practise is contained in every one of them severally: The first Text is the conclusion of S. John's Gospel, (cap. 21) Many other signs also did jesus in the sight of his Disciples, which are not written in this book: But these are written that ye may believe that Jesus is Christ the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name. For the enforcing of which quotation, he adds. By these words (these are written) may be understood either, These things are written, or These signs are written: Take it which way you will, this conclusion will certainly follow, That either all that which S. john wrote in his Gospel, or less than all, and therefore all much more, was sufficient to make them believe that which being believed with lively faith would certainly bring them to eternal life. 4. The second proof is from those words in the Preface of S. Luke's Gospel, (cap. 1.) Forasmuch us many have taken in hand to set forth in order a Declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us, even as they delivered unto us which from the beginning were eye witnesses and Ministers of the word. It seemed good to me also having had perfect understanding of things from the first, to write to thee in order, most excellent Theophilus, that thou mightest know the certainty of those things wherein thou hast been instructed. To this quotation he adds a parallel passage of the same S. Luke in his entrance to his History of the Acts of the Apostles, (Chap. 1.) viz The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus of all that jesus began both to do and teach, until the day that he was taken up, etc. Lastly he adjoins twelve questions serving to enforce to the uttermost the strength and energy of these Tex●s: Which Questions after I have first prepared a way by consideration of a few principal terms in this controversy to a satisfaction what is here concluded from these Texts quoted by Mr. Chillingworth, I will likewise set down, adjoining to each of them its answer. CHAP. VIII. Preparatory grounds for the answering of these reasons and Quotations. That Christian Religion was settled in the Church by Tradition especially. The advantage of that way beyond writing. 1. THe whole weight of this Controversy concerning the Rule of Faith (viz. Whether all truths and precepts, etc. of Christianity necessary to Salvation be to be sought for in Scripture alone, or any one or more of the Gospels, as expressly contained in them (as Protestants affirm) or likewise in the Tradition of the Catholic Church, as Catholics maintain?) relying upon the true understanding of these three things especially, viz. 1. The way whereby Christianity was settled in the Church, which will appear to have been by Oral Tradition and external uniform practice, as being more secure from error and mistakes than writing. 2. The occasion of the writing of the Gospels and other books of the New Testament, and the benefit which the Church reaps by them. 3. The meaning of this Phrase, things necessary to salvation, and the freeing of it from ambiguities and misapplications. I conceived it therefore necessary to meditate seriously, and as exactly, as I was capable, to inform myself distinctly of these particulars, to the end that I might be able to judge, whether these difficulties and objections alleged by Mr. Chillingworth would approve themselves as unanswerable, as at my leaving of England I supposed them, Here therefore I will set down in order the effect of my enquiry. 2. To begin therefore with the first particular to be premised, namely, the way whereby Christian Religion was settled and continued in the Church: By diligent reading of the writings of several Fathers especially, and ancient Ecclesiastical Historians it manifestly appeared, at least to mine own full satisfaction, that it was not the purpose of Christ to deliver his new law, as Moses had done his in Tables or written characters, but in Oral Tradition: or to write it indeed, but, as Eusebius Caesariensis before quoted expresseth it, not with ink on paper, but by his Spirit in the hearts of his people, according to the ancient Prophecies concerning him in the Old Testament: And hereupon the Fathers observe, that our Saviour left nothing at all in writing, neither did he lay any injunction upon his Apostles to write books: And therefore the same Eus●bius (Hist. Ecel. l. 5. cap. 8. & 24.) expressly affirms, That the Apostles had the least regard to writing. The like is noted by Saint chrysostom in his frist Homily upon the Acts, where he gives the reason why the book of the Acts does only or principally contain the occurrences concerning S. Paul, and not those neither to the end of his life. But an assurance of this irrefragable is given by Saint Paul himself, who in several places of his Epistles refers to the doctrine settled by oral instruction, as when he says, Gal. c. 1. If any one shall preach otherwise then ye have received, let him be Anathema. And again, (Phil. cap. 4.) Those things which ye have been taught, and received, and heard and seen in me, do ye. And again to show the uniformity of the doctrine every where, he calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a form of wholesome words. And again, We write no other things unto you then what you have known. And again, (1 Cor. cap. 14. 15.) As I teach in all Churches. And again, So we have preached, and so ye have believed. Hence S. Augustine makes this rule, The Scripture is wont for brevity's sake to be silent of many things, which are to be learned from the order of Tradition. For this reason it was, as antiquity observes, that S. Paul kept his residence so long a time in many Cities after he had settled Churches there, to the end to inculcate into their memories the substantial doctrines preached over and over unto them, and to establish an uniform order and discipline among them, which by that means continued in an exact conformity for several centuries of years in the Catholic Church all the world over, as Tertullian, S. Basil, S. Augustin, etc. observe. 3. Now this way of settling Religion by Tradition and outward practice was much more secure and lasting, and far less subject to corruptions than writings (without unappealable interpreters especially) could possibly be. If it be objected, that memory is not so safe a depositary as written records, which are made use of to supply the defects of memory. It may be answered, that that is true of preserving doctrines merely speculative, but not so of such as may be made as it were visible by practice, as almost all Evangelicall doctrines are. For as for books, we see by experience that those which of all other in the world ought to have been preserved with the most exact care, and wherein the most scrupulous curiosity was commendable, I mean the Sacred Evangelicall writings, have not been able to escape the inevitable fate of all books, especially such as every one almost will think himself concerned to transcribe, that is, to have infinite variety of readings, much more than any other books that I know of whatsoever, and principally in in the original tongues, which were not read in Churches: Insomuch as in my hearing Bishop Usher, (one of the most learned Protestant Prelates in England) professed that, whereas he had had of many years before a design to publish the New Testament in Greek with various lections and Annotations, and for that purpose had used great diligence and spent much money to furnish himself with Manuscripts and Memoires from several learned men abroad, yet in conclusion he was forced to desist utterly from that undertaking, lest if he should ingenuously have noted all the several differences of readings, which himself had collected, the incredible multitude of them almost in every verse should rather have made men Atheistically to doubt of the truth of the whole book, then satisfy them in the true reading of any particular passage. An evident sign this is that the ancient Governors of the Church did not suppose that Christian Religion did only or principally rely upon what was in writing: For if they had, they would doubtless either have forbidden such a multitude of transcribers, or have preserved the Original copies, or at least have imitated the exact diligence and curiosity of the Jewish Masorites in their preserving the Old Testament entire for the future, namely by numbering all the letters and points, and signifying where and how oft every one of them were found in Scripture: None of which preventions and cautions notwithstanding have been used in the Christian Church: Yea so far is it, from that, that at least one whole Epistle of S. Paul to the Laodiceans, and that most ancient Gospel in Hebrew, secundum Nazaraeos are at this day utterly lost: not to speak of several books mentioned in the Old Testament, not now to be heard of. 4. Well, but how casual soever books may prove to be yet it does not hitherto appear how Oral Tradition and Practice can demonstrate itself a way more secure and free from hazard than they. I will therefore endeavour to resolve this seeming difficulty by ask these Questions. Can any one reasonably say that, for example, the doctrines of Christ's death for mankind commemorated in the Blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist, & of his real unfigurative presence there have been, or could possibly have been more securely propagated and more clearly and intelligibly delivered to Posterity in books written, which may be lost and will be corrupted by some transcribers (and every transcribers copy is as authentic as any others) or, as they have been, in the Tradition and universal Practice of the Church, and in a continual visible celabrating of those divine Mysteries, where every action they did perform, published the truth which they believed; where their thanksgiving for Christ's Passion daily renewed the memory, manner and end of it; where their prostrations and adorations demonstrated their assurance of his real Presence, where every man's saying Amen at the Priests pronouncing Corpus Domini nostri Jesu Christi, expressed their confession of that Presence with exclusion of all Tropes and Metaphors in the business? Again, is not the true inward sense of these Christian Doctrines conveyed more intelligibly, and represented more exactly, lively and naturally by such practices and solemn spectacles, than by bare words, though they had been never so eleare, and of never so studied a perspicuity? With relation to which express, impossible to be mistaken way of propagating the Mysteries of Christian belief, and reflecting in his mind thereupon S. Paul in all probability thus reproved the Galatians for their inconstancy, in these words of wonder and indignation Gal. c. 3 v. 1. O insensatiGalatae. O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes jesus Christ hath been (lively) represented, being Crucified among you? As thinking that nothing of less power than a charm could deceive persons, or blind their eyes, after they had been visible spectators, as it were of the passion of Christ. 5. This admirable way of conveying saving truths as it is say more express than words alone, the natural sense of the Mysteries being as it were construed and interpreted to the people thereby, or (according to the Prophet's expression foretelling this way of Tradition of the Gospel) being not written with ink and on paper, but by the Spirit in men's hearts, by which means the sense sunk into their souls, far more effectually than if words only had swom in their brains: So seems it to me also far more lasting, than books, being scarce possibly obnoxious to be either extinguished or adulterated. The rage of Persecutors without an extraordinary vigilance of Divine Providence had failed but little of abolishing the whole Bible, I am sure it made them very scarce and precious, and not every ordinary Christians pennyworth for several ages together, and effectively destroyed many most useful precious monuments of the Ancient Church; The same rage, or negligence or some other misfortune have actually been the loss of an Epistle of S. Paul to Laodicea, and other Apostolic writings, And some merely speculative, not very necessary Traditions have perished because not apted to be conveyed by practice, as What that was which hindered the revelation of the man of sin, which S. Paul says he told the Church of the Thessalonians; that world of miracles which S. John says our blessed Saviour wrought; and likewise the true sense of all obscure passages in the New Testament which the Primitive Churches, no doubt, understood; Yea moreover many ancient Liturgies and Missals are now wanting, by reason that the particular Churches, in which they were in use, have failed: But to take out of the way, or adulterate the Mysteries of Faith through the whole Church, which have been thus continued and daily every where preached not so much in Sermons (though so too) as in visible practice, and not so much written in books (though so too) as in the hearts of all Professors of Christianity, This is beyond the reach of either secular or infernal Powers, for to effect this, Persecutors must first have dostroyed all Congregations of Christian mankind, and by some impossible charm, all men must have agreed together to forget to day what they said and did yesterday: here neither transcribers negligence, nor particular innovating fancies of Heretics, neither adulter sensus, nor corruptor stilus could obstrepere veritate, (Tert. de Prescript.) none of such either negligences or cunnings could interrupt or out-clamour the truth. 6. Now what hath been here exemplified in two particular points, namely the Mystery of Christ's Passion, and of the Blessed Sacrament may and ought rationally to be extended likewise to the whole body of Divine Revelations, pertaining to the substance of Christian Religion, how abstruse, sublime, yea how seeming a speculative soever. What points more sublime, more speculative than those of the Blessed Trinity, the equality and consubstantiallity of the Son with the eternal Father, the union and yet distinction of the two Natures in one person, & c.? And yet all these might and were continued in the Church, not so much by writings delivered, or Sermons reiterated, as by the outward Practices of the Faithful in their public uniform Devotions: Hereupon when troubles and contestations arose in the Church about those Mysteries, and thereupon Synods assembled, the several Bishops being demanded how they had been instructed in them each one respectively in their Dioceses, they had no need of stroining their wits to find out the sense of obscure passages of Scripture concerning such Mysteries, or to invent ways of reconciling Texts seemingly clashing together: they might say, for example concerning the article of the Blessed Trinity, we following the instructions and practices of our Predecessors do baptise in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, and in our Devotions we pray unto, give thanks, glorify each of these three persons in the same language, with equal expressions of duty, without preferring one before the other, thereby acknowledging their glory to be equal, their Majesty coeternal. So likewise for the Consubstantiality of the Son with the Father, the union and distinction of the two Natures, they might say, We adore only one God, and yet we adore the Son with adoration equal to the Father, by which we acknowledge them both to be one only God; We do likewise celebrate and give thanks to the same Son of God for vouchsafing, being God, to take our Nature upon him & in that to die, by his death redeeming us from sin and death eternal, Therefore we confess two distinct Natures united in one Person. etc. 7. Now if such sublime Revelations might, and indeed were really conveyed not in formal expressions of words and phrases, but, which was far more efficacious, in the true natural sense and importance of them uncapable of ambiguities by such a way of Tradition so impossible to be interrupted as long as Christians begot Christians, and so free from danger of corruptions, that they could not be feared, unless all Churches would conspire to alter their whole frame of Devotions; A thing they have been so far from intending, that at this day if we compare all the Liturgies extant from S. james's (which has received testimony from above 600. Bishops in the second Council of Nice) to S Basil'●, S. Chrysostome's, S. gregory's even to the present Roman Liturgy, adjoining the Ethiopian, Maronite, Coph●ite, etc. we shall find an admirable uniformity in all the substantial parts, yea in many manners of expressions, to the very circumstances of Cross, and postures, etc. although these Churches have had no communication together of many ages: How much more easily and perspicuously might other points of Doctrine relating to practise be continued in the Church? as Invocation of Saints to be our Intercessors, Veneration of Relics, Images, etc. Prayer and Sacrifice for the Dead, a belief of a capacity in them to be eased and benefitted by such Prayers, etc. How was it possible that such Doctrines once delivered should be forgotten, being so visibly every Day by all persons acted in the Church? And if no such Doctrines were at first consigned and deposited in the Church, how was it possible they should so chance to mee●e in the Public Devotions of so many Churches and ages, among Persons not only strangers, but for a long time enemies to one another, yea enemies to such a point, that if they had not had irrefragable testimonies of the universal Tradition of such doctrines and Practices, the conformity of their adversary Churches would have been an argument sufficient to have made them to relinquish such Practices and condemn them? Could the Heathen-Graecians ever forget their pretended Deities Bacchus or Ceres, or the benefits supposed to have been received by their means, though they had had nothing else to put them in mind of them but their Dionysiaca or Eleusinian Mysteries? Or among the Romans did not the Palilia, Suo vet●urilia, Ambarvalia, Lupercalia, etc. keep fresh in their minds the Deities, in whose honour and ingratitude for whose favour those solemnities had been instituted? How infinitely more securely and unfailably has almighty God provided for the continuance of Truth and Piety in his Church, since those Heathen-Solemnities were repeated but once a year in one City or Country, but Ours every day by numbers of people in all Countries, Cities and Villages? CHAP. IX. A further demonstration of the firmness of Tradition. Certain objections answered. 1. BUt it will objected, who knows but there may, yea who can deny but there have crept in alterations even in these Liturgies and forms of Public Devotions? For answer, It is confessed there have, for the first Liturgies, as S. James and others ascribed to Apostolic Persons were brief, simple, less ceremonious: and as the Church grew more large and splendid, so God's service became more extended, solemn and majestical. But that any substantial part of Devotion, any expressions implying or instilling new bred errors have been introduced into the public forms of God's service, that is utterly denied: And they that lay this imputation upon God's Church are obliiged to produce examples and visible proofs thereof, which it is impossible for them to do with the hundreth part of that assurance that Catholics by showing those which are now extant of the Ancient Liturgies, by alleging irrefragable testimonies of the extreme punctual curiosity of the ancient Fathers in exactly and unalterably preserving Tradition according to the Apostles direction, Formam habe, etc. Keep the form of sound words, will demonstrate the contrary. I cannot forbear on this occasion, among many other examples which may be produced to specify that extreme niceness of S. Augustine, showing not only his care to deliver Traditional truths themselves, but the terms also in which those truths were conveyed to his times, Ne me ineptum putes. Do not think me foolish (saith be to Honoratus, lib. de util. cred. cap. 3.) for using Greek terms, my chief reason is, because I have so learned these things by Tradition, neither dare I deliver them to thee any other way then as I have received them. So the same Father (dequant anima cap. 34) Divinè ac singulariter in Ecclesiâ Catholicâ traditus, etc. It is a Doctrine divinely and singularly delivered by Tradition in the Catholic Church, that no Creature is to be worshipped with an internal worship of the Soul. For I do the more willingly express myself in these terms, because the Doctrine was taught me in the same. This he says, because the word Creature did not seem so pure and proper a Latin word. From the like grounds proceeded those frequent speeches in Synods, which silenced all Haereticall innovation, Servetur quod traditum est, and, Vetus Traditio obtineat, and, Desin●t incessere novitas vetustatem, etc. Let that which is delivered by Tradition be observed. And, Let Tradition prevail. And, Let novelty forbear to oppose antiquity, etc. This care certainly was more curiously observed in the public Devotions of the Church. 2. For proof whereof, besides the confronting the Ancient Liturgies of the Eastern and Southern Churches, let Protestants, if they please, examine the Ages, against which they believe they have the justest arguments of suspicion of any other, viz. since the time of S. Gregory the Great. There are to this day extant his own missals in Print, and Breviaries in Manuscript in several Libraries, let them examine what changes such ignorant superstitious Times (as they think,) and so many wicked Popes (as they say, and not always untruly) have made in these public Devotions of the Church: They will blush certainly to have had the least suspicion in this nature of the Primitive Times, when they shall see evidently that in the Canon of the Mass there has scarce been one word altered for above these last thousand years, And in the Breviary not any that will afford them contentment answerable to their pains of comparing them. 3 Now whereas some Protestants demand (and particularly Mr. Chillingworth, in several places) where are we to seek for these Traditions of which the Roman Church talks so much? where is the Cabinet and Magazine wherein they are stored? And when will she empty it that we may see all the treasure that Christ lest unto his Church? Hereto it is answered, that M. Chillingworth said well, that, To say a secret Tradition is as absurd as to say a silent Thunder, since Traditions are obvious to all men's Eyes, and sound aloud in all men's Ears, shining in the public visible practice and profession of the Church: The Church is so far from pretending (as Protestants would fain seem to fancy) that she has certain secret conservatories of these Traditions out of which upon occasion she can draw some special ones to determine emergent Controversies, and much less that the Holy Ghost suggests unto her in time of need any formerly vanished Apostolic Revelation; that whatsoever is not expressly in Scripture, or satisfactorily apparent in the publicly received professions and practices of the Church are not perhaps determinable as points of Faith, that is, as Traditionary Divine Revelations In so much as some learned Catholics are of opinion (how justly or no I examine not) that certain Questions now ventilated in the Church, as concerning the Conception of our Blessed Lady, and some of the more subtle and scholastical Controversies between the Jesuits and Dominicans, concerning Grace and Freewill, Predetermination and Contingency, etc. have not light enough either from Scripture, Tradition, or the public Profession and Practice of the Church, so as to be capable of a precise decision, at least so far as to make such a decision to become properly an article of Faith; unless perhaps such a one, as was that of the Council of Vienna touching Grace infused into Infants in Baptism, which is set down in this form. Nos attendentes, that is, We heedfully considering the general efficacy of the death of Christ, the which by Baptism is applied equally and indifferently to all that are baptised by the approbation of this Holy Council, have judged that the second opinion is to be chosen as the more probable and more consonant and agreeeing to the sayings of the Holy Fathers and of the modern Doctors, which opinion asserteth, That informing Grace and virtues are as well conferred upon Infants in Baptism, as on persons of ripe age. See Clementin. de sum Trin. & fide Cath. And thus the Council of Basil (Sess. 36.) determined the point of the immaculate conception of our Blessed Lady, not as an article of faith in the present strict and proper sense, but, tanquam doctrinam piam & consonam fidei, that is, as a pious doctrine and consonant to faith. See more in the learned treatise of Franc. as Clara called Systema fidei, Cap. 35. 4. Indeed it cannot be denied but that in some cases it is within the power of the Church to invent de novo some word or phrase proper to signify and express a Traditionary doctrine, namely in contradiction to any Heresy arising and opposing Apostolic Revelations, shining in the public profession and practice of the Church. So to condemn the Arians denying the Divinity of our Saviour, the Fathers of the Council of Nice, made choice of the term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though new, yet answerable to the sense and notion of that mystery, which was received by Tradition in the Church, a term directly and specifically opposite to the Arian Position. In like manner the Church of late devised a new, or rather borrowed of some particular ancient Father the word (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) Transubstantiation as most proper to express the notion which in all ages has been received in the Church concerning the Real Presence of the body of Christ in Blessed Sacrament, a term which like the flaming two-edged waving sword of the Cherub cuts asunder on all sides whatsoever new Heresies do, or probably ever shall devise to oppose that Mystery. 5. Notwithstanding some certain Traditions there were which in the Primitive times were kept secret among the principal Ecclesiastical Governors, as certain sublime Doctrines, the ceremonious forms of conferring some Sacraments, of making the holy Chrismes, Oil, etc. which seems to have been done partly to gain a reverence to the Clergy, as more nearly approaching to the Divine Light, But principally not to expose such Mysteries to the scornful and profane interpretation of the Heathens, or to the weak understandings of the ignorant, and not yet sufficiently instructed Christians, according to the practice of S. Paul himself, (1 Cor c. 2.) who saith, Sapientiam loquimur inter perfectos, We spèake (sublime) wisdom among those that are perfect: Hence those earnest adjurations in the writings of some very ancient Bishops, whereby they conjured others of their own rank, when they communicated to them certain sublime mysteries to preserve in a deep secrecy what they so received; a memorable instance we have of this caution in the Books of S. Denis Areopagite (Hier. Eccl. c 1.) Hence those disguise of other Mysteries in Books which were to pass publicly abroad: Hence those sudden interruptions when they were ready to discover unawares somewhat above the capacity of their hearers, Pagans, or Catechumen, Frequent examples I could allege out of S. Epiphanius, S. chrysostom, S. Augustine. end others: But Cui● bono in this placed Since Paganism has been utterly abolished, and means of instruction more common and promiscuous, especially since the invention of Printing (whether happy, or not it is doubtful) this cautelous reservedness has been out of use, perhaps with no little prejudice to the Church: in so much as nothing is reserved now in the breasts of the Church-governors, even the anciently most secret Ceremonies are divuled to all men's knowledge: So that now Tradition is far more loud and visible, then ever it was before, and no ground for Protestants to pretend to any suspicion that under a show of Tradition the Church has a mind to exercise either Tyranny or cunning to gain authority to her determinations. 6. Now from this general Traditionary way of conveying Christian Doctrines, etc. it came to pass that many Fathers being assured of the truth and authenticness of such Traditions, and willing to assert them out of Scripture also, have interpreted many Texts, as containing such Doctrines, which either did not at all afford such a sense, or at least not necessarily, though perhaps the outward sound of the words might put a man in mind of such Doctrines: Examples of this are not a few, particularly in the points of Purgatory, Prayer to Saints, etc. So that whereas Protestants cry Victory when they can prove. or at least make probable that such Fathers have been mistaken in such interpretations, as if the doctrines thence deduced were confuted, in my opinion it is without any ground, since on the contrary the less force that such Texts of Scripture have to evince such doctrines, the greater and stronger proof have such Traditions, seeing the Fathers, prepossessed with a belief of them from the public practice of the Church, accounted them so apparent, that they thought they saw them even where they were not at all. And therefore, when the Church commands us not to oppose the interpretations which the greatest part of Fathers unanimously make of Scripture, I conceive she does not a ways oblige Catholics thereby to give the same sense to Texts which the greatest part of Fathers do, but rather, not so to interpret any Text as to contradict the Traditionary doctrines believed generally by the Fathers upon this safe ground of Tradition, though perhaps not Logically enough deduced from such special passages of Scripture: so that though perhaps their commentaries there may be questioned, the doctrine in the commentaries ought to be embraced. CHAP. X. The second preparatory ground: viz. Occasion of writing the Gospels, etc. 1. IT may now be demanded, if this way of conveying Christian doctrines be so much clearer and safer than writing books, or any other way of transmitting records, to what purpose were the Evangelicall books written? and why were the necessary points of faith reduced into such a prescribed form in the Apostles Creed? 2. To say something for answer, and first concerning the Creed. The end why that was compiled seems to have been to bring into a short and clear abridgement the principal points of Christian Religion to be repeated at any one's initiation into Christianity by Baptism, being as it were an enlargement of that form of Baptising prescribed by our Saviour, viz. Baptizo te in nomine Patris & Filii & Spiritus sancti (Now in what sense● and in respect of what Persons in what State or Order the Creed may be said to contain all points of faith necessary to Salvation shall be showed hereafter.) As to our present purpose we may observe. 1. That the Creed seems to be of a middle nature between written books and Oral Tradition: as a prescribed form of words, so it approaches to the former: but as committed by all to memory and actually repeated at Baptism and other public Devotions, so it partakes much of the latter. 2. What extreme advantage Tradition has for its preservation beyond any writing, seeing the Creed after it was enlarged by partaking thereof has preserved itself from any variety or corruption all the Church over to this day It is true indeed that insome Churches, viz in Af●ica in the first beginning of Christianity there was a small difference, their Creed wanting these words, Communion of Saints, the sense whereof notwithstanding may probably be supposed to have been included in the Article concerning the holy Catholic Church, as may be observed in the Creeds extant in the African Fathers, Tertullian, S. Cyprian, S. Optatus and S. Augustin: Which difference it is not imaginable should have come by neglect or forgetfulness: it is rather probable that that Apostolic Person who taught Christianity first in those quarters, brought the Creed with that small defect; for the very first Creed of all seems to have been much shorter than that now current, as containing only a profession of Faith in the three Persons in the Blessed Trinity in whose names only Baptism was administred● to which the Apostles or Apostolic persons might afterward adjoin the other Articles following: which addition being made successively, it is possible some persons might carry away in their voyages into Africa the breifer C●ee●s before they were so enlarged. 3 In the next place, concerning the Occasion and end for which the books of the New Testament were written, we ought to consider the books of History apart from the others of Doctrine and Prophecy, as being distinguishable both in their occasion and end, For the Gospels therefore, the whole subject of them is a narration of several passages of our Saviour's Life, Death, Resurrection and Ascension; likewise some of the most considerable miracles which he wrought; a sum of the principal points of his Doctrine, both moral, and mysterious in parables concerning his Church, etc. Now though the memory of all these (excepting perhaps only the several miracles, prophecies, etc.) as much as was suficient for particular persons, might and actually was in substance preserved by practical Tradition (as 1. the Mysterious and to us most useful passages of his Life, etc. in the public solemnities appointed from all antiquity, in the solemn Fasts & administration of Sacraments. 2. Moral duties in the public Confessions, and most ancient Penitential Canons, Lovefeasts, etc. Yea some of them receiving force almost only from Tradition, as not being at all in Scripture, at least not so expressly as Mr. Chillingworth requires to points of necessity, as unlawfulness of Polygamy, incestuous marriages in some particular degrees, etc.) Notwithstanding it could not but be infinitely acceptable and satisfactory to all good Christians to be informed as particularly as might be in any thing that concerned so Blessed a Master and Saviour, and therefore were these divine books received with all imaginable reverence and joy, and preserved with all possible care, so far as thousands willingly exposed themselves to Martyrdom rather than deliver them up to the fire; they were read in Churches, discoursed on in Sermons, illustrated by Commentaries, in a word esteemed divine and infallible by all Christians. But yet no general Tradition has come to us that all that is necessary for all persons of all degrees, whether single or in Society to bring them to heaven is contained expressly in these Gospels: Which is a certain proof that the ancient Church did not think so, or however that they did not think it necessary to think so, for no one thing generally thought necessary to salvation, but has been conveyed under that notion by Tradition oral, as well as writing, Besides, it is clear there is nothing express for assembling Synods, ordaining several degrees of Ministers, no forms or directions for public service, no unquestionable prohibition of Polygamy, incest, etc. So that although no doubt to some persons in some sudden desperate circumstances there is in the Gospels to be found enough, yea more than enough of mere necessity, yea in any one of them, yea in two or three verses of any one of them: Yet therefore to deduce a general conclusion that all things simply necessary are contained in the Gospels, is surely very unreasonable: and much more, thence to infer a general Conclusion, so as to make it the fundamental ground of all Sects of Religion, and a sufficient excuse for that, which (if that Conclusion be not o●ely not true, but not so evident as that there can be no show of contradiction, is a most horrible sin, namely Schism or Heresy) this to me seemed to be somewhat that deserved a name beyond unreasonableness itself; and that joined with infinite danger in a point of the highest consequence imaginable. 4. Now the same inconveniences will follow though the books of the Acts, Epistles and Apocalyse were added to the Gospels to make them altogether to be an entire perspicuous Rule of Faith without any need of an authoritative interpreter. For first, for the Apocalyse, it is a mere obscure Prophecy, and can contribute little or nothing to the instruction or discipline of the Church. Then the book of the Acts though it relate some particulars of our Saviour after his Ascension, as his Sending the Holy Ghost, etc. together with a very few passages concerning any of the Apostles, excepting some few years of Saint Paul's travels: yet it will prove but a very imperfect model for settling of the Church in such a posture and with such qualifications both for doctrine and practice as unquestionable antiquity represents unto us the Primitive Apostolic Church. And la●●ly for the Epistles of S. Paul, etc. it is confessed by all, and the Text itself justifies it, that those Epistles were never intended to be written as institutions or Catechisms containing an abridgement of the whole body of Christian Faith for the whole Church: For, 1. They were written only to some particular congregations, yea many of them to single persons, and no order is given to communicate them to the whole Church, I am sure no necessity appears that they should be so divulged. 2. They were written merely occasionally, namely by reason that some particular False teachers sowed certain false doctrines in some particular Churches founded by the Apostles, in the confutation of which Heresies all the doctrinal parts of those Epistles are generally employed; So that if those Heretics had not chanced to have broached those particular opinions, those Epistles had never been written. 3. These Epistles especially of Saint Paul the most and the largest, are written in a stile so obscure, such intricacy of arguing, with such digessions interwoven, the Logical Analysis is so extremely difficult, that that gift of interpreting was in those days a necessary attendant of the Apostles preaching, and I am confident that if an hundred men, and those generally of the same Sect and opinions, were oppointed to resolve the order and method of S. Paul's arguing, there would not three of them agree for three verses together. Now upon these grounds, how improper such writings are to serve for the only Rule of Faith (which even in Mr. Chillingworth's opinion must be so clear and evident in points necessary, that there can be no rational possibility of diversity of opinions, and by cosequence no need of an authoritative interpreter) let him that can believe it; and let him that dare, put it to the trial, when his souls eternal estate depends upon it. CHAP. XI. The third preparatory ground, viz. the clearing of the ambiguity of these words, necessary to salvation. 1. THese words (necessary to salvation) being applied to several objects and subjects admit of great variety in the application and use: therefore before they be affirmed or denied of any thing, Vid. Card. Perron. Ep. ad Casaub. or to any person, he that intends to express his mind distinctly and to the purpose must necessarily and expressly before hand declare in what sense, to what degree, in respect of whom, and for what end such things are, or are not necessary. 2. Therefore first for sorts of necessity, There is necessitas medii, when a thing is of itself necessry to salvation: and necessitas praec●pti, when it is only therefore necessary because it is commanded. Again necessitas fidei specialis, that is, of things to be believed expressly and distinctly, as the Articles of the Creed: and necessitas fidei generalis, of things which some persons are only to believe. Again, necessitas actus, that is of things to be performed by all, as Confession of Christ's name, pardoning of offences, restitution, etc. and necessitas approbationis or non contradictionis, when men are at least obliged not to condemn certain things, as vow of Virginity, Voluntary poverty, etc. 3. Then with respect unto objects or things necessary to salvation, some are so absolutely, that is, so as no circumstance of person, time or place, no ignorance, no defect how irremediable soever can excuse the absence of such things: other things on the contrary are necessary only conditionally, which in some cases, to some persons may be excusable. Of the former sort, there are but extremely few things necessary. For, for example, if a Heathen at the point of death upon an effectual exhortation of a Christian should embrace in general the Religion of Christ, not being able to attend particular instruction, nor perhaps actual Baptism, it is very probable that the only believing of Christ to be the Saviour of the world, and relying upon him for the pardon of his sins, and profession of his resolution to obey whatsoever should appear to him to have been Cbrists' will though death should cut him off from a particular information in other doctrines of Faith, the Sacraments, particular duties of Christian morality, etc. would be sufficient to such a man to salvation. Of the later sort, viz things necessary conditionally, it is impossible to tell how many or how few they are, till all conditions and circumstances be expressed. 4. In regard of persons, that is, necessary to one which is not to another, as more to a teacher than a Disciple; to a Governor, then to a person subordinate. Again, that is necessary to a Congregation, which is not to a single person, to the settling of a Church in good order, which is not to every Congregation: to the well-being of a Church, which is not to its simple being: some persons are obliged to know many things explicitly, which others are only not to dis believe, it being sufficient if they oppose them not, not necessary that they know them. 5. Having considered such an ambiguity and variety of things necessary (to which many other distinctions might yet be added) I presently judged that whatsoever was the reason that Mr. Chillingworth thought it not necessary to make a distinct application of these several kinds of necessity according to the exigence of the objects and persons; whether it was neglect or want of memory, or whether intending only to repel his adversaries present objections, he thought fit to say no more than he was for that purpose necessarily obliged: What ever was the cause, I am sure that for want of such a distinct application, whatsoever he has said to confirm his main position is little to the satisfaction of any third person, as, I think, shall presently be demonstrated. CHAP. XII. After what manner I judged it necessary for my purpose to examine Mr. Chillingworth's reasonings and arguments. 1. TH●se preparatory grounds being thus premised, way was made for the nearer approach to the examination of Mr. Chillingworth's reasons and proofs before alleged, for the maintaining of the main foundation of all Schism, viz. That the Scripture, yea any one Gospel, contains in it expressly all things necessary to salvation, either for belief or practice. In the examination whereof (as likewise of other Protestants grounds which follow, and are set down and prosecuted more clearly, more subtly, and I am sure more to the satisfaction of English Protestants, by Mr. Chillingworth, then by any other) I must profess that my intention is not to consider Mr. Chillingworth's discourses as precisely opposed to his adversaries, for I have neither the vanity to believe that so learned and practised a Catholique-controvertist should be willing to accept of any one, and much less of such an ignorant Neophyte as myself to defend his excellent book; neither have I the impudence without leave from him to undertake such a task: But since upon mine own knowledge Mr. Chillingworth believed that his book, as concerning the Positive grounds, contained as much as any Protestant could reasonably say; so for the destructive part, that it was an unanswerable conviction not only of what his adversary in particular had said, but of what any Catholic could allege concerning either the Rule of Faith, or Judge of Conteoversies: Seeing likewise I found it not only very reasonable in itself, but absolutely necessary for me, considering the condition in which I then was, for finding repose unto my mind to inform myself, not what some particular learned Catholics taught to be their sense of the Church's belief in these points (for that would have been a labour insupportable to me, who was much pressed with a desire to be no longer alone without any Church to join withal) but to inquire what the Roman Church herself believed, and in what language, and with what latitude She herself expressed her thoughts and belief: Upon these grounds I conceived it requisite to exact and apply M. Chillingworth's positions and arguments to the simple doctrines and decisions of the Catholique-Church; Resolving that if I found that what She said, and in the latitude that She expresseth herself, was just and reasonable, and withal able to stand firm notwithstanding any of Mr. Chillingworth's oppositions, to rest contented therewith; For, for the present it would be happiness enough for me to get only within the precincts of a Church, though no farther than the doorkeepers place, I might afterwards, if need were, at leisure make choice there of what rank or company I would range myself unto. 2. Coming therefore to the consideration of M. Chillingworth's conclusion, together with the reasons and proofs of it which he believed of force sufficient to destroy the doctrine necessarily to be believed by all Roman-Catholiques, I must needs say that this his Conclusion, (The Scripture contains all necessary points of belief and practice, and the Creed all necessary points of belief) is so expressed, that in several respects it may and aught to be assented to by any Catholic: For (as I showed before) if the word necessary in respect of the object, relate to necssity absolute, and in respect of the subject, to any person though considered in a desperate estate for want of means or space to inform himself further, than not only the Scripture, or the Creed, or one Gospel, but perhaps this one verse in a Gospel. This is eternal life to know thee the only true God, & jesus Christ whom thou hast sent, may be instruction sufficient to salvation: and so arising proportionably to other circumstances, in respect of other single persons more truths and instructions are necessary, and more yet to persons enjoying sufficient means to information, to Clergymen, to Congregations, to well-ordered Churches. Besides, if the same Conclusion be considered in another sense (without altering the expression) a sense obvious enough & not improper, in which among other ancient Fathers S. Aug. explains it as he was before quoted cap. 38. viz. that the Scripture here (as likewise the Creed) is to be taken as joined with the Church's authority, to which, saith he, we are expressly referred in Scripture, than it not only contains whatsoever is necessary to salvation in some qualifyed degree of necessity, and to some certain persons considered in some certain circumstances, but likewise in the most exalted importance of the word necessary, and to all persons considered either as single, or in actual Communion etc. Lastly if the same Conclusion be so understood that the words of Scripture may be (I do not say, supplied, but even) interpreted by the Tradition of the ancient Church and authority of the present, so many Catholics will subscribe to it. 3. This conclusion therefore being so variously applicable, and by consequence capable of being orthodox or erroneous according to several applications: in the next place I was to reflect upon my present condition, to try whether it befitted me or no. Now for the present I was in quest of a Church, that Church wherein I had been bred ere this time being almost ready to expire: I lived in an age wherein there was no want of means of learning and instruction, even to excess, for the overmuch light made many men too too wanton and curious: I had been bred after such a manner that I was capable in some reasonable degree not only of information, but likewise of an ability to judge what instructor could approve himself to be the fittest to be followed and believed, and for that purpose I endeavoured all I could to free my mimd from all prejudices and partiality: in these circumstances, two parties invited me to their communion. (and a Communion some where or other I knew was necessary:) The one said, You may without inevitable danger perhaps take your choice of ei●her, but certainly your best and safest way is to come to us, for we will propose to your belief nothing but the acknowledged written word of God, and that we have for this hundred years believed to contain all things necessary not only for your salvation, but any man's else: You shall have the satisfaction to be freed from all visible authority interpreting that Word, The Spirit will teach you to interpret it as truly as we do, for otherwise we shall not suffer you in our Communion. The other party on the contrary protested aloud, that if I joined not with them I was utterly lost; that they would propose to me nothing but Divine Revelation contained not only in books written, but Traditions unwritten; both conveyed by the same hand and with the same authority, and therefore if either, both to be received; that the former inviters were a new faction for worldly interests divided from the whole world, and apparently from a Church, which had continued ever since Christ's time in an uninterrupted succession of instructers and Doctrine, of Teachers appointed for Guides not only by testimony of all ages, but likewise of the same Scriptures upon which their adversaries pretended to ground their Schisms that these Guides had continually preserved the Church in a perfect unity of belief; whereas the other party within one age that they have appeared, have been torn into near an hundred Sects, All of them with equally-no● Justice pretending to the same Rule, and with the same Rule fight with one another without the least effect of union, not one controversy among them having been to this day cleared. 4. In these circumstances coming to the examination of this fundamental ground of Protestantisme That the Scriptures contain all points of belief and practise necessary to salvation, I found it necessary, without any change made in the words, to apply the terms necessary to salvation not to one or more persons ignorant, destitute of means of knowledge, and in some particular unavoidable exigence, but to myself considered in the conditions before mentioned, yea further, to all Christians in general, and to the exigence of Churches well ordered and settled, as on all sides they pretended to be: And having done thus, I found that no Antiquity ever delivered this Conclusion in so large a sense; yea on the contrary that generally all Antiquity protested against it: I found that no reason could require that writings evidently intended for sepciall uses, and confuting three or four Heresies should be made use of, or however should be accounted sufficiently and expressly convictive against Opinions not named in them, and not them thought upon by the Authors, as if they had been entire Systemes of Christianity: In a word, I found that after I had applied this conclusion to the present use and Hypothesis, the arguments and reasons produced by Mr. Chillingworth, etc. d●d not evince or conclude that which would give me, in the case I was, any satisfaction at all: especially considering that if the Protestants had gained the better in this particular concerning a Rule, yet I should be far from being at rest in their Churches, unless they could further demonstrate, that the Scripture contained all these things so expressly and clearly to all eyes, naming those particular necessary doctrines in contradistinction to others unnecessary, or but profitable, or perhaps requisite only and applying them to the persons respectively to whom they are necessary, and all this after such a manner that no honest reasonable man could remain in doubt, or be in danger of quarrelling with others (a thing which mine own eyes confu●ed, since I apparently saw earnest contentions and separations about points not only by myself, but by the whole Christian world for above thirteen hundred years together esteemed necessary, And since by my small reading, I had found that there was not one Article of the Creed which had not been questioned and contradicted) Or unless they could demonstrate that there was no particular point at all necessary; Or lastly that there was some visible authority to decide unappealeably what was to be acknowledged for the true sense of Scripture, and in it, what was only true, what useful, what requisite, and what necessary: But these were conditions such as that the Protestants had not confidence enough to promise the former, and they were too proud and confident of themselves to allow the latter. CHAP. XIII. An answer to Mr. Chillingworth's discourse and reasonings premised before his proofs out of Scripture. 1. BUt to come at last to Mr. Chillingworth's reasons and quotations out of Scripture to prove that all things necessary to salvation are not only sufficiently contained in the books of Scripture in general, but even in any one of the Gospels, mentioned before cap. 26. And first for the examination of that which he lays as a ground of his enforcing the said quotations, viz. That no man ought to be obliged upon pain of Excommunication to believe any thing, but what God hath revealed to be necessary to eternal salvation, which is the substance of the New Covenant made by God in Christ, containing points of necessary belief, and precepts of necessary Evangelicall obedience. His reasons being, Why should any error or ignorance exclude him from the Church's Communion, which will not deprive him of eternal salvatio? Why should men be more rigid than God? etc. 2. In stead of answering to this, I acknowledge the foundation to be very substantial, and the Reasons very concluding. Only I must take leave to explain one phrase in this discourse, viz. Things which are of the substance of the New Covenant. For if his meaning be, that only those things are necessary to be believed explicitly which are essential substantial parts of the New Covenant, and that directly and of their own nature, I must then deny it: and so does himself elsewhere, although in this place that which follows in consequence to this foundation does seem to require such a sense of the words. And to prove the reasonableness of my denial (he being now unfortunately dead) I desire any Protestant to resolve these questions, To believe that our Lord was descended according to the flesh from Abraham or David, is it of the substance of the New Covenant directly and of its own Nature? We shall both of us answer, No. Nor by consequence is it necessary to salvation to know or believe it. I ask then further: But suppose a man find, that proposition expressly in Scriptures sufficiently proposed to him and acknowledged to be the word of God, is it not then necessary to salvation to believe it? I will answer again as both of us should do, Yes, without any question: the reason being evident, because though to believe Christ to be the Son of Abraham be not in itself of the essence of the Covenant, yet to believe that whatsoever God says is true, is: and by consequence an accessary may by some circumstances be made essential, and, a man may come to be damned for not believing that, which without any the least prejudice to him he might never have known or heard of. So likewise, for any one who believes, that the Church is the depositary of divine Revelation, and that she is endued with authority from Christ to command things though in themselves not necessary, yet such as she thinks helpful to piety; for such a man I say to refuse to believe the unlawfulness of Rebaptization (for example) acknowledged by the whole Church both in her universal practice and profession, that it was a Tradition unwritten which came from the Apostles, and confirmed by the authority of a lawful Council: or again to refuse to abstain and fast in Lent, Fridays, Quatuor-Temporibus, etc. the Church commanding him: both these refusals (though the former be of a doctrine of itself not of the essence of the New Covenant, and the later, of an action little more than circumstantial) are mortal sins, and the Church may justly excommunicate, and by consequence God will assureedly condemn such as persist obstinately in such refusals; And this for a reason more effectual than the former, because namely obedience to the Church is not only commanded expressly in Scripture (as in the former case) but commanded under this very penalty of Excommunication (which the former was not) for saith our Lord, If any one hear not the Church, let him be to thee as a Heathen and a Publican. 3. But to proceed, Mr. Chillingworth to prove that this New Covenant is entirely contained not only in the whole Scripture, but also in the four Gospels, yea sufficiently even in any one of the four, he first alleges these reasons, Because, saith he, the Evangelist's having a purpose to write the Gospel of Christ or new Covenant, no reason can be imagined that they, who have set down many passages unnecessary, should neglect any necessary: for what a negligence must this needs be? such an one surely as no man in these days undertaking the same design would commit. Besides, with what truth could they style their books the Gospel of Christ, if they were only a part of it? 4. Hereto I answer, that if by the Gospel of Christ he had meant the story of the life, acts, discourses, sufferings, death, Resurrection and Ascension of our Saviour (as I mentioned in my preparatory grounds) I should willingly grant that the four Evangelists jointly have written the Gospel of Christ entirely, not omitting any passage thereof necessary, or very requisite to be known: I say the four Evangelists jointly, for of each severally I cannot say so: For, for example, S. Mark (either because S. Matthew had done it sufficiently before, or for what other reason I will not trouble myself to divine, but) S. Mark omitting the Incarnation of our Lord of a pure Virgin, his birth, and all things that followed till he was thirty years old, begins his Gospel with S. john Baptists mission to preach: now I suppose these Mysteries omitted by S. Mark are at least in a high degree requisite to be known and believed generally; yea I will add, necessary; since they are expressed in the Apostles Creed, as short as it is: yet not necessary absolutely and indispensably to every person in what state soever, but only to those that live in the Church, much more to persons of ability and parts, yet more to Teachers, and most of all to Congregations and Churches: and if so, then that which Master Chillingworth would conclude from hence, cannot be satisfactory in this controversy, among such persons, and Sects, and at this time, as I showed before. So likewise the Evangelist, S. John, besides almost all the miracles, Sermons and parables mentioned by other Evangelists, omitt's the Blessed Sacrament, and the Story of our Saviour's Ascension. Now I desire any Protestant to say whether (what ever would become of some particular person ignorant of these things by an excuse of an impossibility of instruction) a man living, as now, in sufficient light, and much more one obliged to be a teacher of others could be saved with ignorance of these things omitted by S. John? I further desire him to say whether a society of men desiring to be joined and ordered so as to be made a Christian Church, if they had only S. John's Gospel for their Rule and pattern, yea though they had all the four Evangelists, yea all the Evangelicall writings, whether they could settle themselves according to the frame of the Apostolical Churches, with the same orders, Liturgies, customs, etc. as apparently were in the Ancient times universally, while some writers lived, who might have seen the Apostles themselves? If not, as it is most evident that not: I ask, whether those Churches were so settled by the free liberty and fancy of the Apostles, so as it had been no great matter though they had ordered them any other way? or whether by the express command of Christ, either immediately, or by the intervention of his Holy Spirit? By the latter way, no doubt: and by consequence some thing necessary for the frame of the Church, because commanded by Christ, is not contained in the Evangelists, neither severally nor together, no nor in union with all the other Evangelicall writings. 5. Again, our Saviour in his life-naturall among them told his Disciples that he had many things to tell them, but he would not tell them then, because as yet they were not able to bear them: But when the Paraclete, the Spirit of truth came, they should then be fully instructed. Now will any man say that all these many things were unnecessary? no certainly, on the contrary they were of such extraordinary great moment, that the Apostles themselves could not then bear them. Or were these so weighty things written in the Gospels, where our Saviour says he would not discover them? If not there: can it appear that S. Luke had a design to set them all down in the book of the Acts, where his principal design was to write some passages especially of S. Paul's Travels only, and that during the time that himself was a witness? Lastly, (for as for the Revelation that being nothing but obscure Allegory or Prophecy, needs not therefore to be enquired of about this matter) is it likely that a few Haeretiques broaching certain errors, which caused the writing of almost all the Epistles, should light so fortunately for us as to give the Apostles occasion in confuting them to publish all those many things which our Saviour would not tell them in his life time? Credat judaeus. CHAP. XIV. Answer to the Texts produced by Mr. Chillingworth out of the Gospels of S. John and S. Luke. 1. AS for those passages produced by Mr. Chillingworth out of the Gospels, and, as he thought, fully to his purpose, and first to that taken out of the conclusion of S. john's Gospel, where it is said, these things were written that ye might believe in the Son of God, and that believing ye might have life. Besides the former demonstrations that S. john writ only of our Saviour's life and death, and even therein omitted many things of extreme moment, which are mentioned by the other Evangelists, and all things revealed after Christ's Ascension by the Comforter, which were far from being unnecessary: And besides the so necessary distinction of things necessary in respect of the object and subject so oft applied before; I answer particularly to the phrase of this quotation that it does not prove that these things alone are sufficient for such an effect, but only that these are some of the principal ones necessary: For it is ordinary in Scripture to ascribe the effect of a concatenation of causes to some more especial ones alone, either thereby to show the extraordinary virtue and necessity of them above the rest, or to imply that such virtues cannot be, at least in perfection, alone, but are always accompanied with the rest. So our Saviour (Mat. cap 5.) promises Beatitude to each single Christian virtue, which indeed is the effect of them all meeting together. And so that speech of S. Paul (Rom. 10.) is to be understood, If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thy heart that God raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. And again, Whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved. Indeed nothing is more ordinary in Scripture then such Phrases, I will therefore abstain from an unnecessary multiplication of such passages, concluding this with two like expressions of the same Evangelist, the first in the same Gospel, This is eternal life that they may know thee the only true God, and jesus Christ whom thou hast sent. The other out of his first Epistle, which may with as good reason prove itself alone, even without the Gospel, to be sufficient instruction to salvation. These things we write unto you that your joy may be full. 2. To the double quotation of S. Luke in the Prefaces to his Gospel, and the History of the Acts of the Apostles, both in effect saying the same thing, namely that in his Gospel he he had written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of all things that Jesus did or taught, it is already answered. And besides that this speech is hyperbolical appears not only from S. john's Gospel, which relating both the facts and speeches of our Saviour, speaks notwithstanding, but very briefly and of a very few things mentioned by S. Luke or any other Evangelist: but likewise from another passage of the same, S. Luke immediately following the quotation out of the Acts, where he says that during the forty days that our Saviour remained on earth from his Resurrection to his Ascension he appeared to them and instructed them in the things concerning the Kingdom of God, very few of which instructions are mentioned by S. Luke. CHAP. XV. An answer to twelve Questions of Mr. Chillingworth, in pursuance of the former Quotations. 1. AS concerning the twelve Questions which I said before (cap. 26.) that Mr. Chillingworth adjoined to these Quotations to the end to press the force of them more efficaciously as thinking them unanswerable, which notwithstanding I found nothing at all difficult, I will according to my promise set them down in order, and adjoin to each an answer. 2. To the 1. Question therefore, viz. Whether S. Luke did not undertake the very same thing which he says many had taken in hand? I answer, Yes. To the 2. Whether this were not to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among Christians? I answer likewise, Yes. But then I must add, not all those things but the principal; and the principal only among those which concerned our Saviour in Person while he lived on earth till his Ascension, as all the Evangelists expressly say: for a further proof whereof I add this, It will not surely be denied but that among the Mysteries of Christianity that of Pentecost holds a principal place, at which time was the Sealing, as it were, of the Apostles Commission by the Holy Ghost visibly descending and enabling them to perform that for which our Saviour was borne, preached, prayed, wrought miracles, died, rose again and was glorified, that is, the promulgation and propagation of the Evangelicall law (as the Jewish Pentecost was appointed to commemorate the Promulgation of the Mosaical law:) Surely then this Mystery is a principal one, and necessary to be believed and commemorated, at least by most Christians capable of instruction, however by a well ordered Christian Church. Yet merely because this Mystery of the descent of the Holy Ghost happened ten days beyond the time that all the Evangelists fixed to their Gospels not any of them relates it: far was it from them to agree in the omitting of it upon this opinion that it was not necessary. To the 3. Question, viz. Whether the whole Gospel of Christ, and every necessary doctrine of it were not surely believed among Christians? I answer, Yes. Yea more, that not only the Gospel, that is, the Historical narration of Christ's life, Sermons, etc. but whatsoever the Holy Ghost afterward taught & ordered in the Church, was the object of Christian faith, as pertaining to the Gospel, that is, the New Covenant. To the 4. Whether they which were eye-witnesses and Ministers of the word from the beginning delivered not the whole Gospel of Christ? I Answer, Yes, in this sense, that all this Gospel, as far as concerns our Saviour's personal actions and passions during his abode among men hath been delivered sufficiently in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the four Evangelists all together; but in particular, S. Mark omi●s the Incarnation, birth, etc. of Christ S. john, the Lords Prayer, the Blessed Sacrament, etc. very substantial things in Christian Religion surely. To the 5. Whether S. Luke doth not undertake to write in order those things whereof he had perfect understanding from the first? I answer still, Yes. To the 6. Whether he had not perfect understanding of the whole Gospel of Christ? I answer, Yes: yea more, that if by the Gospel of Christ we mean, as he does, the story of Christ, he could have added many more particulars, not unconsiderable, if he had pleased, and if he had not thought that that which he did write was sufficient for his purpose, and many more particulars, yet he could have written of the Gospel of Christ, if by that be meant Christian Religion in general. To the 7. Whether he doth not undertake to write to Th●ophilus of all those things wherein he had been instructed? I answer, Yes, keeping within the limits of his design. To the 8. And whether he had not been instructed in all the necessary points of the Gospel of Christ? I answer, Yes, viz. understood as before. To the 9 Whether in the other Text (of Act. c. 1.) those words, all things which Jesus began to do and teach, must not at least imply all the principal and necessary things? I answer, Yes, keeping to his subject. To the 10. Whether this be not the very interpretation of your Rhemish Doctors in their annotations upon this place? I answer, I know not. To the 11. Whether all these Articles of the Christian Faith, without the belief whereof no man can be saved be not the principal and most necessary things which Jesus taught? I must answer by parcels. 1. I cannot assent to that, that no man can be saved without the belief of all these Articles, viz. contained in the Creed, of which he treats in this Chapter: for I doubt not but some particular man in some cases and extremities may be saved without having received information of our Saviour's being borne of a Virgin, of his being three days in the Grave, his Descent into Hell, etc. 2. I am assured that now Christians (having means of more sufficient illumination) are bound to believe more than the simple bare twelve Arti les of the Creed; for the four first General Counsels do much enlarge the signification of them, and besides propose other points, at least indirectly objects of our belief. 3. To the following words I answer that though those points were the principal and most necessary things, which Jesus taught, yet this makes nothing against Catholic doctrine. 1. Because many men are necessarily bound to know more than what is in itself simply necessary: and, 2. Our Saviour himself says expressly that besides those points which himself taught them, there were others more sublime and surely necessary to some, which till the Comforter came, and enabled them further, they were not able to bear. To the 12. and last Question, viz. Whether many things which S. Luke hath written in the Gospel be not less principal, and less necessary than all and every one of them? I answer, Yes, and good reason for it; since his intent being to write a History and not a Catechism, it was fit for him to relate (gross modo) all things that Jesus said or did, whether necessary, or not: for as every circumstance and action of Christ (though worth the knowing) was not a mystery necessary to be related; so neither were all his words articles of Faith necessary both to be known and believed. 3. Whereas for a Corollary and Appendix to these Demands, Mr. Chillingworth adds this Prosopopaea, to his adversary, When you have well considered these proposals, I believe you will be very apt to think (if S. Luke be of any credit with you) that all things necessary to salvation are certainly contained in his writings alone: If his learned adversary would give me leave, I would answer; That truly I have according to the capacity of my weak understanding well considered these proposals, and S. Luke is of very great credit with me, and yet I do not find in myself any aptitude at all to believe that all things necessary to salvation, (that is, with respect to all men and all Churches as the present controversy requires) are certainly contained in his writings alone; and this for several reasons before alleged: to which I will add this one more for a close of this whole conclusion, viz. Because I judging Mr. Chillingworth's opinion to be very reasonable, that upon this hypothesis (that all things necessary are contained in Scripture) it must follow that they are contained there most clearly, expressly and so as no reasonable honest man can doubt of the sense of them; I am notwithstanding most assured that no man can find in S. Luke's writings express words sufficient to confute all Haeretiques that ever taught any thing destructive to salvation. It may be indeed so excellent a wit as Mr. Chillingworth's by the advantage of Logic and diligent reading of Fathers, etc. may out of S. Luke's Gospel draw conclusion after conclusion, and so at last infer propositions contrary to Socinian doctrine, for example: yet he should deny his own principles, if he should call that doctrine a Heresy, or so much as an error of the least danger, which contradicts perhaps the fifth or sixth consequence drawn from an Article of Faith itself. Let any man therefore for trial take S. Luke, or all the four; Gospels, yea the whole Bible, and I am persuaded he will find it a more than Herculean labour out of all to frame such a Creed as the Nicene or Athanasian, and much more, all the points concluded in the four first General Counsels, which truly I believe necessary to be believed, and I do not begin to believe so now, I was taught so when I lived in England. CHAP. XVI. The second Conclusion out of the Fathers, concerning a judge of Controversies. The Authors confession of his willingness that his opinion against the Church's infallibility might appear to have been groundless. II. Conclusion. The second Conclusion out of the Fathers, etc. was this, viz. That it belongs alone to the Catholic Church, which is the only depositary of Divine Revelations, authoritatively and with obligation to propose those revelations, to all Christians, etc. to interpret the Holy Scriptures, and to determine all emergent Controversies; and this to the end of the world, in as much as the Church by virtue of Christ's promises and assistance is not only indefectible, but continually preserved in all truth. 1. IN this conclusion there are several parts, as 1. That the Catholic Church is the depositary of all Divine Revelations written and unwritten. 2. By consequence that it belongs to her to propound them to all persons. 3. That she has authority and that such as requires submission from all, not only to propound, but also to expound these Revelations, and finally to determine all emergent controversies. And 4. That this authority is sufficiently grounded upon the great promises of our Saviour made unto his Church. Now of these several Propositions, the two former not being questioned by me when I was in England, I conceived it not suitable to my design (which was a narration especially of mine own doubts and resolution with as much brevity as possibly I could) to fill paper with quotations of Fathers or other proofs to resolve that of which I was resolved before. My only scruple was concerning the third and fourth Propositions, Or, to speak properly, it was not a scruple, for I was on the contrary fully resolved, and, to my thinking, satisfied that there was not upon earth any visible authority that could so interpret. Scriptures or determine Controversies, is that all men should be obliged necessarily to embrace her interpretations and determinations: And therefore my purpose is to insist principally upon his Architectonirall controversy, not neglecting in the mean time to examine likewise the other propositions, but briefly and quasi aliud agens. 2. It may be believed, and, since this treatise is intended by me for an Exomologesis or public Confession, I will not forbear to confess it, that when the progress of my enquiry after a Church led me at last to take into debate even those grounds, of which before I had not the least scruple at all, namely, Whether, as the Roman Church professed, there were extant in the world visible any such authority, I could not free myself from so much partiality against my own understanding, as to wish that it could be made appear unto me, that there were to be found any tribunal whose decisions I might believe myself obliged to follow without any scruple or tergiversation: For than I should not only in a moment be free from all scruples and doubts in particular points proposed by that authority, in which they would all be swallowed up; but likewise from a world of inconveniencies inevitably attending upon my position, viz. That in doubts of Religion we had only a Rule of itself indeed infallible, but challenged by all Sects, and no Judge to apply that Rule when necessity required, every man being left to his own reason, at his own peril to take heed that he wrested not that Rule according to his own interests or prejudices. CHAP. XVII. The Calvinists, etc. presumptuous renouncing of the Church's authority even in proposing of Scripture: And pretending to an immediate Revelation. 1. BUt before I proceed further to show how and upon what grounds I found satisfaction in this point of the Church's authority, after which I could not long remain unsatisfyed in all other points beside: I have somewhat, though not much, to say concerning the first part of this Conclusion, namely of the Churches being depositary of divine Revelation. I do not remember that the Church of England hath said any thing of it, more than what may be inferred from those words in the 6. Article, In the name of the Holy Scripture we do understand those Canonical books of the Old and New Testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church. By which expression She seems to make the Church's authority the only ground that may ordinarily be relied upon for the discerning which books are Canonical, and which not. And this Mr. Chillingworth acknowledges in several passages of his book. 2. But as for the Calvinist Churches in France (whether the Lutherans agree with them or no, I had not means to inform myself) I could not without both indignation and shame read how they have declared their minds touching this Point in their public Confession of Faith: Where, after the premising what particular books of Scripture they received as Canonical, they add these words, Nous recognoissons, etc. that is, We acknowledge these books to be Canonical, and a most certain Rule of Faith, not so much for the common agreement and consent of the Church, as for the Testimony and inward persuasion of the Holy Spirit, which makes us able to discern them from the other Ecclesiastical books, upon which, although they be profitable, cannot be grounded an Article of Faith. By which expression they do clearly tell the world, that their meaning is (not to ascribe to the assistance of the Holy Spirit this their belief, for generally all Christians do acknowledge a necessity of such an influence upon the soul, whereby the understanding is persuaded to captivate itself to the belief, and the will inclined to the love and acceptation of all divine revelations proposed by the Church: But) that they have a new immediate, distinct revelation and testimony of the Holy Ghost inwardly informing them what books are Canonical and what not: And this not only more certain than the testimony of the present Church, but likewise contrary thereto, inasmuch as thereby they renounce several books: which the Church proposes as divine and Canonical. 3. Was it possible that reasonable men could write such things, and ever hope to find any other men foolish enough to believe them? There seems to have been many persons conspiring to the writing, or at least the signing of this Confession: Had all these this testimony of God's Spirit revealing to them, and so enabling them to judge and discern which particular writings are Canonical, and which not? And does this testimony (which certainly, if not falsely pretended to, is infallible) extend to all the particular passages and Texts in these books, without which the believing of the books in gross would be useless? Well, since they may say what they please without fear of being silenced, and so may all their Offspring; For what other way is left to silence him that says he has the Spirit, but only Exorcisms? Yet for those that wrote this Confession to say this both for themselves and in the name of all their faction to the world's end, and this without consulting any of them to know whether they had received such an immediate revelation or testimony, and without pretending to such an eminent gift of Prophecy, as never was example of the like since the world began, this exceeds all wonder. Good Lord! to what strange times are we reserved, to see a Sect so numerous, so powerful (as they have showed themselves upon many sad occasions) and not one of them but is a Prophet? What a stupendious thing is this that there should not be found one Calvinist destitute of this so certain, so divine a testimony, beyond the assurance of all Churches since Christ, and yet not one Englishman or Frenchman unless of that faction, nor any Christian that I know of besides that knows any such thing of himself, or dares pretend to it? For surely if any one had it, some would profess it, since a man cannot have a Testimony, but he knows he has it. This is a miracle beyond all that Christ and all his (Apostles ever wrought in the Church. But is it not more probable, nay is it not beyond all probability most certain, most palpable that all these men knowingly and wilfully deceive themselves, and would fain but cannot deceive others? Is not this apparently a lying against the Holy Ghost? Why may it not as well be expected that in their next Confession (or rather, their Presumption) they should pretend (as at least most particular writers among them do) for themselves and their heirs a discerning infallible Spirit to judge of the sense of Scripture, as well as the books? Indeed, what may not be expected from such as having had a hatred to charity, and therefore no true love to the truth, God has justly given over to strong delusions to believe such palpable lies? 4. But leaving these men miserably pleasing themselves in pretended inspirations, and by that means attributing to the Holy Ghost not only all their errors, but likewise their renouncing of Christian Charity & Unity, which is impossible as long as they take upon them to believe that it is from the Spirit that they have divided themselves from God's Church both in opinion and practice: I will return to my enquiry concerning the authority of the Church. CHAP. XVIII. Importance of the Controversy concerning the Church's authority. Means for satisfaction in it abundantly sufficient in Antiquity. This Controversy before all others ought to be most diligently studied by Protestants. 1. PRoceeding therefore for mine own satisfaction to read the Fathers upon this argument, and resolving to read them as unpartially as possibly I could, that is, silencing mine own understanding, when it would interpose that no discourse or Rhetoric ought to have force against those demonstrations, which I thought I had against the Church's infallibility, or when it would invent forced senses to that world of passages which I found in the Father's inconsistent with my preassumed assurance; Proceeding I say, in the best manner I could to the reading of the Fathers upon this point, I found that as this controversy was of so infinite importance that upon the decision thereof eternal peace or war in Religion among Christians depended, the most wise and merciful Providence had suitably furnished us with means of satisfaction in so important a point, infinitely more copious, evident and powerful, then in any other besides: For in other special points of Controversy we must be content to inform ourselves of the mind of Antiquity therein only by particular dispersed passages of the Fathers, commonly spoken en passant, they having no occasion ordinarily to combat with Heretics about them: But in this business of the Church's authority I found Epistles, Treatises, Books, yea volumes full of almost no other subject; I found (that I may here before the proper season declare the success of so many month's labour) that the maintaining of the authority of the Church against Heretics alleging only Scripture as a Rule, and disclaiming all Judges of that Rule but themselves as to themselves, had been the business of many Ages, the principal employment of many the learnedst holiest Fathers of the Church: I found that such an authority of the Church had been a Tradition of all others most Universal, not any one book of Scripture being so often testified of in Antiquity as this: I found that if this authority of the Church were not to be preserved inviolable, all Synods and Counsels that ever were in the Church fell to the ground, yea more, became not only of no validity, but were to be esteemed the most unjust Tyrannical conspiracies that ever were, as presuming without sufficient warrant to accuse and anathematise whosoever opposed or accepted not their determinations even in such points as were not in Scripture at all, or at most only there in consequence to their interpretation: Lastly, I found to my infinite satisfaction, and for which I think myself obliged to spend the greatest part of my life in glorifying Almighty God for it, a full, effectual and experimental satisfaction by acknowledging this authority, and suffering myself to be taken out of my own hands, to be conducted by her that Christ had appointed for that office; in a word, I found, that that saying of S. Hierome was most true, viz. That the Sun of the Church presently dries up all the streams of error and Schism. 2. For these reasons I cannot choose but adjure all Protestants, especially English (who think satisfaction and repose of mind upon earth, and glory to be revealed in heaven to be things desirable) that, omitting, or at least deferring all particular disputes with Catholics, they would in the first place without prejudice and partiality examine what the present Catholic Church says, and in what words She says it when She comes to declare her necessary doctrine concerning this her authority: and that having found what it is that She requires to be believed, they would (without altering her expression, and without applying thereto any particular Schoole-man's or Doctors interpretations, as by an obliging necessity to be subscribed to or received) compare what the Church defines, with what the Fathers & Counsels do generally and purposely agree in: And if this method produce not in them the same effect, which, by the blessing of God, it did in me, yet at least they will have this contentment, after an ingenuous, and, to my knowledge, not-much by them-practised way of examination, to conclude, that they find that their own single judgement and interpretation of Scripture deserves rather to be relied upon and to be preferred above all manner of visible authority of all persons and ages, how sacred soever esteemed by others; they will either become Catholics, or remain in their own (than not very unreasonable opinion) Protestant's still, but persons meriting from themselves the highest esteem for infallibility that the Church ever enjoyed since the Apostles times. CHAP. XIX. Passages out of Father's concerning the Church's Authority. 1. BUt I will no longer defer the testimonies which Antiquity affords to the third Proposition contained in the second Conclusion forementioned, viz. of the Church's authority to intepret Scriptures and define Controversies. I confess I might have contented myself, considering the superabundance, to omit single passages, when so many Fathers have written whole books to witness it, as Tertullian, S. Cyprian, S. Augustine, S. Hierome, S. Vercentius Lirinensis, etc. mentioned before, and whereas all Counsels in whatsoever they have determined have virtually determined this, otherwise their determinations were to be esteemed any thing else but determinations. Notwithstanding I will not refuse the trouble of selecting a few passages more expressly declaring what at large most of the books wherein they are found, endeavour generally to prove, whether Logically and rationally or no, let the world judge, I am sure they proved it so effectually, that they have thereby utterly destroyed the Heresies that opposed them. Let the first witness therefore be S. Irenaeus, (lib. 3. c. 4.) Where the Church is there is the Spirit (of God) and where the Spirit of God is there is the Church and all grace. The same Father again, lib. 4. c. 43. We must obey those Priests that are in the Church: those that have succession from the Apostles, who together with Episcopal power have according to the good pleasure of the Father received the certain gift of Truth. And all the rest who depart from the original succession, wheresoever they be assembled, to have suspected either as Haeretiques or Schismatics or Hypocrites: and all these do fall from the truth. Again, lib 4. c. 62. The spiritual man shall judge them that be out of the Church, Which Church shall be under no man's judgement: For to the Church all things are known, in which is perfect faith of the Father, and of the dispensation of Christ, and firm knowledge of the Holy Ghost teacheth all truth. Again, l. 5. c. 4. What if the Apostles had not left Scriptures, ought we not to have followed the Order of Tradition which they delivered to those to whom they committed the Churches? To which order many yield assent, who believe in Christ, having salvation written in their hearts by the Spirit of God without letters or ink, and diligently keeping ancient Tradition. It is easy to receive the truth from God's Church, seeing the Apostles have most fully deposited in her as in a rich Storehouse all things belonging to truth: For what! if there should arise any contention of some small questions, ought we not to have recourse to the most ancient Churches, and from them to receive what is certain and clear concerning the present question? 3. Witness Tert. (the Preser.) Therefore we must not appeal to Scriptures, neither is the controversy to be settled upon them, in the which there will be either no victory at all, or very uncertain, etc. Again, Order did require that that should be proposed in the first place, which ought now to be only debated, viz. Which of the parties is possessed of that faith to which the Scriptures agree, from whom, and by whom, and when, and to whom that discipline was delivered, by which men are named Christians: For wheresoever it shall appear that the truth of the Christian discipline or Faith is, there will also be found the truth of Scriptures, and expositions, and all Christian Traditions. Witness Origen, Since there be many who think they believe the things which are of Christ, and some are of different opinion from those who went before them, let the doctrine of the Church be kept, which is delivered from the Apostles by order of succession, and remains in the Church to this very day. That only is to be believed for truth which in nothing disagrees from the Tradition of the Church. And again, in our understanding of Scriptures we must not depart from the first Ecclesiastical Tradition, nor believe otherwise then as the Church of God hath by succession delivered to us. 4. Witness S. Cyprian, (de unit. Eccl.) There is one head & one Source & one Mother, by the Issue of her fruitfulness copious: by her increase we are born, we are nourished with her milk, with her Spirit we are quickened: The Spouse of Christ cannot be defiled with adultery, She is pure and chaste: She knoweth one house and with chaste bashfulness keepeth the sanctity of one bed. This preserveth us in God: This advanceth to the Kingdom the Children that she hath brought forth: Whosoever divideth from the Church and cleaveth to the adultress, he is separated from the promises of the Church: He cannot have God to his Father, that hath not the Church to his Mother. Witness, Lactantius, (l. 4. c. ult.) It is only the Catholic Church that hath the true worship and service of God: this is the wellspring of truth, the dwelling-place of Faith, the temple of God: into which whosever entereth not, and from which whosoever departeth is without all hope of life and eternal salvation. Witness S. Basile and S. Gregory Naz. who (as Ruffinus (Hist. Eccl. l. 2. c. 29.) relateth took the interpretation of Scripture not of their own sense but from the Tradition of the Fathers. Witness S. Cyril of Jerusalem, (lat. 18.) The Church is called Catholic because it is spread over the universal world from one end to the other: and because it teacheth catholicly and entirely all doctrine which are to be known. Witness S. Ambrose, Faith is the foundation of the Church: for it was not spoken of the flesh of Peter, but of his faith, That the gates of Hell should not prevail: His Confession overcame Hell: and this Confession excludes many Heresies: for seeing the Church like a good Ship is beat upon by many waves, the Foundation of the Church must prevail against all Heresies. L. de incarn. d●●. 5. Witness (Dom. in Psalm. 37.) In the Church the truth resids, Whosoever is separated from it, it is necessary that he speak false things. Again, Ep. 54. The height of all authority, & all the light of reason for the reparation and reformation of mankind consists only in the saving name of Christ, and in his only Church. Again, (Ep. 56) The supreme Emperor of our Faith hath fortified his Church with the citadel of authority, and by means of a few persons piously learned hath armed it with copious provisions of unconquerable reason. That therefore to him is the most right discipline, that especially the weak should retire into this citadel of Faith, to the end that for their defence being placed most securely, others should combat with most strong reasons. Again, (de util Cred. c. 16) if the Providence of God doth not precide over humane affairs, no care is to be had concerning Religion. But if the several variety of creatures, which ought be believed to have flowed from some fountain of most perfect beauty, and by certain inward instinct doth exhort both publicly and privately those who are naturally better disposed, attesting that God is to be sought and worshipped: we ought not to despair but that there is some authority placed by the same God, upon which we raising and settling ourselves as upon a most firm basis, may be exalted up unto God. Again, This is the providence of true Religion: this is commanded us from heaven, this is delivered unto us by our Blessed ancestors, this is preserved even to these our times: to be willing to disturb and pervert this, is nothing else but to seek a sacrilegious way to true Religion. Again, (de unit Eccl c. 19) Neither thou nor I do read this evidently and expressly (viz in the Scriptures) But if there were to be found in the world any one endowed with wisdom and recommended by the testimony of our Lord Jesus Christ, and if such an one were consulted with by us touching this controversy, we should in no wise doubt to observe whatsoever such an one should say unto us; and this for fear of being judged to have opposed not so much such a person, as our Lord Jesus Christ himself, by whose testimony such an one is recommended: Now Christ gives testimony to his Church. Again, (de Bap. l. 5. c. 23.) To speak the truth, the Apostles have prescribed nothing concerning this, but this custom ought to be believed to have taken its original from their Tradition, As there are many things which the universal Church observes, the which in good right aught to be believed to have been delivered by the Apostles, although they be not found in Scripture. Again, (lib. 4.) That which the universal Church holds, and it is not ordained by Counsels, but hath been always retained and observed is most justly believed to have been delivered no other way than by Apostolic Tradition, etc. We must observe in these things that which the Church of God observes: the Question therefore between you and us is, Whether of the two, Yours or Ours is the Church of God? Again, To omit therefore this sincere wisdom which you will not allow to be in the Catholic Church: There are many other things which most justly keep me in her bosom, The consent of Peoples and Nations keep me there; The authority begun by Miracles, nourished by hope, augmented by charity, confirmed by Antiquity keep me there; The succession of Prelates ever since the Seat of Peter, to whom our Lord after his Resurrection committed the feeding of his sheep, to this present Episcopate keep me there; And finally the very name of Catholic keeps me there, the which name this Church alone not without cause hath retained among so many and great Heresies, insomuch as when any stranger demands where the assembly is, wherein a man may communicate with the Catholic Church, there is not any one Heretic has the boldness to show him his Temple or house, etc. These so many, and so strong, and most dear ties of the Christian name with good right retain a believer in the Catholic Church, although that by reason of the slowness of our understanding, or want of merit in our lives, the truth doth not as yet show itself unto us with perfect evidence. Again, the same Father in the same book, (ca 5.) I do not believe (saith he) that Manichaeus is the Apostle of Christ, I pray you be not angry, neither begin to give ill language: For you know that I have resolved not to believe rashly any thing produced by you. I ask therefore, Who is this Manichaeus? You will answer, the Apostle of Christ. I do not believe it. Now thou wilt find nothing what thou shouldst say or do; for thou didst promise me a science of truth, and now thou forcest me to believe a thing that I know not. It may be thou wilt read the Gospel unto me, and from thence wilt endeavour to assert the person of Manichaeus. But what if thou shouldest light upon one that doth not yet believe the Gospel, what wouldst thou do to him when he tells thee, I do not believe? And truly, I myself would not believe the Gospel, were it not that the authority of the Catholic Church moves me Now why should I not believe the same persons saying to me, Believe not Manichaeus, to whom I gave credence, saying, Believe the Gospel? Choose what thou wilt: If thou shalt say, Believe the Catholics: they move me to give no credence to you, therefore if I believe them, I must of necessity not believe thee. If thou shalt say, Do not believe Catholics, Thou shalt do unjustly compelling me by the Gospel to believe Manicheus, because the same Gospel I believed upon the ●reaching of Catholics. But if thou 〈◊〉 say, Thou didst well to believe the Gospel upon the commendation of Catholics, but ill in believing them discommending Manichaeus: Dost thou think me so very a fool, as that without any reason rendered I should believe what thou pleasest, and disbelieve what thou likest not? So that surely I do much more justly and warily, if because I am already a believer I do not forsake the Catholics to come over to thy party, unless thou commandest me not to believe, but undertakest to show me something that may be known most manifestly and apparently. Therefore if thou wilt afford me reason, quit the Gospel: if thou holdest thyself to the Gospel, I must hold myself to those upon whose command I believed the Gospel: and upon the same persons commandment, I must by no means believe thee. But if by chance thou shouldst be able to find in the Gospel some passage most evident concerning the Apostleship of Manicha●●, thou wilt thereby weaken indeed unto me the authority of Catholics, who command me not to believe thee: which authority being invalidated I would no longer believe the Gospel itself, because it was for their sakes that I believed it. So that whatsoever thou shalt allege, will have no force with me. To the same purpole the same Father, (lib. de util. cred. c. 14.) Why should I not most diligently inquire what Christ commanded of them before all ●●hers, by whose authority I was moved to 〈◊〉 that Christ commanded any good thing? Canst thou better declare to me what he said, whom I would not have thought to have been, or to be, if the belief thereof had been recommended by thee to me? This therefore I believed by fame strengthened with celebrity, consent, Antiquity. But every one may see that you, so few, so turbulent, so new, can produce nothing deserving authority. What madness is this? Believe them [Catholics] that we ought to believe Christ; but learn of us what Christ said. Why, I beseech thee? surely if they [Catholics] were not at all, and could not teach me any thing, I would more easily persuade myself that I were not to believe Christ, then that I should learn any thing concerning him from any other than them by whom I believed in him. Lastly the same Father, (con. Cres. I. 1. c. 33.) Although (saith he) there cannot be produced out of the Scriptures any example of such a thing, yet the truth of the same Scriptures is held of us in this matter when we do that which pleaseth the whole Church, the which the authority of the same Scriptures doth commend, that because the holy Scriptures cannot deceive us, whosoever feareth to be deceived with the obscurity of this question, let him require the judgement of the Church, which the Holy Scriptures without any ambiguity do demonstrate: to the end that because the Scriptures cannot deceive us, whoseover is afraid to be deceived by the obscurity of any question, may have recourse to the Church's judgement concerning it, the which (Church) the Holy Scriptures demonstrate without any ambiguity. 6. Witness S. Vincentius Lyrinensis, (c. 2.) Inasmuch as all do not take the Scripture in the same sense by reason of its profundity, but some on one fashion, some on another, so that almost as many senses may seem to be drawn from it as there are men: for Novatianus expounds it one way, Photinus another, Sabellius another, Donatus another, Arius, Eunomius, Macedonius another, Apollinarius and Priscillian another, jovinian, Pelagius, Caelestius another, And lastly Nestorius another: For this reason to avoid the labyrinth of so many contrary errors, it is very necessary that the line of Prophetical and Apostolical conceptions should be drawn according to the rule of Ecclesiastical and Catholic sense, or intelligence. Witness lastly S. Leo, It is not to be doubted but that all Christian observance is of divine institution, and that whatsoever is received by the Church into the custom of devotion doth come from Apostolical Tradition, & from the doctrine of the Holy Ghost: who doth also now preside over his own institutes in the hearts of the Faithful, that all both obediently observe, and wisely understand them. Serm. 2. de jeiun. Pent. CHAP. XX. Quotations out of Antiquity for the authority of Counsels. A contrary character of Heretics. 1. TO the former quotations so express, so efficacious to assert the Church's authority in points of Religion, from which there lies no appeal. I will adjoin other testimonies of Antiquity to demonstrate the veneration given by all Orthodox Fathers to the Counsels of the Church, their acknowledgement of their obliging authority, and how in obedience to them they submitted their own particular opinions. Witness hereof may be either the Apostles themselves or Apostolic Fathers at least, in those most ancient Canons (whereto S Clement also gives testimony) who appointed that Bishops should twice in the year keep Counsels, Can● Apost. 36. 37 etc. Clement. Const. Apost l 2. cap. 30. and among themselves examine the decrees of Religion, and compose such Ecclesiastical controversies as should arise? the first in the fourth week after Pentecost, and the second on the twelfth day of (Hyperberitaei) Octob. Witness S. Ignatius, (Ep. ad Smyrn.) Do you all follow the Bishop, as Christ did his Father. Without the Bishop let no man praesume to do any of those things which belong to the Church. The same Holy Father (Ep. ad Policarp) testifieth that it was the order in his time that Synods and assemblies of Bishhops were frequently celebrated. Witness Tertullian, (cont. Psych. cap. 13.) In those countries of Greece there are assembled in certain appointed places Counsels out of all Churches, by which both things of higher importance are agitated in common, and the representation of the whole Christian name is celebrated with great veneration. Witness that glorious Emperor Constantine, in his Epistle to the Churches mentioned by Socrates, Hist. Eccl, lib. 1. cap. 6. where he saith, Whatsoever is decreed in the Holy Council of Bishops, that is, universally to be ascribed to the Divine Will. Witness S. Gregory Nazianzen, (Ep. ad Chelid.) Those that agree with Apollinards say that they were admitted by the Council of the West or Roman Bishop, by whom it is manifest they were once condemned: Let them show this and we will yield: for than it is manifest that they assent to the true doctrine, for it cannot be otherwise, if they have obtained this. Witness S. Ambrose, (de Fid. ad Grat. lib. 3. c 7.) who calls the decrees of the Council of Nice, haereditari● signacula, not to be violated by the rash boldness of any man: And many expressions to the same effect are extant in S. Hilary in his book addressed to the Emperor Constantius. 2 Witness S. Augustin, (con. Don. lib. 7. & con. Crescon. lib. 1.) It is to us a safe thing, not to rush forward in any rashness of opinion concerning those things, which neither have been agitated in any Catholique-National-Synod, nor determined in any Occumenicall: but to maintain that with the assurance of a secure voice, which in the government of our Lord God and Saviour Jesus Christ hath been strengthened with the consent of the universal Church. And again, In the former ages of the Church before the Schism of Donatus. (Id. de Bapt. con. Don. I. 1.) The obscurity of that Question (viz concerning Rebaptisation of Haeretiques) compelled great persons and endued with great charity to dispute and debate among themselves however without any breach of peace: In so much that in several Countries for a long time the decisions of several Counsels did vary and clash among themselves, until in a Plenary Council of the whole world that which was sound believed, was without all manner of doubt confirmed. Again, (Id. con. Parm Ep. lib. 2) the question being whether Baptism can be given by those men also who never have been Christians; we ought not to affirm determinately any thing therein without the authority of a Council so great as may be answerable to the greatness of the matter. But concerning those who are separated from the unity of the Church, there is no question at all but that they do both retain it, and communicate it, and that they do both perniciously retain and perniciously communicate it without the bond of Peace: for this hath been already agitated, considered; perfected and confirmed in the unity of the whole world. And again, (Id. de Bapt. con. Don. lib. 2. cap. 4.) Neither durst we affirm any such thing if we were not well grounded upon the most uniform authority of the universal Church, unto which undoubtedly S. Cyprian would have yielded, if in his time the truth of this question had been discussed; and declared, and by a General Council established. Lastly, (to omit many express testimonies of Vincentius Lyrinensis, Facundus, etc.) the last witness shall be S. Gregory the Great, (Ep. 24.) who professeth that he receives and venerates the four first General Counsels no otherwise then the four Gospels: as likewise that he doth in like manner embrace the fifth Council. This was the language of the Catholic Fathers, when they wrote many of them purposely upon this very Question: And besides these testimonies, other will be produced occasionally in the following discourse. 3. On the contrary, Haeritiques (as S. Basile observes) do generally agree 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to raise an altar in opposition to the altar of the Fathers. And Vincentius Lyrinensis, (cap. 16.) gives us a proper character of their Spirit and language, bringing them in thus speaking, V●nite ô insapientes & miseri, qui vulgò Catholici vocitamini, etc. Come now O ye foolish and miserable wretches, who are commonly called Catholics, and learn the true faith, which besides us no man understands; which has lain hid for many ages past, but hath been of late discovered & made known: But you must learn it by stealth and in secret, for it will be delightful unto you. So of old spoke the Heretics: Whether of late they have changed this stile, or no, yea how much they have changed this (to be accounted modest) language into a new one full of arrogance, pride and fury, will sufficiently appear in the treatises polemical of Luther, Calvin, etc. CHAP. XXI. The doctrine of the Roman Church concerning the Church's authority. The great and apparent reasonableness of it. 1. I will now subjoin to the doctrine of the ancient Church that of the present Roman Church, that being set in view the one of the other, we may better judge how well they resemble, or what unlikeness there is between them. The substance of what the Church has defined concerning this point is contained in this decision of the Council of Trent (Sess. 4.) viz. Praetercà ad coercenda petulantia ingenia, decrevit (Synodus) Ut nemo, etc. that is, Moreover to the end to restrein petulant wits, this Synod decrees, That no man relying upon his own skill, and wresting Holy Scripture to his own senses, shall presume to interpret the Holy Scriptures in matters of Faith and manners pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine against that sense which hath been and is held by (our) holy Mother the Church, to whom it appertains to judge of the true sense and interpretation of Holy Scriptures, and against the unanimous consent of Fathers, although such interpretations were never at any time to be published abroad. The substance of this decree is repeated in the Bull published by Pius IV. concerning the Oath of the Profession of Faith. 2. This decision, considered simply as the words import in their plain direct sense, seemed to me so strangely reasonable and equal, requiring only due reverence to the present Church, and implying with a strange ingenuity and assurance a conformity with the doctrine unanimously maintained in the ancient Church, that I could not believe but that some where or other I should find a far greater burden laid by her upon her children's shoulders: for according to that information, which I received from the learnedst Doctors of Controversy among Catholics (who for the most part do dress this point in School-language, and exalt that language to the utmost importance, deducing likewise the most rigid consequences from it) I thought the bonds & fetters wherein the Roman Church restrained all in her Communion were far more stringent and painful, cutting even to the very bones; So that this newly discovered great equity of the Church made me suspicious, and thereupon inquisitive: therefore I searched myself, and begged of others to search for me into former Counsels for somewhat more rigorous and unreasonable: and after all, I could not find in any declaration or Canon in any Council universally received any higher or more hardly-to be digested expression of the Church's authority, than what is set down in this decree of the Council of Trent. 3. Then I perceived that it was that (as it fell out through mine own unwariness, to me unfortunate) word of infallibility, and that word understood by me in the most rigorous sense that the term could import, that above all other things made me despair of ever being able with a good conscience to enter into the Communion of the Catholic Church: And yet no such word could I find in any Council, no necessity appeared to me, that either I, or any other Protestant should ever have heard that word named, and much less pressed upon us with so much earnestness and rigour as of late it hath generally been in disputations and books of Controversy. Against this word of infallibility that (so much by all English Protestants exalted) book of Mr. Chillingworth especially combats, and this with too too great success, by reason that the Author makes his advantage of that word, affixing thereto a sense far more strained and exilted, then, I am sure, Catholic doctrine, yea or even his learned Antagonist do require. Truly if Mr. Chillingworth would have thought it for his purpose to have proceeded with the ingenuity he professeth, and have examined how much latitude might have been allowed him in this point, concerning this expression of the Church's infallibility in her Conciliary decisions, he would have found that he had much less cause to triumph in the furious batteries that he pretends to make against it. For first of all, the forecited Doctor Veron saith expressly, That no mention is found of the word Infallibility in the decrees of the Council of Trent, nor any other received Council, and by consequence according to the design of his Method, that word cannot be, as of necessity, imposed upon any one: A Method commended & authorized by three General assemblies of the Clergy of France: without contradiction insisted on, and prosecuted more than 40. years together by him, both in Sermons, Disputations and writings, and the Author of it enabled to pursue it, both by letters Patents of the King of France, by the quality of a Catholic Doctor, and by Episcopal Mission. Again, Bellarmine treating of the comparison between the Infallibility of a General Council, and that of Scripture, gives the preeminence to Scripture in five several respects, among which the third is, That in Scripture there can be no error, neither in points of Faith nor manners, nor likewise whether any thing be affirmed pertaining to the whole Church, or only to some few or one particular person, whereas Counsels may err in particular judgements. And the fourth, That in Scripture not only all sentences, but all and every single word belong to Faith, whereas in Counsels neither the disputations premised, nor the reasons added, nor illustrations nor explications adjoined do belong to Faith, but only the simple naked Decrees, and not all those neither, but only such as are proposed as of Faith, etc. Hereto may be added that even those naked decrees also are not always necessarily to be understood according to the latitude of the significations of the words and expressions in themselves, but only so far as they are intended to contradict the special Heresy condemned by them. Hence that famous Carmelite, who modestly disguises himself under the common title Salmanticensis (the miracle of this age both for subtlety, perspicuity, and profound solidity of judgement, in that part of his Theological discourse, where he treats largely of Angels) being to answer an Objection out of the Council of Lateran, hath these words, Ad dignoscendun an aliquid sit desinitum ab Ecclesia, etc. that is, To be able to give a judgement, whether any thing be defined by the Church, we must (as Cajetan well observes) attend unto the errors, which the Church proposeth to condemn, and not to those things, which she speaks incidently, for such things do not remain defined, neither is it erroneous in Faith to opine against them. Now the intention of the Council of Lateran in that decree was only to exclude the error of Origen, who affirmed, That this visible world was not (per se) directly intended by God; but only occasionally and by accident, to be a prison in which the Devils should be punished: and hereupon the Council defined, That it was God's pleasure and will directly and out of his primary intention, by his divine Omnipotence to create both the Angelical and Humane Nature: Whereas in that Decree it only says incidently that he created at once from the beginning both these Natures. And therefore this last assertion is not by virtue of the said definition become an Article of Faith. Hitherto Salmanticencis. De Angel. p. 364. 4. Hence it will appear what ill use Mr. Chillingworth makes of the term infallibility, either unwillingly forgetting, or willingly concealing the great latitude that is allowed generally, and by unsuspected Catholic Authors to the sense and notion of it: which latitude I am assured his learned Adversary would have been very willing to have allowed him. But it was not for his purpose to accept, nor so much as take notice of such allowance, it would have spoiled and abated the edge of many of his flourishing and seemingly subtle discourses. So that it is apparent that Mr. Chillingworths' arguments against the Churches just authority, as he pretends, (which to most English men, and I am sure to me once appeared unanswerable) If that the word infallibility were but laid by for a while, yea if the unquestionably allowable qualifications if its sense were but expressed, would (I am confident by mine own experience) lose the greatest part of their strength, and however appear not to endanger the Catholic Church at all. 5. I do not speak this (being now, as I am, by God's grace a Catholic) to the end either to show myself foolishly forward to take part with any one Catholic writer or opinion against another: (for the truth is, my resolution was, that, if my mind disquieted with scruples of Religion should chance to find rest in the Catholic Church, to submit myself in all simplicity to her doctrine, to avoid as much as might be the interessing myself in Disputes and Controversies, and the entertaining all unusual, suspected, devious, and rash opinions, and to spend the remainder of my life more to the benefit of my soul, then by engaging myself in particular factions and partialities, either about Doctrines or practices.) Nor secondly, to censure at random all those that make use of that term in disputations. For I know that before any of our late Schisms, that word was used perhaps without any inconvenience by the School men; and if it were confined to that place where it was bred, there would be still no inconvenience. But since by manifest experience the Protestants (I speak of England) think themselves so secure, when they have leave to stand or fall by that word, and in very deed have so much to say for themselves, when they are pressed unnecessarily, abruptly and too too rudely with it, the sense thereof not being mollified and sweetened by just and allowable qualifications: Since likewise it is a word capable of so high a sense that we cannot devise one more full and proper to attribute to God himself, insomuch as Mr. Chillingworth, when he could prove that the Church was not in so high a degree infallible as the Apostles (shall I say?) no not as God himself, thought he had gained the victory: Whereas, besides Bellarmine before quoted, S. Aug. (lib. 2. de Bapt. come. Don. cap. 3.) expressly allows to holy Scripture a place and preeminence before the decisions of Counsels; Lastly since the Church (which Catholics in this controversy do pretend to maintain only) obliges no man to that word, which is not found expressly in any of her received Counsels, as Mounsieur Veron professeth: yea since she almost desivers the victory into their hands when they urge only her decisions, and when they urge them in the latitude that she allows; Can I be blamed, if my duty to the Church, my affection to mine own country and indeed to all that call themselves Christians, and the remembrance how, if I had not perceived that it might be permitted me in this Controversy concerning the Church, to wave that word of infallibility, I should perhaps never have had occasion to speak this of it in a writing of this nature, Can I (I say) be blamed, if such reasons move me to wish that the Protestants may either never be invited to combat the authority of the Church under that notion? Or however that when the term of Infallibility is used, it may not be pressed in a sense more rigorous and comprehensive, than the Church herself hath expressed. 6. Now here by the way I think it fit, to the end to prevent any mistake or misconstruction of what hath been said touching the words Infallible and Infallibility, to express my meaning to be this (viz.) That I am so far from dislikeing the words themselves so generally made use of, both by School men and Controvertists, that I profess I cannot devil any other single terms by which to express the Churches just and necessary Authority. For if it be true (as infallibly it is, I am sure) That God hath endowed his Church with an Authority to which all Christisns are obliged to submit their understandings and captivate their wills; than it must necessarily follow from the infinite wisdom and goodness of God, that his divine providence will preserve his church in all truth, so as to secure all believers that they cannot be misled by following her, nor walk safely when they follow any other direction: And by consequence, that she can neither deceive them, nor be deceived herself; all which is clearly imported in the distinct Grammatical sense of those single terms, Infallible and Infallibility. Notwithstanding since the same terms may possibly be misconceived, because they are capable of comprehending a more extended notion, then is here expressed, as evidently they do, when they are attributed to God and to his immediately inspired word. And since Protestants have, especially of late, entertained and drunk in a notion and conception from these terms far more rigorous and comprehensive, then either the church herself, or most of the most learned and approved Controvertists do conceive any one to be obliged unto; which notion it is as yet very difficult to efface out of their imaginations: Upon these grounds it is, that both from mine own experience in myself, and knowledge, that I think I have of the peculiar temper of English Protestants; I judged it convenient, and even requisite, to exhort Catholics treating with them, especially in such times as these, that the fields are even white unto the Harvest, and that very many more may probably be won by a charitable compliance (yet still without wrong to necessary Catholic doctrine. God forbid else) then perhaps by the most convincing arguments of reason, That they would condescend so far, either to the misunderstandings, prejudices, or infirmity of Protestants, as, since the Church herself obliges no man to those very express terms, for a while either to abstain from them in disputes, or using them, to do it with a qualifying preface, urging and fastening no stricter a sense on them then the Churches own Decision of her authority doth require. Certainly the receiving of a soul from Heresy and Schism is a work so infinitely precious and meritorious before Almighty God, that it will deserve that we should employ in it, not only all our strength of wit and learning, but all our charity likewise; so imitating the great example of that great Conductor of souls S. Paul, who told the Corinthians, Astutus dolo vos cepi, that is, being crafty I caught you with guile, namely, by instilling Christian Doctrines into their minds leisurely and seasonably, neither out of time enforcing unnecessary truths upon them, nor hastily and abruptly urging even necessary, but perhaps unwelcome ones, till he had prudently prepared a way for them. Now if we, entreating with well minded, but seduced souls, would, imitating S. Paul, only propose to them at the first necessary doctrines, and those represented with all the lawful inviting advantages, and most easy constructions, we should no doubt, make many points, from which for the present through misapprehension they have a strong aversion, very receiveable, and very easily digestable to them. And by these means, having been happy instruments of restoring them to the Church, we may at leisure, if we have a mind, seek to induce them to adhere unto, and declare themselves for our particular opinions, and distinctive interpretations of common points. 7. But to return from this digression, I most affectionately entreat the Protestants, that they would heedfully cast their eyes upon this decree of the Council of Trent, that they would peruse and turn it as they please; and when they have done this, let them consider if a Synod of Charenton, or Dort, or Gap do not, even while they renounce all visible obliging authority, usurp notwithstanding more than the Catholic Church here challenges: Would any of them give leave to any among them to interpret Scriptures against their sense established by them? Nay, do not they command men to interpret Scriptures against doctrines unanimously consented to by Fathers? Lastly, would they suffer a French Protestant to interpret Scriptures, but even as their brethren Protestants in in England (heretofore during their prosperity graced by them with that title) do ordinarily interpret them (for example) about Episcopacy, real Presence, & c? If therefore such fragments of churches do allow themselves so much, let Protestants try if they can be unreasonable enough to impute tyranny to the Catholic Church, for forbidding any in her communion to invent new senses of Scripture, contrary not only to the doctrine universally embraced through the whole Catholic world, but to this doctrine as professed to be the same which all Churches before, and all Fathers unanimously consent in? CHAP. XXII. The method whereby the Author arrived to an entire satisfaction concerning the Church's authority. 1. I Will now proceed in my narration, how and by what means (after I had informed myself of the Roman Churches established doctrine concerning her authority, and after I had been assured by very learned Catholics, that I was not obliged to build upon any other expression of this doctrine, but that of the Church itself) I in ashort time arrived to a full satisfaction of all the difficulties and prejudices, that before I was encumbered withal. 2. The objections and difficulties by education and many years study settled in my mind against the Church's infallibility or authority, and which were not suddenly cleared, after I knew that the Church was more moderate and condescending than I had before believed, respected not only the substance of this doctrine, but likewise many particulars and circumstances of it, as likewise the immediate consequences of it, forexample, How it could be justified with certainty sufficient to support a supernatural faith, that the Church was legally possessed of this authority; Where this authority was seated, whether in the whole Church, or some special members of it; Upon what grounds it was challenged; How far it was extended; And after all these, what might appear to me to be the most rational way for a Catholic to express his resolution of faith, so confidently by all Protestants charged with circles and absurdities? 3. To gain satisfaction in these points, as, for the foundation, I resolved only to consider what the Church herself said, so for an information more particular since the church had not descended to so punctual an expression of her mind, conceived it my best way to have recourse either to the writings or verbal resolutions of such Catholics of unsuspected Opinions, as had expressed themselves the most moderately, intelligibly, with allowing the greatest latitude, and lastly, most approaching to the grounds which I thought before to be most reasonable. The particular persons whose speeches or writings contributed most to my satisfaction, I shall occasionally name or reflect upon in the pursuance of this Narration. 4. Now I do not vainly pretend to, or so much as trouble myself with wishing that any man, Catholic, or other, should believe that the method according to which I proceeded, or the grounds which in mine own reasoning I laid, were more rational than others; for my intent is only to make an Exomologesis, or account of that particular order and progress whereby I attained repose of mind in the authority of the Church, and great contentment in abasing and captivating my reason: It will be sufficient for me if the grounds by me laid, and inferences from them deserve not to be condemned by Catholics, to prevent which, I may with confidence say that I took very good advice, and used very great circumspection. Let them be accounted as imperfect as any man shall please, I am very well contented that others should tell me that they could have furnished me with better: This only I have to say, that purposing to write mine own story, and not directions for others, I am resolved to tell it freely and ingenuously, without concealing whatsoever defaults or wickednesses may by others be imputed to it. CHAP. XXIII. Grounds laid to prove a certainty of Tradition. Several degrees of it. 1. SOme of the grounds laid by me in preparation to a distinct conception and satisfaction concerning the Church's authority founded upon Tradition, and the certainty thereof, have been already occasionally, though somewhat before their due season, mentioned in the former conclusion, cap. 8. and 9 The substance of which, together with others pertinent thereto, I will here, as in their proper and natural place, orderly set down. 2. In the first place therefore, since all information of things passed before our age can no other way be had (excepting only extraordinary or divine inspiration, not to be expected, or relied upon, if pretended, unless it be attested by miracles) but by Tradition from the times when such things happened, yet arriving at us by the testimony of the present times and persons living with us: By consequence I had no difficulty, but that in the present hypothesis of Christian revelations the only immediate witness of them was the present church, and this either by oral profession, that thus she had received by information and practice of the precedent age; Or by writings of antiene times continued and daily transcribed, but all preserved and conveyed to us by the present church. 3. In the second place I considered that these divine Revelations, and doctrines of Christian Religion being of such a particular nature as that, besides the believing them to have been, we are obliged to assent unto and embrace them, as the only necessary means of avoiding eternal misery, and attaining to eternal happiness. Hereupon it is, that the present church, our only witness of them, represents them to us, not only as the present age does the actions of Caesar, or books of Cicero, that is, with so much assurance that we cannot be reasonable men and doubt of them, yet by doubting or disbelieving them there is no loss to be feared, but only of our reputation. But she proposeth them to us as necessarily to be submitted to, and herself as an authorised witness, having received commission from the divine Author to oblige all men to believe her, as a proponent. Which double capacity of the church, viz. 1. Simply a proponent. 2. As an authorised proponent, I conceived it very requisite for me to distinguish, and, at least, in my understanding, to separate the one from the other: For though Catholics, who from their infancy have been brought up in acknowledging the grounded authority of the church, have no need to distinguish this double capacity for themselves, yet in disputation with those Sects, which accept of Tradition, simply at least for books of Scripture, but deny such an obliging authority, and especially in explaining the manner of Resolution of Faith, I conceived and found, as to myself, great profit in this distinction. 4. In the third place, for simple Tradition I enquired whether, and upon what grounds it could be made to appear to be certain and absolutely convincing. And upon mature consideration, I was satisfied that they were extremely mistaken, who thought that there was no absolute certainty in any knowledge, excepting only such as we receive either immediately by our senses, or by evident discourse and demonstration of reason. For on the contrary I found that knowledge from report of Tradition might in some cases be as truly certain, as that from sense or demonstration. So for example, before, I saw the City of Rome, I was most assured that there was such a place, and the reason was, because it was impossible that such a world of writings and persons, all which could not be led by interest to frame a lie, should conspire to witness such a thing, and not one person be found that contradicted them. The like may be said of Tradition, or report of things past, when a whole age agrees universally to acknowledge a Tradition under that notion, neither friends nor enemies contradicting, it is impossible that such a report should be false: Yea I may add further, when there are in the same age two Traditions of two considerable parties directly contradicting the one the other, it may fall out, yea sometimes it may be most assured, that both of them must in some respect be true. As for example, the whole Nation of the Jews dispersed all the world over, do agree that they have received as a most sure Tradition, that our Saviour was an Impostor, and wrought all his pretended miracles by Magic and help of the Devil; on the contrary, all Christians through the whole world agree that they have received a Tradition, that our Saviour was the true Messiah promised, and that he wrought all those true miracles by the power of God, and for confirmation of his divine doctrine: In this case these two Traditions being in respect of the parties respectively universal, must necessarily be true, though in some sort contradicting, yet not in that wherein they contradict. For it is as certain that the Jews received, and have continually propagated such a Tradition, though false in the root, as that the Christians have received the contrary: Notwithstanding reason may judge infallibly between them concerning the root of these Traditions, namely by demonstrating that such miracles (acknowledged by both sides to have been wrought) were many of them of such a nature, as that they did exceed all created power, and that the doctrine was so divine, so destructive to the devil, as that he was obliged in interest to endeavour the annibilation of it: and lastly, that nothing was either done or taught by our Saviour, but what was agreeable to the ancient Prophecies, received by the Jews concerning the Messiah, etc. upon which grounds it will evidenly appear, that the Jews, who first received such a Tradition, were abused by the malice and perfidiousness of their ancestors, etc. And this is the only proper way of determining and deciding the controversy between these two Traditions. But of this more hereafter. 5. In general therefore I found that a full unquestionable certitude might be had of some Traditious; as to give one example more, that there was such a man as William Duke of Normandy, who conquered England, is most certain, not any Englishman or other that ever heard of it, but believes it, and would impute frenzy to any man that should call it in question. Now the reason why this is so certain to every one, is this; because all men living at this time, who either are inquisitive into times past, or c●pable of information do agree; that this particular was told them by their Predecessors, as a thing come to them by Tradition, and so the men of the former age of that before them, thus ascending, till we come to the age wherein he lived, and was personally known and seen by his Subjects. Now it is impossible that all men of any age should both agree together, and actually effect that complot, to deceive their children with a lie, under the notion of Tradition, Add to this; that the present age affords us books and Records descending from hand to hand, and written in several ages between that time and us, which testify the same thing. As likewise there are in the general practice of England, Laws, Customs, Privileges, etc. all which are acknowledged to have had their Original from the same Author. This is an example of one of the highest degrees of Traditionary certitude that may be of a thing passed so many ages since, being confirmed by Oral Tradition, Universality, Records, language, and practices or customs. 6. An inferior degree of certainty in Tradition (yet certainty however) is, for example, that there was such a man as Alexander the Great. This is a thing most certain, and yet it wants many of those arguments of assurance in the former example. There is indeed a kind of Oral Tradition of this likewise, yet not arriving unto this age and climate of the world by such a general succession as the former, by reason that Alexander having lived in a quarter of the world remote from us, we are not descended from the men of his age, who knew him; yet, it may be, some of them or their children coming to Rome delivered this, and so some Romans conveyed it among these Western parts of the world. There are no customs or practices among us relating to Alexander; so that the main arguments of certainty are, 1. Positive, that is, writings dispersed abroad, made by ancient Grecians and Romans, all testifying the same thing. 2. Negative, not one man appearing in this age, nor to be heard of in the former, that denied it, or so much as called it in question. 7. A yet inferior degree of certainty in Tradition may be exemplified in some writings, as in S. Clement's first Epistle to the Corinthians, lately published and printed in England. For that there was such an Epistle written is testified by all Antiquity, and was assuredly believed by all learned men in this age before the publishing of it: But it is, now near eight hundred years that it has been missing in the world, for Photius, I think, is the last writer that takes notice to have read it. Of late this Epistle was found in an ancient Manuscript in the King of England's Library, sent him for a present out of the Eastern countries. Now the certitude that this is the same Epistle anciently acknowledged and read in the Church, appears in this: 1. That the characters of the Manuscript are very ancient, (yet I do not believe it to have been written by that glorious Virgin Martyr S. Tecla, as the credulous Grecians would pretend;) so that if it had been counterfeited, it was done in times, when the falsity might have been discovered by unquestioned copies. 2. That the stile is agreeing with the ancient simplicity and gravity of Apostolic writings. 3. That the subject is the very same that those ancient Fathers, who speak of it, do mention. 4. That all the extraits and passages, which the Fathers of the Church do quote out of S. Clement's true Epistle, are found in this. Upon which grounds it may be truly said, and I believe no man will contradict it, that this is certainly S. Clement's Epistle. 8. It is likely that besides these degrees of certainty, more upon consideration might be found out: but these I esteemed enough for my present purpose. Now by certainty I intent not certitudinem rei, for so nothing that is or hath been is in itself more certain than another, for even a thing that has its existence from free or casual causes, when it is, is as certain as any other thing produced by causes never so determinate, efficacious or necessary: But certitudinem quoad nos, that is, our assurance that it hath been: And a thing I call more certain, in this notion (not which has less doubt or suspicion of not being, for if there be any rational suspicion, there is no certainty, no not in the lowest degree: but) that which has more ways to prove itself to be certain then another. CHAP. XXIV. Divine revelations proved to be certain beyond humane story. 1. I Will now proceed by way of comparison to demonstrate the high degree of certitude; which we may have of divine Revelations, testified by the present Church, considered as a simple proponent, setting aside the authority which she challenges to oblige all men to submit to. In which discourse we are to consider four things especially in Christian Religion, coming to us by Tradition, but in subordinate degrees of certitude, viz. 1. Doctrines merely speculative, and which hardly could be testified in the practice of the church. 2. Books of Scripture. 3. Ceremonies and external practices not mentioned expressly in Scripture. 4. Doctrines and customs shining in the practice of the Church, and likewise more or loss clearly expressed in Scripture. 2. First for speculative doctrines, which could hardly be expressed in the practice of the Church, the Tradition of them seems to be very difficult, and the certainty not so demonstrable. As for example, there are in the Catalogue of Heresies made by S. Epiphanius, S Augustine and Philastrius, certain opinions called Heresies in a large notion, which seem not to have been in themselves of any dangerous consequence, but yet have been condemned by Popes, etc. and ever since by a tacit consent of the Universal Church avoided; as the opininions of the Millenaries, Melchisedechians, etc. Now whether these Heresies were condemned as contrary to a Tradition, or only by a judgement of discretion, by showing, that the grounds pretended for such opinions out of Scripture are not concluding, but rather the contrary, (as the second Council of Orange seems to condemn some doctrines of the Semipelagians) is not very certain. However they rest condemned, and more probably the former way, as contrary to Tradition; which may rather be believed of the Millenaries, because they pretended for their doctrine a Tradition derived from Papias a scholar of the Apostles, and it was very far spread in the church, and maintained by great Saints and Doctors, as S Irenaus, S. Justin Martyr, etc. It might very possible be, that the Traditionary doctrines contrary to these Heresies (however speculative, and which could not be conveyed by any outward practice of the church) might have continued in men's memories to the times, when these opinions were confuted; For no doubt can be made, but that the Apostolic churches, together with the books of Scripture, received the true sense and interpretation of the most difficult passages, which might continue by a successive instruction, but of which, by reason they were no necessary doctrines of Christian Religion, many are lost, as I exemplified in the former conclusion. So that the certainty of such Traditionary speculative doctrines is very hardly demonstrable; and thereupon many learned Catholics conceive, that several lately controverted opinions in the church, as concerning Grace and Freewill, Molin in S. Tho. p 1. q. 1. a. 2. disp. 1. & 2. ad. 3. Can. in loc. Theol. l. 12. Ca 3. Fr. a S. Cla. in Syst. fidei. Ca 2. 8. 14. the immaculate Conception of our blessed Lady, etc. have been so much agitated without any decision of the church; and it ever any of the said opinions come to be decided by a Council, that the decision will at least oblige to obedience and noncontradiction, but not, perhaps, as an article de fide, that is, as a divine revelation, delivered by universal Tradition: Since it is generally confessed, that they want such a Tradition. See above in this Section: 1 Cham 9 3. As concerning books of Scripture, the Tradition of them may appear certain in a high degree, at least for the substance of the books: For though at first they were written for the use and necessity of particular Churches and persons, and no Obligation appears expressly to have been imposed to disperse them through the whole Church: Notwithstanding the infinite reverence, which all Christians bore to the Apostles, made every church desirous to possess themselves of whatsoever writings proceeded from them: Yet this not out of any extreme necessity, for from their first foundation all churches were instructed in all points and doctrines of Christianity, as likewise the same orders of government, public worship, etc. and this after an uniform manner, as appeared to me evident, not only from the ancient Liturgies, but several testimonies out of Tertullian, S. Epiphanius, S. Augustine, etc. But there was required a long time ere such writings could be universally spread, yea several ages were passed, before they were all of them received, even at Rome itself, as appears out of S. Hierome. For before they were admitted into the Canon, we may be sure that great caution and exact information was used. So that after all this they having been now many ages acknowledged by the whole church for divine writings, we may have a greater assurance of them, then of the books of Aristotle, Cicero, etc. which, by reason men were not much concerned, whether they were legitimate or supposititious, have not been examined with so much advice and caution; and yet that man that should pretend to a doubt of them, would be suspected of all men to be tainted in his understanding. But this high degree of certitude we have only of the divine books considered in gross, not of the true reading of particular Texts, as appears by the infinite variety of readings in Manuscripts, yet even in this respect also we may assure ourselves that there is no corruption very considerable, or of very dangerous consequence, by considering not only God's providence and promises to his church, but likewise by comparing the original Texts with such a world of Translations, Syriake, Arabic, AEthiopian, Latin, etc. many of which were made in the very infancy of the church, long before the Archetype or Original copies were lost, some of which Tertullian says, remained in his days. 4. In the third place, reason told me that such ceremonies, as were universally practised through the whole church from the first times, though not mentioned in Scripture, might justify themselves to be derived from the Apostles with a greater certainty, than even the books of Scripture themselves; according to that saying of S. Augustine, (Ep. 118.) Those things which we observe, and are not written, but delivered, and are practised all the world over, are to be understood to have been commanded and appointed either by the Apostles themselves, or by General Counsels, the authority whereof is most healthful in the Church. Which Tertullian before him thus expressed, (the Praesor.) This custom certainly proceeded from Apostolic Tradition; for how could that come into (general) practise, which was not delivered by Tradition? Now of such kind of rites many examples are extant in ancient Liturgies, and many more mentioned, as universally received by Tertullian, S. Cyprian, etc. who wrote before there had been in the church, any plenary Council, and therefore, by S. Augustine's rule, argue such rites to have come from the Apostles. The reason is, because it is not imagineable how it could be possible that such rites should be received by all churches through the world, and that so immediately after the Apostles times, and in such a season, when there had never been any general meeting of Bishops, yea when by reason of the horribleness of the persecutions it was extremely difficult for the Bishops of one Province to meet together to settle particular necessary affairs (in none of which Synods notwithstanding is the least mention made of ordaining such ceremonies) if together with Christian Religion, they had not been introduced by the Apostles. Let now any reasonable man judge if the books of Scripture, which he acknowledges only upon the ground of general Tradition, however certainly and unquestionably divine, yet do not want some of these arguments of demonstration, and enjoy some of the rest in an inferior degree. 5. But fourthly, Doctrines or customs shining in the general practice of the Church, and withal more or Less clearly expressed in Scripture (that is, indeed the whole substance and and frame of Christian Religion, as was showed before, and therein many points now in controversy between Catholics and Protestants, etc. and above all other, this point of the Church's authority) may prove themselves certain in a degree beyond all these, and with as much assurance, as Tradition is capable of, I am confidently persuaded, beyond the highest degree that I mentioned for secular Tradition, in the example of King William the Conqueror of England. For first, all the persons living in the time of Luther's Apostasy in all Provinces, not of one Kingdom, but of the whole Catholic Church, agreed in testifying that their ancestors had delivered such things to them, as of Tradition Apostolical, and by consequence, since the contrary cannot be made apparent, we are to judge the same of all precedent ages ascending upwards, till the first times, not one Catholic expressly dissenting, and much less any one age: So that unless in some one age of the church all Catholics should should have conspired to tell a lie to their children, and not only so, but should have been able to have seduced them, not one appearing that would have the honesty to discover the deceit, I could not conceive it possible, that a Tradition of such a nature could be false. Add to the confirmation of the same doctrines the testimonies of Histories and Records, yea even of enemies for many doctrines and practices: Moreover the laws continually in force through the Catholic Church, lastly the public forms of Devotions, Feasts, times of mortifications, etc. All these arguments of certainty conspire in a far more eminent manner to prove these kind of doctrines and rites, then in the example of William the Conqueror. 5. But beyond all these something may, be added, to which that secular example doth in no visible distance approach: For, did William the Conqueror ever appoint any persons about him to write all the considerable particulars of his story, supplying them with all things for the enabling them to that purpose? Did he work miracles himself for the confirming his authority, and give power to his servants and their successors for several ages to do the like? Did he appoint a succession of Teachers to the world's end sufficiently instructed, commanding them to keep warily the depositum of that Religion, both from mixture and perishing, and so to deliver it to their successors, and this upon great penalties of disobeying? Did he, besides solemn days for several uses, institute outward rites and practices to be by all men in all times and places solemnly either seen or practised, and these with prescribed forms, postures, and actions, on purpose that the weightiest passages of his acts or sufferings should continually be celebrated in the world, leaving an impossibility of their being forgotten without a deluge? Nay lastly, to secu●e all men from the least apprehension, did he engage an omnipotent power to perform a promise that those orders, ceremonies, and laws should continue to the world's end in despite of the gates of hell itself? Not any of these things have been done by Will. the Conqueror, (or any other but our Lord) to propagate his memory; and yet, notwithstanding all these defects, we are most assured of the Tradition, that such a person there was, that he conquered England, brought in new laws, customs, etc. What shall we then say of the testimony of the present church for the substance of Christian Religion, even while we consider the church only as a bare witness or proponent of such things to us? Is any confirmation stronger than all this requisite to beget an assurance in us? Yea is it possible that more secure order could have been taken, then that which the Son of God has used to make that which was passed now above sixteen ages to remain always, as it were visible before our eyes? CHAP. XXV. The reason of considering this double capacity in the Church. Certainty of belief, compared with certainty of knowledge. 1. THe reason why I enquired into the proofs of the certainty of universal Tradition proposed by the Church, considered antecedently to her authority, was, because I found it necessary, as to myself, for a distinct understanding the Resolution of Catholic Faith, that grounds of certainty of Tradition should first be laid, before the authority of the church interpose to oblige us to believe Christian doctrine for the prime author's sake finally, which is God. 2. Since than Tradition in general is in itself credible, and some Traditions certain, and above all others that ever were; or, I believe, can possibly be, the Tradition of the church, especially in necessary doctrines of Faith universally believed, and all rites universally practised, and among them this particular Tradition of an obliging authority in the Church, is the most certain; we may conclude that the belief and assent thereto approaches the nearest to knowledge of sense, that belief possibly can do. But it is impossible, ordinarily speaking, that it should arrive to all the degrees of assurance that sense cum debitis circumstantiis may have; by which means it becomes meritorious, that is, capable of a reward, which, I conceive, experimental immediate knowledge is not: And hereupon it was that our Saviour told S. Thomas, who would not give credit to any reports concerning his Resurrection, till his eyes saw him, and hands felt him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me thou hast believed, blessed are those who have not seen, and yet have believed. (John 20. 29.) But it may be objected, if manifest vision take away meritoriousness by reason of such an apparent certitude, as enforces the understanding to assent; why should Faith, which is, or may be built upon grounds demonstrably certain, though indeed not in the utmost degree of experimental knowledge, have blessedness annexed to it? I answer, the reason seems to be, 1: Because before a man arrive to an assurance in Faith, there is required a great exercise of his understanding to search all the arguments conducing to a firm grounding of his belief, which cannot be done, unless there be in those persons enquiring some degree of love to the things inquired after, which travel proceeding from love, is a thing proper to be rewarded. 2. Add to this, that such persons after such a love, and inquiry proceeding from that love, will be forced to submit and captivate their understanding, to the belief of many mysteries infinitely beyond the natural capacity of their comprehensions, a thing extremely acceptable to God. 3. And this is the state requisite in Christians endued with abilities and learning in the Church, especially the teachers and governors; And however it is most necessary in general for the settling of a Church, that there should be means of assurance of Tradition praerequired to supernatural Faith, because discoursing men, especially if they be propossessed with prejudice, or a contrary belief, would hardly or never be brought without it to captivate their understandings in such a manner. But as for silly ignorant Christians, to whom God is pleased to give a certainty of adherence beyond a certainty of evidence (as M. Chillingworth says) and who seem rather to believe with their wills, than their understandings, an immediate and simple captivating of their minds to Christian Verities, without searching arguments of assurance, may be conceived acceptable to God, supposing notwithstanding that they live in a Church, where it may be made appear, that what they believe is not a lie, nor a doubtful truth, but on the contrary certain and infallible. To which purpose S. Augustine (cont. Ep. Fund. c. 4) saith, As for the other r●ut of common people, it is not the sharpness of their understandings, but the simplicity of believing that makes them secure. And again, If Christ be dead only for those who are enabled by a certain comprehension to discern these things, we do labour in the Church almost to no purpose. And therefore the Calvinist Ministers &c. (who profess an undervaluing of Tradition in comparison of pretended inward revelations and assurances from God's Spirit, and who teach their followers to hate the very name of Tradition) may do well to consider what will become of them and their faith of Scriptures in general, when they shall begin to doubt that such pretensions are either apparently false, or at least impossible to be proved, or however no arguments at all to persuade a third person. 4. Lastly it is observeable● that such Traditions as we now speak of, are always capable of being proved to be certain, yet are evidently so, the nearer they come to their fountain or times, whence they take their original. And therefore, for example; though at the beginning the whole Nation of the Jews were eye-witnesses of the stupendious manne● of delivering the law in the wilderness, yet their successors (immediately after that generation was dead) fell into Idolatry and infidelity; the reason whereof was, not because they wanted means, assuring themselves of the divine authority of their law, and the curses attending the breach of it; but because of this there was requisite some meditation and exercise of their understanding and besides, those curses were future, and therefore present temptations of fleshly and secular lusts presently enjoyed by them, had so much power over them as to keep them in negligence or busying their understandings, and in a presump●●ion that those curses which were future might perhaps never happen, or not upon themselves in person, or however by a repentance some time or other might be prevented. In like manner, and upon the same grounds the Christians of the first times were more holy, more unmoved in their faith, more zealous for the glory of God then in following ages; because the grounds of assurance and other motives did more immediately, and so more strongly, make an impression upon their minds. Notwithstanding the faith and holiness of the times further distant from the Apostles (caeteris pa●ibus) is perhaps more acceptable to God, and more meritori us, as having more of the will in it, as our Saviour implies in the forecited speech to S. Thomas. CHAP. XXVI. Grounds pre-required to the Church's Authority. 1. HAving showed the certainty of Tradition in general, and some several degrees of it, and withal the incomparable advantage, which the Church, as a simple proponent, has to prove the certainty of her Tradition of those doctrines which concern the substance of Christian Religion: In the next place I proceeded to make some nearer approaches to the consideration of the Authority, which she challenges to herself, and whereby she obliges all in her Communion to believe receive, and embrace whatsoever she thus proposeth, that is, to acknowledge the Verity and divine original of all those Christian revelations deposited in her hands, and several ways both by oral instruction, practice, or writing delivered by her to all Christians, to be by them believed, practised and obeyed. The Church, as a simple proponent, only tells us, that such doctrines, books, and rites were anciently delivered as divine, and attested by divine miracles, believed most assuredly to be such by all Christians: And in respect of this way of proposing, even her enemies may join with her to confirm this Tradition; proofs thereof we find in Jewish and Heathen Authors: The Jews all confess that the Religion (by Christ and his Apostles preached in the world) was (at least pretended) to be of divine authority; That strange wonders, (pretended likewise to be wrought by a divine omnipotence) gave testimony hereto. But yet neither Jews nor Heathens assent to what Christians infer from hence, namely, that these were indeed divine miracles, and by consequence the Doctrine confirmed by them, divine also. 2. This being so, the Church (before she can interpose and make use of her authority to oblige any to submit to the particular doctrines and practices by her proposed, and by her likewise, where need is, explained and interpreted) must give a firm unquestionable assurance of these two things. 1. That the Religion in gross (which Tradition on all hands agrees to have been delivered) is divine, and hath been more then sufficiently proved to be so. 2. That one of the special doctrines of this Religion, is her authority so far extended. I say this assurance must be firm, and unquestionable in both these points; for if it be only probable, though in never so high a degree, I was not able to comprehend how that which is built upon such a ground, could be absolutely firm and unquestionable. 3. To demonstrate therefore the former point; viz. concerning our assurance of the divine original of Christian Religion, I suppose this for a ground, That from sufficient principles, reason can conclude certainly and necessarily: which not being to be denied by rrason, I add that the principles to be laid by reason as a ground of this our assurance are, 1. The consideration of what a nature those miracles were, (which that they have been wrought we have from Tradition not only assurance, but the highest degree of assurance that Tradition can almost afford.) 2 Of what a nature Christian Religion (delivered by an equally assured Tradition) is, for the confirmation whereof such miracles were wrought. These two principles, as they give mutual virtue each to other, and both of them together do necessarily conclude all that we desire to demonstrate, so they ought not easily be disjoined. For first, some of the same effects, which in Christianity we call true miracles, no doubt, have been wrought in places where a false Religion hath been professed. And on the other side every Religion wherein there is no impiety is not necessary to be esteemed of divine original. But when can it be demonstrated that true miracles have been wrought for the asserting of a Religion; and that that Religion teacheth supernatural doctrines of holiness, piety, justice, etc. then nothing can in reason be objected against it. 4. In the present case therefore; 1. Concerning Miracles wrought by Christ and his Apostles &c. (to the end that I may only point at these things, since it is not my present purpose to speak of this argument, but only as a preparation to my information concerning the church's authority and Resolution of Faith) we may consider as in this number of miracles, 1. Propeecies in the Old Testament brought to us by most assured Tradition, wherein we find expressly foretold, that the Messiah should come before the Sceptre was departed from Judah, that is, before the particular Commonwealth of the Jews was destroyed; that he should teach a new Covenant to be written not in Tables of Stone, but in the hearts of God's people; that he should confirm this Covenant by the same Miracles which our Saviour actually wrought; that the Gentiles, (after the death and glorification of the Messiah) should be received into this Covenant, and the Jews for their infidelity rejected, etc. 2. Stupendious miracles apparently wrought by Christ and his Apostles; to which, because they were but a few persons, end therefore, lest the narrowness of the scene should prejudice their authority, we may add a continuance of the like miracles performed by the successors of the Apostles in all the parts of the Roman Empire, and by a world of persons, learned and unlearned; men and women, etc. None of which could have been performed by any inferior natural agent known of us, and therefore either by God himself immediately, or by good supernatural spirits at least. 5. In the second place for the doctrines and precepts of Christianity, the former are indeed many of them above the reach of natural reason, but not directly against it, conducing very much to the glory of the divine incomprehensible Majesty; and the latter directing mankind in the most perfect manner imagineable to glorify God, to renounce, de●ie and contemn wicked Spirits, teaching men to perform all duties of justice and charity to all manner of persons respectively, to preserve peace and tranquillity in the world, and lastly to perfectionate every single person in sobriety, chastity, etc. after a manner more than humane; so that if man be capable of being elevated to a felicity beyond nature, this is the only Religion worthy to bring him to it. 6. From these principles, reason may conclude most assuredly. 1. That such miracles were certainly wrought, many of them, immediately by an omnipotent power; and the rest at least by good Angels, as God's Ministers; since it is impossible that wicked Spirits should be willing to strain themselves so far on purpose to teach mankind to love and glorify God so hated by them, to encourage them in the learning and practice of virtue and holiness, and, in a word, to induce them to hate, renounce, and destroy the Kingdom of Beelzebub, the Prince of Devils. 2. That such a Religion, which most assuredly has been attested by such miracles, is most true. 3. That by consequence, since this Religion expressly says so, it is most necessarily to be embraced, being proposed by such a witness and proponent, as God in that Religion has declared to have received commission from him, and authority for that purpose. And this Proponent is (as after the spending of many thoughts and much time, before I could free myself from many prejudices and misinformations caused by education, etc. by the goodness and mercy of God I came at last evidently to perceive to be) the present Catholic Church. CHAP. XXVII. Proofs ●ut of Script●ure etc. for the Church's authority. 1. THe special grounds, from whence to mine own full satisfaction, I collected this assurance, That the Church alone was that divinely authorised proponent, from whom I was to receive divine Revelations, and these in the sense that she received and proposeth them; as likewise the method and manner according to which, as distinctly as I could, I first gave an account to mine own understanding, and now to others, were as follows. 2. It having been before declared, and conformably testified by all kinds of ancient Ecclesiastical writers, 1. That the doctrines and forms of practice of Christian Religion were by the Apostles with great care and assiduous inculeations firmly settled in all Churches by them founded and established: To which form other Churches, by their successors converted, generally conformed themselves, as Tertullian (de Prescrip.) saith, The Apostles founded Churches in every City, from which (Churches) other Churches afterward did borrow the Faith delivered, and the seeds of doctrine. 2. That Religion was thus settled chiefly, and indeed only by Tradition, the books of Scripture having been written only occasionally, and though they comprehend in general the principal points of Christianity, yet it is very briefly, obscurely, with seeming contradictions, and dispersedly; whereupon it is that they do often refer us to the profession and practice of the church. Hence in evidence of reason it will follow, that he that would inform himself of Christian Religion, must have recourse thither where it ●a's been deposited, and that not simply in words, but withal the sense of those words, and the very life of them in practice; and this depositary is by all acknowledged more or less, to be the Catholic church: For even those, who make it a part of their Religion to oppose the authority of the Catholic church, yet acknowledge that they have received the Scripture (that is, all the Religion which they have) from her and her authority. 3. Hence it will follow, that that man that should either look for Christian religion where it is not, or expect to find it entire where there was no intention to include it in its whole latitude, or hope to assure himself of the clear sense of it, where it is set down often obscurely, almost every where obnoxious to variety of interpretations, would certainly not follow the conduct of his reason. 4. Notwithstanding, if the imputation of unreasonableness were the only effect of such an indiscreet way of information, there is no proud man (and pride, or impatience to submit to authority is the root of all heresy and Schism) but would easily persuade himself to despise such an imputation; yea he would take a pleasure in opposing himself and his own reason single, not only to one, but many ages of men, that should it more reasonable to rely upon authority for that, which cannot be believed, but upon the only motive of authority. There is therefore another effect far more considerable, than point of reputation, which is the utmost danger of eternal perdition in renouncing one main doctrinal foundation of Christian Faith, which is the authority of the one, holy, Catholic Church of Christ: which authority consists not only in delivering books of Scripture, or Traditionary doctrines, but in obliging all men to unity, both in f●ith and love, which is impossible to be had, except all men be obliged to the sense and interpretation which she proposeth, as received from her by the same authority from which she received the books or doctrines themselves. 5. A doctrine this is the most express in Scriptures, the most constantly asserted by Fathers, the only business of all Counsels, the most freely without any contradiction embraced by all Christians before these times, (excepting only those, whom even the Sectaries of these times will call Heretics or Schismatics) and in these times by all that enjoy the name of Catholics. In a word, a doctrine this is beyond all other traditionary doctrines propagated from the Apostles to these times, with the fullest universal consent of all Catholics in all places, and of all times, of any one point in Christian Religion, or any one book of Scripture. 6. Among proofs out of Scripture, we will begin with the Old Testament (concerning which S. Augustine (in Psal. 3. ch. 2.) professeth that the Prophets foretold more often, & more plainly of the Catholic Church then of Christ himself, and the reason, he says, was because many Heretics would arise that would perhaps spare the person of Christ, but none could be a heretic without withdrawing himself from the authority and unity of the Church. Now the particular Texts which especially S. Augustine makes use of to assert the church's Authority are these, In the last days the mountain of the Lord shall be on the top of all mountains, and all hills shall flow unto her. And she shall judge every tongue that resists her in judgement. And, Kings shall walk in the light of the Church, and people in the splendour of her East. Again, That every Kingdom and Nation which doth not serve her shall perish. (Isa. c. 2. 54. and 60.) That of the Kingly Prophet David, Glorious things are spoken of thee, thou City of God. That of the Canticles, Thou art fair, and there is no spot in thee. And that of the Prophet Ezechiel, Thou shalt no more be called forsaken, Psa. 86. Cant. 4. Ezech. 37. 7. Proofs out of the New Testament are, Behold I am with you always unto the end of the world, Mat. 8. upon which S. Augustine in Psa. 70. & 10. thus infers, The Church shall be here unto the end of the world. For if it shall not be here unto the end of the world, to whom was it that our Lord said, Behold I am with you always unto the end of the world? And what was the reason that it was necessary that there should be such speeches in the Scripture? Because there would in times to come arise enemies of the Christian Faith, which would say, Christians will continue for a certain space, after that they will vanish, and Idols shall return, that shall return which was before.) Again Mat. 6. Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it; And again, Joh. 14. The Spirit of truth shall remain with you for ever. And again, Let both grow together unto the harvest. And again, Mat. 18. If any man will not hear the Church, let him be to thee as a Heathen and a Publican. (Upon which S. Augustine (lib. 5. de Bapt.) thus descants, the which house likewise hath received the keys, and a power of losing and binding. Whosoever shall contemn this house, reproving and correcting him, let him, saith he, be unto thee as a Heathen and a Publican.) And lastly, The Church, which is the pillar and ground of truth. 1 Tim. 4. CHAP. XXVIII. The validity of such Texts, etc. 1. UPon these and other such Texts of Scripture, joined with Tradition and uninterrupted practice, the ancient Church grounded upon her authority, the ancient Counsels their power of anathematising all gainsayers, and the ancient Fathers all their arguments and discourses against all sorts of Heretics; arguing thus, That if the promises of Christ were true, that his Church should continue for ever, and so continue, as that she should always be preserved in all truth, so that the gates of hell should never prevail against her; than whatsoever Heretics opposed, or Schismatics separated themselves from the present Church, either gave Christ the lie, or acknowledged themselves to be a Congregation exempted from these promises; concluding that no pretence could be sufficient to warrant any man at any time to separate from the Church, to which such promises have been made. Hence that great Alexander Bishop of Alexandria, (Theod. Hist. Eccl. l. 1. c. 4.) We acknowledge one only Church Catholic and Apostolic, which, as she can never be rooted out, although the whole world should attempt to fight against her, so she surmounts and dissipates all the impious assaults of Heretics. Hence likewise S. Athanasius, The Church is invincible, although hell itself should oppose her. Hence lastly Theophilus● God at all times affords the same grace unto his Church, namely that the body should be preserved entire, and that the poisons of heretical doctrines should have no power over her. V. S. Hierom. Ep. 67. 2. Now if these promises of Christ be not both infallible, and likewise absolute: and unless the Church, to which such promises belong be not only visible, but by the weakest understandings discernible from all other factions and Congregations: and lastly, unless upon the same grounds that all the Fathers took advantage from such promises to condemn all Schisms and Heresies against the Catholic Church of their times, all succeeding Catholics might with as much reason and justice from the same promises conclude as efficatiously against all following Heresies and Schisms; whatsoever hath been said by all these Fathers, especially the writings of S. Augustine against the Donatists, will prove to be the most foolish, impertinent, juggling discourses that ever were; yea that were too mild a censure; I should say, the most blasphemous and pernicious to Christianity: For by ascribing to the present Church respectively such sanctity, authority, and indefectibility, if such titles could not be warranted from Scripture and Tradition, all possible means of taking away scandals and errors among Christians would be utterly lost; it would be unlawful for any men to preach truth and piety, or reform vice: in a word, that fearful comminatory curse in the Revelation would be converted into an Evangelicall precept, Qui nocet, noceat adhuc, & qui in sordibus est, sordescat adhuc. Let him that doth mischief, proceed to do more mischief still, and let hi● that is filthy, be filthy still, (Apoc. 22.) I might add, Et qui incredulus est incredulus maneat. Let him that is a disbeliever, take care that he continue a disbeliever still, for whosoever reforms these things are Heretics and Schismatics. 3. But such promises are too express in Scripture, the Tradition of them too constant and universal, the Fathers too good Christians to leave any suspicion in men's minds, that they should either lightly, imprudently, or wickedly make use of arguments to destroy heresies, which in future times would be as proper, yea far more efficacious to destroy truth. Therefore if all antiquity conspired to argue thus; Christ has expressly promised and foretold that his Church shall be as a City set upon the top of a hill: and that he by his Spirit will be with this his Church to the end of the world, in which Church notwithstanding there shall be a mixture of good and bad till the day of Judgement, but however the Church itself is without spot or wrinkle: Therefore it is a blasphemy in you Manicheans, Donatists, Pelagians, etc. to say the Church of Christ was perished or invisible, or a harlot, till you revived, reformed and purified it: I say, if the Fathers had reason from such promises to argue thus in the second, third, and fourth Centuries, their Successors had as good reason to make the same deductions from the same principles in the fifth and sixth ages, and so downward till these very times. For, as Christ is the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever, so likewise are his promises, and by consequence so likewise is his Church, since he has engaged his omnipotence to make good such his promises to his Church until the world's end. 4. If not, Let those that forbid such a method of arguing, name how long a time, and how far those promises are to be extended: Let them name the Climacterical year when the effect of them is to cease, or what constellation has overruled the operation of God's holy Spirit. To conclude, let them give some reason why the Donatists, (who though in all points of Christian Doctrine agreed with the Catholic Church, yet because, for I know not what pretended misdemeanour of one Bishop, they separated from his Communion, and afterward from all those that communicated with him, that is, the whole Church,) are therefore so highly condemned by the Fathers for this their Schism, that they professed the same heaven could not hold them both, yea that Martyrdom itself could not blot out that crime: What privilege can all those Sects of this age allege for themselves, that the same arguments and judgements of the Fathers should not be applied to them, who, to their Schism from charity, have added a division from, and contradiction to not only the Catholic Church, but all manner of Congregations preaexistent in so many points of doctrine and faith of so high importance? 5. I confess I could not imagine what could be opposed to this; and therefore I could not but conclude that the ancient Father's Logic was concluding; yea that such unanswerable arguments of theirs, were powerful means preordained by Christ for the accomplishing of his good promises to his Church, inasmuch as by them the gates of Hell, that is (as several Fathers expound) Heresies have been so far from prevailing against the Church, that they are utterly vanished, and the Church built upon that Rock which gave Peter that his new name, continueth firm and unmoveable, and no doubt will do so to the end of the world, whatsoever engines of cunning, malice, or rebellion, the Calvinists and other bloody Sects do raise against it, to batter it with greater violence than ever before. 6. I am the more confirmed in joining thus with the Fathers, because I perceive that they, yea that one single Father of the first magnitude (S. Augustine) has already answered all the most considerable arguments which the Protestants of these times are ready to borrow of their Fathers the Donatists, etc. to destroy the authority of the Church: He has already cleared the objection from the example of the Jewish Church reduced to such an almost invisible estate, that there were left no more than seven thousand men (and those hidden) which had not bowed the knee to Baal. And from that speech, When the ●on of Man comes, shall he find faith upon earth? and, Come out of Babylon my people, and from the example of that great Eclipse in the Catholic Church, during the interregnum of Arianisme. S. Aug. collat. post. con. Don. cap. 20. id. l. 81. quaest. qu. 61. id d● Un. Eccl. S. Hier. con. Lucif. S. Aug. Ep. 48. CHAP. XXIX. The Objection from the overflowing of Arianism in the Church, answered. Mr. Chillingworth's objection, That Christ's promises are conditional, answered. 1. THis last objection concerning Arianism, because even the-now-English-Protestants think they have great advantage from it, I am not in so much haste to draw towards an end of this conclusion, but I can be content to set down S. Augustin's answer to it, with a short Appendix. It seems the Donatists took the advantage from some hyperbolical language of S. Hilary concerning the great deluge of Arianism upon the Church, to enervate the promises of Christ, concerning the extension and duration of it. To this S. Augustine, Ep. 48. thus answers, That time, concerning which Hilary wrote, was such, that thou hast thought that thou mightst privily assault such a number of divine testimonies, as if the Church were perished out of the world, etc. Hilary therefore either blames only the tares, which were in the ten Asian Provinces, and not the wheat: or he thought fit therefore the more profitably, by how much the more vehemently, to blame the wheat, which by some default was in danger. For even the Canonical Scriptures have this customs in reprehensions, that the word seems to be addressed to all, when it reaches home only to some few. 2. For confirmation of this answer of S. Augustine it may be observed, 1. That the violent brunt of that Persecution of the Catholics by the Arrians lasted scarce four years, namely from the Council of Ariminum to the death of the Emperor Constantius. 2. That during that time the Western Churches felt little change by that Persecution. 3. That those who subscribed the cunningly contrived Creed at Ariminum did not intend to prejudice thereby the faith of the Council of Nice, since the new Creed was capable of a Catholic sense. 4. That even in the East very many glorious Catholic Bishops survived the fury of the Arrians 5. That the succession of Catholic Bishops was so far from being interrupted thereby, that S. Hierome who lived near those times, professeth that in his days there was not one Bishop in the Catholic Church that was not a legitimate successor of those glorious Prelates of the Council of Nice. From all which considerations we may rationally collect, that our Lord in this example gave a warning to the Rulers of his Church to be vigilant to prevent the like dangerous Heresies for the future; but withal to be confident in his promises, since he had been so careful to perform them, that when Heresy had all imagineable advantages, yet he provided so for his Church, by putting an end to those tentations, that the succession of lawful Bishops was not at all interrupted by them. 3. Beside these, Mr. Chillingworth produceth an engine (his friends know from what forge) to invalidate, as he believed, all manner of advantage, which Catholics reap from the promises of Christ, concerning a perpetual succession of his Church, by saying, that those promises are only conditional, viz. If Christians would make use of, and improve those means that Christ had left for the propagation of his Church; otherwise not. 4. But hereto the answer is very ready, For 1. All that is alleged is spoken merely gratis, there being no warrant from any circumstance in those Texts, wherein such promises are contained, for such an interpretation; and therefore when plain Texts are, and have been interpreted in a sense absolute by all Catholics of all times, a new unnecessary interpretation will certainly find no entertainment with any, unless it be such as make antiquity a prejudice to truth. 2. M. Chillingworth applies this interpretation to future times only, not to passed or present; so that thereby it shakes only our hope for succeeding times, not our faith for the passed or present; and therefore it is not available in the dispute in hand, concerning the Roman Catholic Church, which all English Protestants acknowledge to be a true Church of Christ, defective in no necessary truths, all the fault being her superabundance. 5. And for this reason it was that generally he was blamed, and I myself have often taxed him for serving himself of so scandalous, and as we thought, so useless an interpretation. But upon more serious consideration, I judged not him unreasonable for it, but my self, and others not quicksighted enough to perceive the necessity he had (though he never discovered himself plainly to any man, as far as I know) to make use of so desperate a gloss: For doubtless he saw clearly, that if there were such absolute Promises of indefectibility and divine assistance to the Catholic Church, none could with any justice challenge them, but the Roman Church, since she only appropriates them to her present Communion, all others laying down their claim. The special allegations which she may produce, to prove herself in a special manner interessed in these promises I shall take notice of in the last conclusion. Lastly S. Augustine will afford us a satisfactory answer, who, to the like objection of the Donatists (viz. Men would not persevere, and therefore Christian Religion hath failed out of all Nations, except only the party of Donatus:) Answers him, As if the Holy Ghost was ignorant what would be the future wills of men, which yet foreseeing notwithstanding foretold that the Church of Christ should endure for ever. De unit. Eccl. c. 12. CHAP. XXX. The general ground of the Church's authority, viz. Christ's promises. The several subjects and acts thereof. 1. TO return therefore to the authority of the present Catholic Church, by virtue of which she obligeth all men in her communion, not only to receive the Scriptures from her, as a depositary of them, but the true interpretation likewise of them preserved by her, together with all other Traditions, as much as concerns the substance of Christian Religion: This authority seems to be grounded especially upon the promise of indefectibility: an indefectibility, I mean, of the Church considered as one body composed of parts ruling and obeying, teachers and persons instructed, as S. Paul describes the Church, as it is to continue to the perfecting of the Saints: (Eph. 4.) Not as Mr. Chillingworth, who would make our Saviour's meaning to be no more, but that till his second coming his Gospel should not be so utterly rooted out of the world, but that somewhere or other there should be some that should profess it. 2. By virtue of this promise, the Church is assured 1. not to be deprived, neither of any necessary truths, nor of lawful Pastors to teach those necessary truths: when I say necessary, I mean not absolutely necessary to every single person, considered in any circumstance, exigence, or extremity (as Mr. Chillingworth and Doctor Potter etc. through their whole books understand it, whether mistaking their adversaries, or no, I thought it unnecessary to trouble myself to examine; but I am sure, without any prejudice to the established doctrine of the Church, which remains untouched, though all the inferences which they would make from such a notion of the word necessary were allowed them,) but I mean truths necessary to the constitution of a glorious visible Church, which must be furnished with a world of Doctrines and Orders, which to all single persons are far from being necessary to be believed or known, much less to persons wanting abilities, or means, or time to be instructed. 2. She is secured from Schism or Heresy; for remaining to the world's end, one holy Catholic Church (as we profess in the Creed) how can she be divided from herself, either in Faith or Charity? For unless all Bishops in Counsels Ecumenical, and indeed all Christians should conspire to renounce that truth to day, which they believed yesterday, how can novelty or heresy enter universally into the Church, under the notion of Tradition? 3. Concerning the subject of this authority, the principal subjects are indeed the Governors and Pastors of the Church, with whom Christ hath promised that he will be to the end of the world: But the adequate subject are all Catholic Christians, as well instructers as instructed: since Tradition is continued by them both, shining in the doctrines taught and received, in devotions exercised, and in outward practices and ceremonies celebrated by all Christians. 4 Now of this authority of the Church there are, generally speaking, two acts, 1. An Obligation lying upon all Christians to acknowledge that doctrine to be true and necessarily to be believed, and those practices necessarily to be conformed to, which are taught and received by the whole Church: and all this upon penalty of being accounted Heretics, that is, no members of the Church, and therefore by consequence divided from Christ the head of the Church, which inspires life into it here, and will glorify it hereafter. 2. A coërzion, or infliction of spiritual penalties and censures, as suspensions, deprivations, excommunications etc. on those that persist stubbornly in opposing those truths and practices. And this belongs to the Teachers and Governors of the Church, more or less, according to their several qualities: For every Parish Priest has some degree of this coercive power over his stock: every Bishop over both Priests and several congregations within his Diocese has more: every Metropolitan a yet larger power: A Provincial Synod above a single Bishop or Metropolitan etc. And in conclusion, the supreme Ecclesiastical tribunal is a Synod Occumenicall lawfully called, See Bacon Analys. sid. & Cellot. de Hier. Eccl lib. 4. c. 10. & 12. Syst. fidei ca 23. & infr. ca 33. confirmed, and some add, universally received by all Catholic Churches, that is by their Prelates, from which there is no appealing, for if there were, all authority would be vain, enjoying the name, but without any effect, or use at all, as shall be showed hereafter. 5. Concerning the former act of Ecclesiastical authority, (viz. an Obligation lying upon all Christians under pain of Heresy to receive the doctrines and practices of the universal Church) that it is in the Church antecedently to a general Council, appears by this, namely, that there were in the Church very many Heresies taken notice of, acknowledged for such by all Catholics, and dissipated before any general Council had been called, as the Ecclesiastical history & S. Epiphanius will assure us. And this is grounded ● Upon evident reason, for what is heresy (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) but a relinquishing of a former received opinion or practice, and the choice of a particular new one? an act this is which implies an extreme contempt of the whole mystical body of Christ, and a preferring ones own single judgement or wilfulness before whatsoever else is prudent or sacred in the world. 2 Upon express Scripture, for S. Paul commands the Thessalonians, and S. John all Christians to abstain from the conversation of, and not so much as to bid God speed to all disordinate walkers, swerving from the rule established, and all introducers of novelties in the Church: Yea S. Paul says, that an Heretic, even before the Bishop's censure, is (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) condemned by himself, that is (as several Fathers expound it) voluntarily and by himself separated from the body of the faithful; so that the solemn excommunication of the Bishop against him may seem to be only a ratifying of that man's censure against himself: For I conceive it can hardly be affirmed of all Heretics in general that they are (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) self-condemned, that is professing and maintaining errors against their own conscience and knowledge. 6. Now this authority residing in the whole body of the Catholic Church (I must add, of the present Catholic Church) has been in all times preserved so inviolable, that besides the forecited testimonies of the Fathers, this observation will sufficiently justify it, viz. That there was never in any age of the Church (as far as I have been able to inform myself) any one single person esteemed a Catholic, that ever either spoke against, or in the least degree censured, or seemed to render suspicious any doctrine or practise universally believed or received by the Catholic Church during the time that he lived. Many Fathers have been very bold and eager against abuses and errors particular, some of them perhaps too largely dispersed; but never any of them, whether private person or Governor, learned or unlearned, taxed the Church either of error in doctrine, or of superstition, profaneness, or any other enormity in practice: Many of them have earnestly called for a free Council to reform particular disorders and errors in the lives and writings of both Clergy and Laity (sometimes not sparing Popes themselves) but never to have the Church itself to alter any of her doctrines, or to change any of her practices, upon pretence that they were condemnable. 7. I know the several Sectaries of this present age are in this occasion always ready to object the only one unblamable action of that glorious Father and Martyr S. Cyprian, I mean his contestation with the Pope, and opposition to the general Apostolic Tradition and practice of the Church in non-rebaptization of Heretics. They neglect, forget, and by their practices condemn that most Christian Spirit of Unity and Charity, which shined in him toward those that differed from him in this point, and (as if his error had been his only virtue) acknowledge him only an example to be imitated in his fault, not considering what probable excuses there are to qualify that single fault of his, to which qualifications, they in none of their so many rebellions can pretend to: as 1. That the general practice of the Church against him did not appear to him so evident, but that he could allege examples, not only of the African Churches, but several in the East likewise, as Cappadocia, Phrygia, etc. as he was informed by Firmilianus in his Epistle to him. 2. That he himself begun not this novelty, but conld justify the Tradition of it for several successions, at least as high as the times of Agrippinus one of his Predecessors. 3. That no general Council had determined any thing against him. Yea S. Augustine (before quoted) confidently professeth, that if S. Cyprian had survived to the time of the Council of Nice, he would no doubt have relinquished his opinion, and submitted to the Council. 8. By this objection borrowed from ancient Heretics, it appears, that as in the Catholic Church there is a Tradition and Succession of truth, so in heresies likewise of error, the latter Heretics borrowing from their Predecessors (though not Predecessors in their particular opinions) the same arguments and pretences that formerly have been without success made use of against the Catholic Church: so zealous do such men show themselves to use all endeavours to renounce that precious legacy of unity and peace, which our Saviour, ready to relinquish the world, so tenderly bequeathed to his Church. 9 Then for the second act of Ecclesiastical authority, (viz) a power coercive and judiciary residing in the Church-governors' respectively, and supremely in general Counsels, lawfully convened, approved, and accepted: this authority the primitive times, and all ages ever since have acknowledged to be grounded upon the institution and promises of Christ, and practice of the Apostles mentioned expressly in Scripture, Act. 15. & delivered likewise by universal Tradition, both oral and practical, v. g. Tell the Church, and if he will not &c. And, wheresoever two or three are gathered together in my name, I am in the midst of them. And, The Apostles and Elders were gathered together to consider about the matter, viz. in the first general Council, concerning the controversy about Moses his law &c, 10. And here likewise may be verified a like observation to the former; viz. That never any one of the Fathers of the Church did ever censure, much less contradict or disobey the decisions, orders or decrees of any legitimate Council in their own or former times. Yea I think I may hereto add something to the utter shame and confusion of the contrivers and propugnators of the late Heresies and Schisms, viz. That though most of the ancient Heretics, after a Council had condemned their opinions, did indeed refuse to submit to their own condemnation: Yet● I think, there cannot be found in Antiquity the example of one Heretic that ever began to publish a Heresy against any doctrine that had formerly been declared by a general Council. Such a supereminent degree of Rebellion we must acknowledge to be due, and to be appropriated to Luther, Calvin, etc. viz. to tread under foot all kind of Ecclesiastical authority, not only of the present, but all former times likewise. 11. I shall defer the consideration, how admirable and only effectual a means of unity among Christians is the authority of the present Church, and reverence of general Counsels, so unanimously acknowledged by all the ancient Worthies, Fathers, Doctors and Martyrs; insomuch as the more eminent in learning and sanctity that any of them have been, the more earnest Champions have they been of the Church's authority But the proper season to enlarge myself upon this subject, will be when I have taken into consideration the contradictory doctrine of Protestants, concerning power of interpreting Scriptures, and judging controversies. CHAP. XXXI Authority of the Christian Church compared with that of the Jewish. 1. BEfore I leave this argument of the grounds of the Church's authority (and the foundation thereof, viz. Christ's promises of indefectibility etc.) because objections against it are frequently taken out of the Old-Testament, namely from a comparison with the Jewish Church, which though it enjoyed great promises, did notwithstanding fall into a general corruption, both in faith and manners: It will not be amiss to set down for what reasons I rested satisfied, that none of those arguments ought to have any effect upon me, to shake my acknowledgement of the authority of the Christian Church so unalterably grounded, and so universally submitted to. 2. The first reason was, because the Jewish Church had not such promises of indefectibility and security from Heresies, as the Christian Church apparently has. It is true, the Patriarch Jacob prophesied, that the Sceptre should not depart from Judah, nor a Lawgiver from between his knees till Shiloh came. But this promise; I assured myself, respected only the outward policy of the Jewish Nation, which was to remain in a distinct government, not swallowed up by other governments, but openly governed by its own laws, as a Commonwealth, plainly distinguishable from others till the coming of the Messiah. 2. They were not furnished with those means of preventing and condemning of Heresies that the Christian Church enjoyeth. For the understanding whereof, I conceived that the Civil and Ecclesiastical Law of Moses was to be considered in two respects, first in the plain literal sense, and so it differed not much from the laws of other Kingdoms, the end thereof being worldly happiness, which is only in express words proposed in that law. Secondly in a spiritual, allegorical and typical sense, and so it had Immediate influence upon the conscience and inward acts of the soul, which later sense was taken notice of only by extraordinary persons, as Prophets etc. Now for the execution of this law in the literal outward sense and notion of it, God left sufficient authority in the Priests and other Magistrates, threatening every one with death that opposed their sentences and decrees. And for the explication of any emergent difficulties, God left the Sanedrim together with a succession of Scribes, from whose lips the people were ordinarily to seek knowledge: Insomuch as our Saviour speaking of such Scribes says, They sit in Moses his Chair; whatsoever they command you to observe, observe and do it, Mat. 23. But if we observe the dependence and limitation of that speech, the meaning will appear to be, that for the outward practices of Moses his law, the Jews were to submit themselves to the established authority, yea even when they interpreted that law to the people's disadvantage, as they did in the case of tithes mentioned by our Saviour in consequence of the former speech, including herbs ' as Mint, Commyn, etc. among the Species tythable, which Moses his law did not express, not necessarily imply. 3. Such authority the Priests, Scribe● and Pharisees had to explain the Precepts of his law for outward practice: But as for spiritual points of belief, Prophecies or internal sanctity, it does not appear that they much meddled with them, not one decision of the Sanedrim can be produced concerning such matters. Indeed who should be the interpreter of such doctrines? There were among them two principal factions, the first of the Nobility, that is, Priests, and those were generally Sadduces, as Josephus informs us: the other that popular faction of the Pharisees. Now I suppose the Sadduces, who denied the immortality of the soul, the existence of Angels etc. were very incompetent Judges in spiritual matters, and yet the authority was principally in their hands: As for the Pharisees, they were the more Orthodox of the two, but wanted authority. And to show that neither party pretended that points of such a nature were within their cognizance, it is observable, that neither of them extended their power to the condemnation or excommunication of the other for such differences; For for such trifles as heaven or hell, etc. they gave free liberty of conscience to every one to believe what and how much any man thought fit. Therefore surely our Saviour never intended to extend the forecited Text to such decisions of the Scribes: For then the people had been obliged to have submitted to that decree of theirs, viz. that he should be excommunicated that confessed Christ to have been the Messiah. Which Decree of theirs, though it seems to be about a principal point of Faith, yet the ground of making it was not to determine points of that nature; but because they believed, or at least said that they believed, that our Saviour's design had been to destroy the law of Moses and the Temple, and all the Rites which Moses gave to the Jews, therefore as external Magistrates, they provided by such a decree against sedition and rebellion. CHAP. XXXII. Enquiry concerning the extent of the Church's authority. How Stapleton states this point. 1. AFter the having examined the grounds of the Church's authority, which appeared to me both as firm in themselves, as the express word of God, the promises of Christ, and the Prophecies of the Old Testament could make any thing firm; and likewise as evidently certain to my understanding as the universal acknowledgement of all Christians in the Catholic Church, attested by the continual profession and practice of all ages of Christianity, the quotations, yea whole volumes of Fathers, and the concurrence of all Counsels, Provincial, national, and Ecumenical, could render any thing that was delivered before our times assured to any man: In the next place, I took into consideration the extent and latitude of this authority, how far it did necessarily oblige all Christians to submit to it; and what manner of submission is required respectively to the doctrines, Rites, Reformations, etc. decided by the Church. 2. Now this enquiry I made, not with any design to make choice of any particular opinion among learned Catholics to adhere to in opposition to any others (for being a Catholic, I was resolved to be an obedient son of the Church, and only of the Church) but to the end, that by instructing myself, how much more easy some Catholic Doctors of unquestionable integrity had made the bonds, whereby the Church restrained all in her Communion (contrary to that conceit which I, whilst I was a Protestant had entertained, when I opposed the Church's authority under the School-notion of infallibility, and that notion extended to the utmost importance of the word) I might clearly perceive myself, and if occasion were, discover to others (especially of my own country) that the exceptions and advantages which we have against the Roman Church, proceed only from our misunderstanding of her necessary doctrines, or at most, that all the efficacy they have, is only against particular opinions and inferences made by particular Catholic Writers. 3. I did not search for the most qualified sense of the Church's authority in the writings of Occam, Almain, Major, no nor of the most learned spiritual Gerson, etc. partly because some of those Writers are obnoxious to be excepted against, and all of them wrote before the new Schisms gave Catholics the opportunity to study this controversy more exactly. I had recourse therefore to writings published since the Council of Trent, and abstaining from relying upon the suspicious moderateness of Cassander, Padre Paulo Veneti, Picherellus etc. I fixed upon the judgement of our learned Stapleton, a man seldom cited, either by Cardinal Bellarmin, Pe●ron, etc. without a testimony of his profoundness, perspicuity, and integrity, and without the least suspicion from any Catholic of tergiversation, partiality or unsoundness. 4. This so approved Doctor in those books which he wrote purposely upon this subject, Stapl. lib. de Pri●●. Fid. doc. Contr. 4. Qu. 2. being to determine this Question, viz. An Ecclesiae vox & determinatio sit infallibilis? that is, Whether the voice and determination of the Church be infallible? gives an exact explication of the true state of the controversy in seven observations (called by him Notabilia) which are in brief, as followeth. 1. That the Church does not expect to be taught by God immediately by n●w revelations or enthusiasms, but makes use of several means and diligent enquiry, as being governed not by Apostles, who received immediate revelation, but by ordinary Pastors and Teachers. 2. That these Pastors in making use of these several means of decision, proceed not as the Apostles did, with a peculiar infallible direction of the Holy Spirit, but with a prudential collection, not always necessary. 3. That to the Apostles, who were the first Masters of Evangelicall Faith and founders of the Church, such an infallible certitude of means was necessary: not so now to the Church, which pretends not to make new Articles of Faith, but only to deliver what faithfully she received, and in some cases to add explications. 4. That in conclusions notwithstanding, though drawn from means and arguments sometimes of reason and humane documents, the Church is infallible, Prophetical, and by the holy Spirit's assistance, in some sense divine. 5. That the ground of this difference is, because the Church teacheth not Philosophically, and by rules of art, but by an authority conferred by Almighty God. Hence in Counsels we see their Decrees and Conclusions, but not always their proofs and arguments. 6. That this manner of deciding in Counsels was necessary, first in respect of ignorant persons, because they being rude and infirm, could never be secure of their belief, if it were to depend on mediums and principles which they could not comprehend: and secondly in respect of the learned, among whom there would be no end of disputing, if it were permitted to them to examine, whether the Principles upon which Counsels build their Conclusions were firm and concluding enough. In a word, otherwise Religion would not be faith, but Science and Philosophy. 7. (To set down his words at length) We must observe, that to the Church's infallibility in teaching, it is sufficient that she be infallible in the substance of faith, in public doctrine, and things necessary to salvation. This is manifest, because this is the end of the infallibility given, viz. For the consummation of the Saints, and the edification of the body of Christ, that is, to the public salvation of the faithful. Now God and nature as they are not defective in necessaries, so neither are they superabundant in superfluities, neither is the special Providence of God to be deduced to each particular: The which Providence as it doth permit many particular defects in the Government of the Universe, and this for the beauty of it, as S. Augustine (de Civ. lib. 11. cap. 18.) observes: so likewise doth it permit many private errours● in the Church, and even in the most learned men an ignorance of many things not necessary, and this not only to show a beauty in opposltion, but for the salvation of the Teachers, to whom it is expedient to be ignorant of many things; that in this regard power may perfected in weakness, that is, may be repressed from pride. Thus Stapleton with great solidity, and likewise with much becoming wariness states this Question. CHAP. XXXIII. Upon what grounds Stapleton may be conceived to have stated this question, with more than ordinary latitude. 1. TO this determination of Stapleton, I will subjoin the thoughts I had during my ●●b●te with myself about this great and most important controversy; together with the grounds upon which I believed that he had been more moderate and condescending in this point, then generally other Catholic Controvertists are. 2. But first by the way it may be observed, that when he speaks of the voice and determination of the Church in the question proposed, he means the decree of the Church speaking in a general Council representatively, in which, says he, the Church is infallible, namely with that restriction expressed by him in his last observation, viz. in delivering the substance of Faith, in public doctrines, and things necessary to salvation. Other Catholics there are which in this matter speak more restrictively than Stapleton hath expressed himself: as, to name one Panormitan, Panorm. C. signif. ext. de Elect. (whose words and opinion, though for the most part disclaimed by Catholic Writers, yet not hitherto consured by any that I know, as heretical,) they are these. Although a general Council represent the whole universal Church, yet in truth the universal Church is not truly there, but only representatively, because the universal Church is made up of a Collection of (all) believers, and that is that Church which cannot err. Panormitans meaning (to make his words tolerable) I conceive is, That the decrees of a general Council are not absolutely and necessarily to be acknowledged the infallible Doctrines of Faith, till they be received by all particular Catholic Churches, because till then they cannot properly be called the Faith of the universal Church, or of the body of all faithful Christians, to which bod● the promise of infallibility is made. And this was the doctrine of Thomas Waldensis, and some other Schoolmen etc. An opinion this is, which though not commonly received, yet I do not find it deeply censured by any, yea the Gallican Churches reckoned this among their chiefest Privileges and liberties, that they were not obliged to the decisions of a General Council, till the whole body of the Gallican Clergy had by a special agreement consented to them: yea, which is more, till out of the said Decrees they had selected such as they thought good to approve, the which they reduced into a Pragmatic Sanction, and so proposed them; and them only to the several Churches there: My Author from whose credit I received this, is Thuanas, Thuan. de Vita. suâ lib. 6. who protesteth in a discourse to K. Henry the IV. related by himself, that it could not be found in any Records of that Kingdom, that ever any General Council had been any other ●●y received in France. This were a privilege indeed to the purpose, if it could be made good, as it is much to be doubted. 3. But as for the Opinion of Waldensis, it has found many abetrours in these latter ages, for Fr. Pious Mirand●la in his eighth Theorem de Fid. & Ord. ●red: saith, Those Decrees may justly be ●●lled though the Decrees of the universal Church, which are either made by the Pope the Head thereof, or by a Council, in which the Church is represented in matters necessary to Faith, and which are approved by the Church herself. In like manner Petrus a So●● Soto Asser. Ca cit. de Concll. instan●ing in the second Council of Ephesus corrected by that of Chalcedon, manifestly implies, that Counsels, even General, before they be received and approved by the Universal Church, may be repealed by a following Council, but a Council once received can never be altered. And therefore, says he, God by his providence over his Church will so order, that whatsoever is erroneous or defective in one Council, shall be corrected in a following one, before it be received in the Church. The same Author repeats the same Doctrine again in his observations upon the Confession of Wittenberg. Id. in Conf. Wittenb. Cellot. de Hier. Eccl. l. 4. c. 10. 8. 12. cap. de Council. Consequently hereto Cellotius a learned Jesuit professeth, That the infallibility promised to the Church is twofold. 1. Active, by which the Prelates in Counsels proposing points of Faith, are secured from error. 2. Passive, whereby the Universal Body of the Church under all the Prelates in all the several Provinces respectively is preserved from assenting to, or believing an error. Now that in the whole Church, whether represented in a Council, or dispersed over the world, both these kinds of infallibility are to be found, saith he, no Catholic can deny. He adds, In case there hath been any thing decreed by Counsels, which either hath not been generally admitted, or by general disuse hath ceased, that the present Church is not thereto obliged, appears clearly by the Decrees of the first Council of the Apostles, in the prohibition of things strangled, and blood. In the last place, our learned Countryman Bacon Bacon Anal. Fidei. n. 113. (alias Southwell) a very ingenuous and acute Jesuit, doth plainly enough signify, That it was the opinion, not only of S. Augustine, but generally of all the Writers of that age, that the resolution of Faith had its utmost complete effect in the reception of the whole Christian world; grounding his assertion upon such like passages of S. Augustine as these, Those are only Plenary Counsels which are gathered out of the universal Christian world. Aug. de Bap. l. 2. c. 3. id ibid. Again, The letters of Bishops may be corrected by national Counsels, and national Counsels by Plenary ones, and former Plenary Counsels may be corrected by others that succeed. And again, We should not have the boldness to affirm any such thing, were it not that we are confirmed by the most unanimous authority of the universal Church. Now I suppose their intention is not to refund all authority finally upon the ignorant people, but upon the whole Body of the Prelates, admitting and attesting what was decreed by a few in Counsels, by which means the universal Government of the Church sets their seal to the Doctrine of Faith, and virtually, or by consequence, in and with them, all Christians universally in their communion and under their charge. By this means indeed all possible objections will be taken away, and the Decisions of Counsels will be the Acts, not of ten Bishops representing a hundred, and perhaps giving suffrages to Doctrines never questioned or debated by them, but of all the Bishops of the Christian world. Now it is not necessary, according to these Author's grounds, that there must be such a Reception of conciliary acts by particular P●●●●●s ●●prossely, formally, and directly, it being sufficient ●hat it be done interpretatively, that is, when such Doctrines are known, and permitted to be published ●emine reclamante. And till this be done, shy they, the Council, though in itself it be very legitimate, and deserving the ●itle of Oecumonicall, yet it does not sufficiently and evidently appear to be so: whereas a Provincial Council, yea a Private Fathers or Doctors opinion so received, has in it the virtue of a General Council. 4. Now this opinion maintained by such considerable learned Catholics, and not apparently contrary to any decision of the Church, though I did not intend to subscribe to, as undoubtedly true; for my resolution always was not to engage myself in any private Sects or topical opinions, and least of all in such as appeared to be exotic and suspicious, notwithstanding I was very well contented to perceive, that it was at least an allowable opinion; For I found it of great convenience to myself, to free me from many difficulties: For thereby, 1. Here is no entrenching on the points of controversy between Catholics and Protestants, since they are all, not only decided by the authority of Counsels, but likewise actually assented to and embraced by all particular Catholic Churches; neither (as matters of controversy do now stand) is it necessary to require any more from Protestants, than what has been so both decided and received. 2. Hereby all the objections, which Protestants make from certain (real or imaginary) contradictions which may be found in decrees of Counsels about other points not now in controversy, are apparently rendered ineffectual; for if that be to be only necessarily accounted an article of Catholic Faith, which is actually acknowledged and received by Catholics, and since contradictions cannot be actually assented to, it will follow, that whatsoever decisions of Counsels may seem to oppose such articles, are not necessarily to be accounted Catholic Doctrines, and by consequence not obligatory. 3. That so much objected speech of S. Augustine (de Bapt. Dom. l 2. c. 3.) (viz. The letters of Bishops may be corrected by national Counsels, and national Counsels by Plenary ones, and former Plenary Counsels may be corrected by others that succeed) though it be understood of points of Doctrine (as it seems to require such a sense, because S. Augustine speaks it upon occasion of rebaptisation) yet makes nothing against Catholics, who upon the forementioned grounds and authorities, need account that only to be Catholic Doctaine, which is actually embraced by Catholics. Yea upon the same grounds the like may be said of that yet more bold speech of Cardinal Cusanus, viz. It may be observed by all experience, that an Universal Council may fail. (Cusan. concord. l. 2. c. 14.) 5. But to proceed to the several grounds; upon which I conceived Stapleton determined this question, with a greater latitude and indulgence then most other Writers, and yet notwithstanding he hath escaped the censure of any, being commended even by those who use much more rigour in it then he has done. The first is, That no Doctrine can be called an Article of Faith, but what was in the beginning revealed and delivered to the Church by Christ and his Apostles. 2. That these doctrines have been preserved and continued to these times by Tradition, that is, not only in books approved and delivered Traditionally, but rather in an oral practical Tradition from one age to another. For the Church pretends not to any new immediate revelation, though she enjoys an effectual assistance of God's holy Spirit. 3. That there is a double obligation from decisions of General Counsels, the first an obligation of Christian belief, in respect of doctrines delivered by General Counsels, as of universal Tradition: the second only of Canonical obedience to orders and constitutions for practice, by which men are not bound to believe that these are enforced, as from divine authority, but only to submit to them, as acts of a lawful Ecclesiastical power, however not to censure them as unjust, much less to oppose and contradict them. 4. That many (I may say, most) constitutions of Counsels in order to practise do yet virtually include some degree of belief; as that of Communion under one kind, of the use of Images in Churches and upon Altars, etc. of residence of Bishops, of authorised Translations of Scripture, etc. And that in such cases we are not obliged to believe that Christ or his Apostles gave order that such practices should follow, but only that considering Christ's continual care over his Church so clearly promised, neither these nor any other orders universally established and practised are destructive to any substantial doctrine or practice of Christianity; and that the authority left by Christ in his church was so large and ample, as that when she shall judge it fit, considering the various dispositions of succeeding times● she may alter external practices and forms not essential or● of the substance of Christian Religion, even in the Sacraments themselves, as we see acknowledged in some cases by all Christian churches, as about the altering of the time and posture of receiving the Eucharist, the triple immersion in Baptism, abstaining from things strangled, and from blood, etc. 5. That doctrines determined by national Counsels lay no obligation at all upon any other churches, but only those whose Bishops meet together: and all the obligation even of those Christians who live within such Provinces, is only not to contradict; they are not bound to receive such decisions as Articles of Faith; the reason being evident, because one Nation cannot be a competent judge of Catholic Tradition, and there neither is, nor can be any Article of Faith but what is delivered that way. 6. That the authority of the Pastors of the present Church is not of so absolute and sublime a nature as that of the Apostles was, though it be sufficient to require obedience from every man: as likewise consequently that they are not in all degrees so powerfully assisted in their determinations as the Apostles were, so that some difference is to be made between Canons of Counsels, ●● Apostolic writings, as hath been showed before out of S. Augustine, Beltarmine, and other Authors. 7. That some difference may likewise be made between the present and primitive Churches: For they having received Christian doctrines more immediately and purely, and besides the true sense of particular passages of Scripture, which are difficult (which is now in a great measure utterly lost) they were able to speak more fully of many particular, not necessary points in Christian Religion, than the present church now can, though perhaps the advantage of tongues and sciences, the benefit of so many writings, both ancient and modern, long study and meditation, etc. may in some sort recompense those disadvantages of the present church 3 yet however these are but acquired and humane perfections, whereas the former were Apostolic Tradition. 8. That even of points of doctrine decided by Counsels a difference may be made between such as are of universal Tradition, and others: for those former being capable to be made evidently certain (as I proved before) such decisions are to be the objects of our Christian Faith, and no more to be rejected then any other divine revelations: But other points of doctrine there are sometimes decided in Counsels, rather by the judgement and learning of the Bishops, considering Texts of Scripture, wherein such points seem to be included. And weighing together the doctrines of ancient. Fathers and modern Doctors, an example whereof I gave before in the Council of Vienna, touching inherent grace infused into Infants in Baptism, and in the Council of Bazil, concerning the immaculate conception of our B. Lady: NOw such decisions many Catholics conceive, are not in so eminent a manner the necessary objects of Christian Faith; because not delivered as of universal Tradition: But however an extreme temerity it would be in any particular man to make any doubt of the truth of them, and unpardonable disobedience to reject them, I mean the conclusions themselves, though if the Texts of Scripture be set down, from whence such conclusions are deduced, or the said authorities produced, it may perhaps not be so great a fault to inquire and dispute, whether from such a Text, or such authorities, such a conclusion will necessarily follow. 9 If in such decisions, as these later are, there should happen to be any error, (which yet we may piously believe the assistance of God's holy Spirit promised to the Church will prevent) but if this should happen, since it must necessarily be in a point not pertinent to the substance of Christian Religion, (for all substantial points are universal Tradition, as we showed before) it were far better such an error should pass, till (as S. Augustine saith) some later Council amended it, than that unity should be dissolved for an unnecessary truth, since as Irenaeus saith, There is no reformation so important to the Church, as Schism, upon any pretence whatsoever is pernicious. 5. Upon such grounds as these, I supposed, it was that our learned Stapleton stated this question of the church's authority (or as he calls it, infallibility) with so much latitude and condescendence; And him I have quoted not with any intention to prefe● him with the disparagement of any other, but to show that thereby I perceived myself not to have sufficiently considered the necessary doctrine of the Roman Church in this so fundamental a point of faith; and likewise how (when I heard the Church speaking in her own language, and moderately interpreted by Catholic Doctors.) I found what she said so just, so reasonable, so impossible to be contradicted by any thing but passion, or interest, or pride, or hatred of unity, that there was no resisting the attraits of it. Then at last I found what I had all my life time in vain sought after, namely a firm foundation, whereon I might safely and without any scruple rely; and more glad than of all worldly treasures to see my soul taken out of mine own hands, and placed under the conduct of her whom Christ had appointed to be my guide and conductress, to whom he had made so many rich promises, and with whom it is his pleasure to dwell, than I took up a Psalm of Thanksgiving and said, Laetatus sum in his quae dicta sunt mihi, in domum Domini ibimus: Stantes erant pedes nostri in atriis tuis Jerusalem: Jerusalem quae aedificatur ut civitas cujus participatio ejus in id ipsum: Illuc enim ascenderunt tribus, tribus Domini etc. Psal. 121. CHAP. XXXIV. Unsatisfactory grounds of the English Church, concerning the Ecclesiastical authority. Calvinists Doctrine, concerning the Spirit's being judge of controversies, etc. answered. 1. BEing thus satisfied of the firm grounds of the Church's authority, the only bulwark against all Heresy and Schism, a sure preserver of unity, without which no Commonwealth, no society of men can possibly subsist, much less of churches; in a word so necessary, so consonant to reason, that even all sorts of sects and congregations, whilst they deny it to the Catholic Church, usurp it to their own conventicles; to which yet they have not assurance enough to apply our Saviour's promises in contradiction to other Seets, with whom they will not communicate; yea even those who make a liberty of prophesying a differencing mark of their Sect, yet will not allow their own partisans this liberty of prophesying, unless they prophesy by their rule, and against their enemies. In the next place I took into consideration the unspeakably happy effects of this authority, which immediately represented themselves to my mind. 2. I will notwithstanding a while defer an account of those effects, till I have briefly set down and examined the grounds which Protestants lay for interpreting Scripture, and judging controversies in Religion, in opposition to this authority of the Church and her General Counsels; as likewise their principal objections against the said authority: For then comparing both these doctrines together, and the consequences together, it will be more easy and commodious to decide whether of them is the more advantageous, and whether or no I have made a prudent choice in forsaking a Church, where all unity was impossible, but only such an outward unity, as worldly hopes and fears can produce, and in betaking myself to a church where Schism is impossible. 3. All Protestants, and other Sects, agree in this against the Catholic Church (for Schismaeest unit●s ipsis, as Tertullian. de Prascrip● c. 42.) saith, Their unity is an agreement in Schism, that the Scripture is the only sufficient Rule of Faith, and that there is no visible Judge of the sense of it. But yet to the end that God's church may not become a very Babel, since a Judge visible or invisible must needs be had, some disagreement there is among among them, what invisible judge to pitch upon. 4. All that I can collect from the sense of the English Church in this point is, that which results from these articles of hers compared together, viz. Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary for salvation, so that whatsoever is not read therein, is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an Article of Faith, or be thought requisite necessary to salvation. Again, The three Creeds etc. ought throughly to be received etc. For they may be proved by most certain warrants of holy Scripture. Again, The visible Church of Christ is a Congregation of faithful men, in which the pure word of God is preached, and the Sacraments be duly administered etc. As the Church of Jerusalem etc. so also the Church of Rome hath erred, not only in their living and manner of ceremonies, but also in matters of Faith. Again, The Church hath power to decree rites or ceremonies, and authority in controversies of Faith; and yet it is not lawful for the church to ordain any thing that is contrary to God's Word, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture that it be repugnant to another: wherefore although the church be a witness and a keeper of Holy Writ, yet as it ought not to decree any thing against the fame, so besides the same ought it not to enforce any thing to be believed for necessity of salvation. Again, General Counsels may not be gathered together, without the commandment and will of Princes. And when they be gathered together (forasmuch as they be an assembly of men, whereof all be not governed with the Spirit and Word of God) they may ●rre, and sometimes have erred, even in things pertaining unto God: wherefore things ordained by them as necessary unto salvation, have neither strength nor authority, unless it may be declared, that they be taken out of Holy Scriptures. From which Articles it is apparent, that the Church of England, though in words she seems to ascribe some kind of power to the Church and General Counsels, yet in very deed, since she makes herself at least, if not each particular man, a judge, whether the Catholic Church proceeds according to Scriptures or no, the thereby utterly deprives the Church of all manner of authority: yea de facto the Supremest authority, which is in the Church, is actually censured as a Delinquent, both in having made decisions beyond, and against the Word of God. But after these destructive determinations, the English Church names no other visible or invisible authority, not laying herself any claim thereto, although in effect she takes upon her to do more than she claims: So that à primo ad ultimum, all the judgement that I could make of the English Church was, that since worldly interests constrained her to separate from the Catholic Church, by the just judgement of God, she had only a power given her to destroy the Temple of God, but not so much as to lay one stone towards the raising up another in the place of it. 5. As for the Calvinist party in England, they follow the example of Calvin, and most of his followers that I had read, as likewise the Lutherans, etc. all which make the Holy Ghost, testifying to every man's conscience, the infallible interpreter of Scripture. Now concerning this their pretence to such a Judge, all I had to say upon it, during that very small time that I had the patience to take it into debate, was; 1. That I could not believe that they believed themselves, when they laid claim each man, or each Sect to such an infallible judge. 2. That if they did indeed believe it, as I could not hinder them, so till I had some good experience I durst not pretend to the like infallibility. 3. Since all those Sects pretend to so more-then-miraculous an infallibility, and yet not any of them work any other miracles, it proves of no effect to end controversies, which is the proper office of a Judge, especially such a Judge as the Holy Ghost, which is the Spirit of unity. 4. That if such a pretence was indeed false (as it must be in all Sects differing between themselves, but only one) it is in all the rest a most horrible presumptuous lying against the Holy Ghost, and most justly punished by him with implacable and eternal divisions both among themselves, and from Catholic unity, divisions; I say, impossible to be remedied, till all but one Sect agree in the same confession, or acknowledge, since a Judge is requisite, and the invisible one will not serve the turn, that therefore they are to have recourse to the only visible one, viz. The present Catholic Church, which in Spirits so envonomed against the Church, as those Sects are, how without a miracle it cannot be expected, fearful experience shows. 5. That since this pretending to the Spirit is effectual only so far, as by a seeming divine warrant to make them hate one the other, but not to oblige one the other to submit to their so eanonized interpretations, it is of no use at all in this business of finding out a Judge to end controversies among dissenting Christians. Lastly, That that rule of Tertullian (de Praser.) being unquestionable, viz. That whatsoever is new is Religion, praejudges itself to be false, it will undoubtedly follow, that this ground of so many Sects, is of all others most apparently untrue, since no example can be found for it in all Antiquity: Here the Tradition from the ancient Patriarches of Merefies fails them, for excepting some fanatical Heretics, as the Montanists, etc. none ever pretended to the Spirit against the church. CHAP. XXXV. Mr. Chillingworth's new● found Judge of Controversies, viz. Private reason. His grounds for the asserting such a Judge. 1. SInce the publishing of Mr. Chillingworth's book, there has appeared in England a new Judge of controversies, and much deferred unto there, which is every man's private reason interpreting of Scripture. From what country this new Judge came, is very well known, and I willingly forbear to discover. The truth is, if Christ had made no promises to his church, if it had not by God's own Spirit been called the Pillar and ground of truth; if universal Tradition were a fable; if all Councello, conspiracies of Tyrants, and lastly, if unity in the church were unnecessary or unprofitable, reason might have much to allege for itself, that it should be raised into this tribunal. 2. But before I examine particularly the pretensions of reason to this Office, I will set down the State of this controversy, as Mr. Chillingworth (c. 4. parag. 93.) has very perspicuously and yet very briefly expressed it in these words; Believe the Scripture to be the word of God, use your true endeavour to find the true sense of it, and live according to it, and then you may rest securely that you are in the true way to eternal happiness. These are the directions which he professeth that he would give to any man desirous to save his soul, and requiring whose instructions to rely upon for that purpose, and this in opposition to a Catholic, that would advise such a man to have recourse to the Catholic Church etc. 3. Now for a more orderly examining of Mr. Chillingworth's direction for finding out the true sense of Scripture, and judging controversies; I will yet more distinctly set down his grounds in several propositions collected out of his book, in such a method, as may show the respect and dependence of the one on the other, together with the chief reasons which he alleges for the proof of them; and afterward I will subjoin thereto the reasons which moved me to judge such grounds of his, insufficient, and his reasons unconcluding; and in conclusion I will declare how I satisfied mine own reason, that all the several objections which he makes against the Church's authority, under the notion of infallibility, have not that force that both he and I myself once imagined. 4. The abridgement of Mr. Chillingworth's whole discourse, I conceived might be reduced to these Propositions following, viz, 1. That Christian Religion having been planted so many ages since, the only ordinary way that we can arrive to the knowledge of it is Tradition: and the only assured way, universal Tradition of all ages and Churches, which is of itself credible, and admits not of any proof. 2. That for himself he could find nothing delivered by such an universal Tradition, as of divine authority, but only books of Scripture; for if he had, he would have embraced it with equal submission, since the being written makes not any thing more credible. 3. That the Scripture is a most sufficient, and the only rule of Faith (most sufficient) because itself says so (the only rule) because nothing else can be proved to be of universal Tradition. 4. That by consequence, the Scripture contains in it all things necessary to be believed and practised by all sorts of persons, and this so plainly and expressly, that no reasonable man can doubt of the sense thereof, much ●esse be mistaken; for otherwise God would not have provided sufficiently for the salvation of mankind. 5. That concerning those passages of Scripture, wherein are contained doctrines of Christianity, but not so plainly, men are not obliged necessarily to understand or believe them, since it cannot consist with the goodness of God, that men should be bound to have an express knowledge or belief of that which God himself has purposely delivered obscurely. 6. That since no proof can be made, either out of Scripture, or universal Tradition, that there is any authoritative visible Judge of the sense of the Scripture; and since each man's understanding or reason is the only faculty capable of judging; that therefore it only is to judge of the sense of the Scripture as far as concerns each man's particular. 7. That since every man's reason may possibly be deceived, (especially proceeding upon objects not immediately offered to sense) therefore an infallible faith is not required; such a probability will serve tqe turn, as is sufficient to produce in a man obedience to the precepts of holiness commanded in the Gospel. 8. That since all Christians cannot but agree in necessary doctrines (which are express) they ought not to deny communion to one another for other doctrines, not expressly contained in Scripture. And that this is the only affectual means of reducing● and preserving unity among Christians. 5. These are in brief the grounds of Christian Faith, and of the means afforded us to attain to the true sense of as much of it as is necessary, and likewise to beget charity and unity among Christians as they lie dispersed up and down in Mr. Chillingworths' book, and which I have set down faithfully and ingenuously, in the most rational method that I could devise. I will now with as convenient dispatch as I can, adjoin likewise in the same order respectively the reasons why I could not content myself with them, but was forced to relinquish them, to abase mine own reason, and to have recourse to a foundation, as I thought, more firm and rational, and I am confident far more safe, viz. the Catholic Church. CHAP. XXXVI. An answer to the three first grounds of Mr. Chillingworth. 1. TO the first ground therefore, viz. That there is no other way to be assured of a Religion established many ages since, but universal Tradition, I grant it; But whereas it is added, A Tradition of all ages: If the meaning be, that it is required to such an assurance, that a man should have precisely from every age a sufficient testimony of this universal Tradition, this is utterly impossible any other way, then as including the testimony of former ages in that of the present; for though there may be preserved a few writings in every age, all which may contur in this testimony, and so make it indeed very probable; yet the testimony of three or four Writers is not equivalent to the testimony of the age. Add to this, that such a way of proof (though it may give good satisfaction to learned persons, and is practised more by Catholics then any other, who yet rest upon the present Church for the certainty of Tradition) yet it is very laborious and uncertain, and whereof very few persons are capable, and therefore not to be made a ground for all men to build all Religion upon. The testimony therefore of all former ages is always most safely included, as to particular men, in the testimony of the present age, if that be universal for place, and grounded upon Tradition, as I showed before, and made the proof of the assurance of it to be, because it was impossible it should be false, unless some one whole age should conspire to deliver a thing as of Tradition, which was not so and not only conspire, but should actually deceive their children, no man discovering the imposture, a thing beyond all imagination of possibility. I will therefore add no more here, but only the confession of a learned Protestant in his own words, viz. Field of the Church. l. 4. c. ●14. When a Doctrine is in any age constantly delivered as a matter of Faith, and as received from ●● ancestors, in such sort as the contradictors, thereof were in the beginning noted for novelty, and if they persisted in contradiction, in the end charged with heresy, it is impossible but such a doctrine should come by succession from the Apostles. 2. To the second, where he says; That he could find nothing as of divine authority delivered by universal Tradition of all ages, but only books of Scripture. I answer, that any one that will search with a willingness to find, shall doubtless have better fortune then Mr. Chillingworth. For I desire any one to consider with himself, ●● Whether the Apostles did not in all churches established by them, settle the whole doctrine and form of Christian Discipline uniformly? and whether this doctrine and discipline was not carefully preserved in the Primitive churches all the world over? if these things be granted, as plain Texts of Scripture for the former, Act. 20. 20. 27 and an agreement of most of the Fathers, within the time of the four first General Counsels will testify for both. Then I desire to know, whether from the fourth Council till S. Gregory the Great's days, any substantial part of either has perished? If any one say it has, he will find it a labour beyond Hercules his forces to prove it; for to this hour I could never see one pressing testimony out of any Ecclesiastical Writer. Then from S. Gregory's days to these, it is visible that not any the least substantial part of either is lost, and this by the confession of several learned Protestants, Vid. Brereleys Prot. Apol. tr. 2. Sect. 1. by the agreement of all Catholic Writers, by S. Gregory's own writings, and (which is a proof irrefragable) by comparing the Gregorian Liturgy and Missal with those of the present age. In the next place, let him consider, that most of the books of the New Testament were written by the Apostles and Evangelists for the use of particular churches, some to particular persons, sent by single messengers. Besides, that several ages were passed, before all the books were communicated, and dispersed, and accepted as Canonical by the whole Catholic Church. Now after a comparing of these two Traditions together, let any man judge whether of them is the more universal, either for time or place. 3. To the third, viz. Of Scriptures being an entire Rule of Faith, etc. It is already answered cap. 31, 32. etc. Whereto I shall for the present only add this, viz. That Mr. Chillingworth (cap. 1. parag. 5. 6. 7.) takes great advantage from a speech, as he says, of his adversaries, namely, That the Scripture is a perfect rule, forasmuch as a writing can be a rule. I am confident his learned adversary never intended to allow him all this in the sense and extent that Mr. Chillingworth presseth it, as if all points of Faith were as fully set down in Scripture, as they could be in any writing. But I have no commission to interpose between them two, and therefore all I have to say is, that there appeared to me no kind of necessity, nor any probability that it was his Antagonists intention, that such a large allowance should be made to Protestants; for I would fain know, since evidence is one necessary condition to make a rule perfect, could Mr. Chillingworth believe that the meaning of his learned adversary should be, that for example, the doctrine of Faith concerning the blessed Trinity is as evidently and intelligibly stated in Scripture, as in the first Council of Nice? or all points in controversy now adays, as in the Council of Trent? or that all Texts of Scripture are so unquestionably evident, that no interpretations or Commentaries could make them plainer? his meaning therefore surely was, that Scripture in regard of evidence, and with relation to fundamental Doctrines, chiefly intended to be published in it, is as evident as can be expected from any one single writing standing alone. Not but that one writing explained by a second, and those explanations further cleared by a third may be plainer: Or though it might have been possible, that for example, the Doctrine of the Trinity might have been declared so manifestly, that Photinianisme or Arianism might have been prevented, notwithstanding no plainness of writing can prevent malicious spirits from extracting novelties of some kinds of senses or heresies, either those or others as pernicious, since as our blessed Lord says, Necosse est ut veniant scandala, that is, It is necessary that scandals must come, Mat. 19 9 And S. Paul, Oportet & haereses esse, that is, It is needful that there should be heresies, 1 Cor. 11. 19 both for the trial of those that love God, and discovery of those that hate him. For unless God should quite change the nature of mankind, it is impossible that any one writing should be so plain, but that either the curiosity, or pride, or interests, or malice, or at least the debility of men's wits may, and doubtless will find or extract obscurities and difficulties out of it, especially such a writing as the Scripture is, which being composed by men of several dispositions and spirits, moreover belongs to all mankind, of all conditions and dispositions, so that if they be let alone, every one will be forward, yea even take a glory to dig and search into the treasures of it, and challenge an equal right to maintain his own, and disparage the discoveries of any other; every Sect and Sectary will think they see and read therein all their own distinctive opinions clearly shining, and a confutation of all opposite tenants. Yea perhaps, the blind sensual. Passions, worldly interests, and proud fancies of vain man, will have recourse thither, and not want the impudence to seek for, nor blush to pretend that they have found a covert and protection for the works of Satan in the divine Word of God. In vain therefore doth Mr. Chillingworth triumphantly boast of his inferences, to his seeming advantageous to himself, since they are all extracted merely from his own misunderstanding of that most reasonable and prudent saying of his worthy Antagonist. 4. Yea this one consideration, that the necessary mysteries of Faith are not, nor could be so evidently set down in any one place of Scripture, but that other places may be found, which may afford ground even to an understanding man to raise objections, will make any man conclude, that either there are no mysteries necessary to be believed, or that something besides Scripture must be made use of to clear all difficulties. CHAP. XXXVII. An answer to M. Chillingworth's fourth and fifth grounds. Several Novelties introduced by him. 1. To the fourth, where it is said, That all things necessary to salvation are contained in Scripture so plainly, that no reasonable man, desirous to find the true sense, can doubt or be mistaken in the sense of them; so that for such matters there is no need of any interpreter. An assertion this is, which is one of the main foundations, upon which all manner of Sects that withdraw themselves from the Church's authority, do and must rely; therefore I thought it necessary to spend more thoughts in examining the firmness of it: and after all, I profess I found it of all others most weak, most contrary to reason, and every day's experience. 2. For demonstrating the justice of this censure of it, and that I may express myself more clearly, I will lay down certain positions, to which I conceive all rational men will assent. As first, touching the word necessary, (besides what hath already been spoken of the ambiguousnesse of that word, which is relative, and variable according to its application to several objects and subjects, which I will not now repeat) I suppose that all men will call that necessary, for which being either denied or affirmed, they being of a contrary opinion would break Communion from, and deny it to other Churches: for Schism about unnecessary things, is by all Christians acknowledged a sin almost unpardonable. 2. That rationally to affirm a doctrine to be expressed plainly in Scripture, it is not sufficient to say it appears so to me, for so almost every one will be forward to say of all his Opinions, which he pretends to be grounded on Scripture: But that is to be called plain and express, which has not been controverted by men of reason, pretending to piety and impaertiality, especially if they be in any considerable number; so that it will not be satisfactory to say, this appears plainly to me, and I am sure I am not led by interest or faction, as others are; for this may be every one's plea against another. 3. That where two senses are given of any passage of Scripture, the one extremely probable and natural, the other not wholly absurd, and whereof the words may possibly be capable: in this case one Protestant cannot upon their own grounds condemn or impute heresy to another. 3. These positions thus premised, in the next place I conceived it very just, that before any Sect of Christians did build upon this foundation of the Scriptures, containing expressly and evidently all things necessary, that they should all conspire to make a Catalogue of points necessary, and this with relation to several states of persons, or at least to Communions and Churches: (I add this limitation, because to multiply several distinct Catalogues for all persons would be of extreme labour: and on the other side, to make one Catalogue for all men, would (as Mr. Chillingworth (Cap. 3. parag. 13. says) be like the making a coat for the Moon, which is continually in the wain or increase.) 4. Now to show the reasonableness of this, and that Mr. Chillingworths' adversary required most justly such a Catalogue from Protestants, let but any man consider with himself what satisfaction any man can have from a Protestant Minister, when he shall tell him, You have the Bible of our Translation, in which we affirm all necessary truths to be contained, but mixed with a world of unnecessary, you are not absolutely bound to study, or to be able to read this Bible, yet you shall be damned if you be ignorant of those necessary truths dispersed here and there in it; to say definitively how many, and which are those especial necessary truths, we are not able, neither have we authority; therefore at your own peril be sure you mistake neither in the number nor sense of those truths: we can indeed afford you Articles and Catechisms, to which as long as you live with us you must be forced to subscribe, but we have no authority (for there is none visible upon earth) to propose our collections or determinations, as obliging in conscience, etc. In what a miserable case would that Protestant be, that should give himself leave to examine upon how mere a quicksand all his pretensions to eternity are built. 5. And whereas Mr. Chillingworth would seem to conceive himself secure in the midst of these uncertainties, because, as he thinks, Catholics also are encumbered with the like: I found that conceit of his altogether groundless; for the promises of Christ remaining firm, and appropriated to the Catholic Church, it will follow; 1. That in the Catholic Church shall be taught to the world's end all necessary and profitable truths to all sorts of persons; so that every man respectively receiving and believing what the church appoints to be proposed to him, cannot fail of being instructed with things necessary, etc. 2. The same Church being endued with authority to determine the true sense of divine truths, a Catholic submitting to the Church, cannot be in danger through mistakes or errors; so that he who hearkens to the Church, has his catalogue of fundamentals made to his hand, the Church, like the wise Steward in the Gospel out of that store of provisions given her by Christ, proportioning to every man his dimensum panis quotidiani, his own befiting allowance. 6. And here by the way will appear; 1. The vanity of that ordinary calumny, which Protestants impute to the Catholic Church, as if she taught that it were sufficient to ignorant men only implicitly to believe what the Church believes, without an explicit belief of any thing: for there is none so ignorant, but is obliged to know and assent to what the Church teacheth him by his Pastor suitable to his estate and education. And secondly, an usual mistake among Protestants, who think that all the credenda in Catholic Religion, are comprised in the definitions of Counsels: for before ever any General Council sat, the Church was furnished with her full measure of divine truths, necessary to be believed, which were by her publicly professed and proposed; which have been occasionally declared, and distinctly expounded in her Counsels. But to return to Mr. Chillingworth. 7. He by his sharp understanding, and long meditation, coming to perceive those inconveniences, and considering that no Protestant or other Church could upon their generally acknowledged grounds authoritatively define either the number or sense of Articles of Faith, so as to oblige any man, even within her Communion, in conscience to assent and submission (For, for example, if an Englishman would not subscribe to the sense of any Article of the Church of England, all the penalty would be, he should not partake of the privileges and preferments of that Church, but he might go over into Denmark or Holland, whose sense in such an Article he liked better, and still be acknowledged even by the English Church to be orthodox enough.) He therefore was forced to introduce two Novelties among English Protestants which find great approbation: the first is to alter the old manner and notion of subscription to the English Articles; for whereas before, the Protestants there by their subscription testified their belief of all the 39 Articles in the sense imported in the words; yea whereas there was a Canon which denounced Excommunication ipso facto to all that should say that any of them were not true, Mr. Chillingworth thus expresseth his mind in subscribing, Answ. to Dire. to N. N●par. 39 I am persuaded that the constant doctrine of the Church of England is so pure and Orthodox, that whosoever believes it, and lives according to it, undoubtedly he shall be saved: and that there is no error in it, which may necessitate or warrant any man to distrub the peace, or renounce the Communion of it. This in my opinion (saith he) is all intended by subscription. 8. His second novelty is, that whereas the Protestants always professed that the publiqua Confessions of their Church's Faith, was indeed their own faith, that is, such expressions plain and indubitable, as are in holy Scripture concerning such points, or at least irrefragable consequences from Scripture, and therefore were to them as Scripture, because their sense of Scripture: and whereas they respectively divided themselves from the Communion of the Catholic and other particular churches, because they would not join with them in the belief of Scripture explained in that sense, which their several Articles import (and not because they refused to submit to Scripture, which all profess to do.) And lastly, whereas though they acknowledged Scripture to be the only Rule of Faith, yet because it not having being written in form of Institutions or a Catechism, the necessary doctrines of Religion are dispersed uncertainly in the several books, difficulty to be found out of them, and withal not so plainly delivered, but that there is need of explication and conciliation with other passages of Scripture that seem to contradict; for this reason each church compiled abridgements and confessions disposed orderly and methodically, by which they signify to the world how they understand Scripture: Mr. Chillingworth on the contrary delivers their mind jointly for them after a new way (which is his second Novelty) which I will set down in his own words, (cap. 6. parag. 56.) By the Religion of Protestants I do not (saith he) understand the doctrine of Luther, or Calvin, or Melanchion, nor the confession of Augusta, or Geneva, 〈◊〉 the Catechism of He●delberg, nor the Ar●●●● the Church of England, no nor the harmony of Protestant Confessions; but that wherein they all agree, and which they all subscribe with a great●● harmony, as a perfect rule of their faith and actions, that is the Bible, the Bible, I say the Bible only is the Religion of Protestants: Whatsoever else they believe besides it, and the plain irrefragable indubitable consequences of it, well may they hold it as matter of Opinion, but as a matter of Faith and Religion, neither can they with coherence to their own grounds believe it themselves, nor require the belief of it of others, without most high and most Schismatical presumption. Thus far Mr. Chillingwrrth. Now how far other Protestants out of England will approve of this new shift, which he has found out for them, and which, I am sure, he has published without any commission from them, I know not: But if they also justify him in this, all I can say is, that they will make their party much the stronger by it, and will likewise have reason to pretend to almost primitive antiquity, for if all be of their body, who, whatsoever their particular tenants be, build their faith upon only Scripture interpreted by each man's reason, than not only all Heretics of these times, but likewise almost all Heretics since the Apostles times, will be united in the same corporation. 9 But once more to return to Mr. Chillingworth's ' Position, viz. That all necessary truths are contained in Scripture so expressly, that no man can rationally doubt of the sense of them, and by consequence there is no need of an authorised visible interpreter. All that I shall say in answer hereto, shall be the making a few requests to our English Protestant's especially: As 1. To consider this and the former speeches of Mr. Chillingworth, not as an extraordinary invention of his excellent wit, but that which extreme necessity forced him to: for though before him few Protestant Writers have so freely discovered the arcana schismatis, as being unwilling to tell their followers that they had no authority to oblige them to their opinions: Yet Mr. Chillingworth deals more ingenuously, discovering, that this is indeed a foundation most necessary to be laid by all those, who deny all visible Ecclesiastical authority in expounding Scripture, and judging definitively of controversies in Religion: for otherwise they may say, God has given us the Scripture to be our only rule, this Rule is ambiguous and difficult, even in necessary things; there is no judge to interpret it, men's understandings are weak, and their wills strong, they are easily led away with prejudices, education and worldly interests; so that it is a great chance if they light upon the true sense of those difficult, yet most necessary mysteries, considering besides, that they are very contrary to flesh, and blood, and carnal reason. This were to deal with mankind worse than the Egyptian Taskmasters did with the Israelites, to demand brick, and give them no straw. Since therefore no Protestant would willingly lay such an imputation upon the Father of mercies, it will follow, that he must of mere force acknowledge with Mr. Chillingworth, that all truths necessary to salvation are contained in Scripture so expressly, that no rational man can doubt of the sense of them. 10. My second request to English Protestant's is, that they would take into consideration how (after that a Catholic would be so liberal, as to allow them this ground) they would be able, and by what rules, to distinguish points unnecessary from necessary: for though it were true that all necessary points are plain, yet all plain points are not necessary. 3. That for a more particular trial, they would resolve with themselves, whether the Mysteries of the eternal Godhead, and Incarnation of our Saviour, be not necessary to be believed; if so, (as the English Articles import) than they may do well to take a survey of all the Texts of Scripture, which Volkelius and Crellius heap together to combat these mysteries, and afterward conclude, whether only Scripture being the Rule, and only private reason the Judge, these mysteries be so plainly and expressly contained in Scripture, that no reasonable man can doubt of the sense of them, and that there needs no interpreter to reconcile them. 4. I would likewise desire them to consider the places of Scripture which Catholics make use of, to build the authority of the Church, and the Real Presence (I name these, because they are the principal grounds of their separation.) Now when they have considered the Texts for the former point, let them take notice that they cannot produce one express Text of Scripture against the authority of the Church; and for the other point, whether the Texts which Catholics produce for the Real Presence, do not in the literal grammatical sense say all that Catholics believe; and whether all that Protestants labour to prove be not, that though Hoc est corpus meum, as the words lie, be against them, yet the sense hidden and figurative, which they desire to force upon these words, is against Catholics. And having considered these two instances, let them upon Mr. Chillingworths' present grounds judge how they can satisfy their own reason and conscience, without express Scripture for themselves, and against at least express words of Scripture for Catholics, to make a separation from the whole world. 11. In the last place I desire them to speak freely, whether if this be true, that to be expressly & unambiguously set down in Scripture, be a condition necessary to all necessary points of Faith, there be indeed any points of faith necessary, since there is scarce any one article of the Creed which has not been, and is not at this day questioned by many men, yea by whole churches, in which are, and have been found persons of great learning, subtlety, and as far as the eyes of men could judge, piety and virtue, as S. Augustine witnesseth of Pelagius, and S. Vincentius Lirinensis of other Heretics. Now if they say they will not believe such testimonies of their adversaries probity, than the controversies between Sects will become not disputations, but calumniations and impleadments. 12. To Mr. Chillingworth's fifth ground, viz. That it cannot consist with the goodness of God to oblige any man as of necessity to believe explicitly, or to interpret clearly those places of Scripture which are obscure and ambiguous. I acknowledge all this, and from their own grounds desire Protestants to consider, whether any knowledge or distinct belief can justly be required to be yielded to any special points of Christiantty, since there are scarce any that have not been controverted. CHAP. XXXVIII. An answer to Mr. Chillingworth's sixth ground. Of the use of Reason in Faith. 1. TO the sixth ground, viz. That since no proof can be made out of Scripture, nor out of universal Tradition, that there is any visible Judge of the sense of Scripture: and since a man's reason is the only faculty and principle capable of judging, therefore Reason is the only judge of the sense of Scripture; but this only for each man's own self, etc. I answer; 1. That his supposition of no visible Judge is so far from being true, that the contrary has all the proofs imagineable, and in the highest degree of assurance imagineable, if Tradition universal for time and place, plain Texts of Scripture interpreted by all Fathers that have written upon them, the continual practice of the Church in Counsels etc. can give a certain proof, as I have showed before. 2. For private reason being a judge, I will show the impossibility for it to attain the ends for which Christ appointed a government in his Church, (viz. unity of minds and wills among Christians) together with the unavoidable absurdities attending such a Judge; and this, after I have considered briefly the rest of his grounds. 3. In this place I will take into consideration the general foundation of this his foundation, viz. That no other judge, as to a man's own self, besides his own reason, can be imagined, chap. 2. 11. 2. This foundation Mr. Chillingworth esteems so firm, that upon all occasion he objects it to his adversary, and places his chief confidence in it; both as a sword to wound his enemy, and a buckler to defend himself: for thus, and in this order he argues. 1. Whatsoever I do in matter of Religion, I do it by mine own particular reason, and resolve it finally into mine own reason. And this is not only my method, but the same is done likewise by all sorts of men, even those that deny private reason to be judge, deny this by their reason; and because their reason tells them that it is more reasonable to rely upon authority, then upon their private judgement or reason. etc. 2. The difference between a Papist and a Protestant is, not that the one judges, and the other does not judge, but that the one judges his guide to be infallible, the other his way to be manifest. 3. To speak properly, saith he, The Scripture is not a judge of controversies, but a rule only, and the only rule for Christians to judge them by; every man is to judge for himself by the judgement of discretion, and to choose either his Religion first, and then his Church, as we say: Or as you, his Church first, and then his Religion: but by the consent of both sides every man is to judge and choose. This appeared to me to be the substance of Mr. Chillingworth's discourses severally dispersed in his book upon this argument, 3. I confess this way of arguing of Mr. Chillingworth had a long time great effect with me; and after considering it more attentively, I found that of necessity there must be some Sophism in it, because it makes all parties most contradictory to one another, yet to resolve their beliefs into the same point, which notwithstanding they utterly deny, it was long before, to mine own satisfaction, I could discover the secret; and now after all, I find not the least difficulty how to express myself distinctly and intelligibly in my answer to it: notwithstanding I will endeavour to do it as perspicuously as I can. 4. For preparation therefore hereto, I will first show what faith or belief is, and the several kinds and manners of it, together with the order how it is begotten in the soul, etc. Now I only speak of a rational and well grounded faith, not such an one, as with which many ignorant or interessed persons assent, that is, rather with their wills and passions, than their reason or understanding. 1. Belief therefore in general is an assent of the understanding to any thing related to us; and this for the authority of the relator: So S. Augustin. (de util. cred. c. 2.) That we believe any thing, we owe it to authority; that we understand any thing, to reason. 2. Belief is immediate, or mediate: immediate, when the prime relatour reveals it immediately to the believer: mediate, when by the intervention of others. 3. Belief certain or probable is either, when we have a certainty or probability of the prime relators authority or fidelity; or else, though we be assured of the prime author's fidelity, when we have a certainty or probability of the authority, fidelity and information of the subordinate relator. 4. Belief supernatural is, when the prime relator is supernatural, and also when the object is supernatural: I might add, and which is begotten in the soul by a supernatural virtue (but that is not debated here.) 5. The order an manner whereby an assured firm supernatural faith is begotten in the soul, is, first, in immediate divine revelations, the prime relator reveals any thing to the believers understanding, by the intervention of his outward or inward senses, in mediate divine revelations; when this is done by means of some persons endued with authority and ability; so that before firm faith in the thing revealed, there must necessarily precede a certain knowledge that such a thing has been revealed. 6. Discourse of reason may, and ordinarily does precede belief; but belief itself is not discourse, but a simple assent of the understanding. 7. In belief we are to distinguish between the causes, and the motives of it: and when men speak of the last resolution of faith, they intent to consider the last motive or authority into which it is resolved, not the primary efficient cause of it. Therefore though faith be an act of reason, yet it is not said to be resolved into reason, though produced by it, but into authority. 8. It is a mere tantology to say, the act of faith is terminated in reason, because reason judges that it is reasonable to believe God: For that seems all one, as if a man should say; an act of reason is an act of reason, or a reasonable act; and indeed otherwise it would be impossible to terminate faith ultimately in God, but a man should believe God, not for God's authorities sake, but his own. 9 The use of reason antecedent to faith, and act of the understanding, in assenting to a thing revealed for the authority of God the revealer, do not prejudice neither the supernaturalnesse, nor certainty of Faith; because the same things have place in any revelation, though made immediately by God; for it is with my senses that I receive the thing revealed, and convey it to my understanding; it is with my understanding that I assent to it, and the reason why I assent to it is, because it is most reasonable to believe God, yet none of these things diminish either the supernaturality, or absolute certainty of this belief. 5. But to come to a more particular examination of Mr. Chillingworth's Positions. 1. He argues that private reason ought to be acknowledged the Judge of controversies, and interpreter of Scripture, because whatsoever we do in Religion, we do it by our particular reason; yea, even those that deny private reason to be a Judge do this, because their reason tells them this is more reasonable, etc. It is confessed that Faith is an act of reason, that is, of the reasonable faculty of the soul; and that it is the same faculty of reason which submits and captivates itself to divine or Ecclesiastical authority; for as to be God's slave is the greatest liberty, so to renounce carnal reason when God commands it is most reasonable. It is moreover confessed, that in such a case, when reason with submission to God captivates itself, and renounces all discourses of reason that would oppose such an a bnegation of itself, that it does this from a rational principle, viz. that it is most reasonable to believe and submit to God, who is veracity itself. But what will follow from hence? Will any one therefore either be so unreasonable, as to conclude, that divine faith is ultimately resolved into reason, as into the motive of assenting? (it is indeed the efficient cause producing the act of assent, but the last and principal motive is divine authority) or that divine revelations are to be examined and exacted according to the rule and principles of natural reason, thereby either to stand or fall? Or lastly, that when reason judges it reasonable to receive the sense of divine Revelations from the Church endued with authority for that purpose, Reason in that case shall be called the interpreter or judge? 6. In the second place, where he says, The difference between a Papist and a Protestant is this, not that the one judges, and the other judges not: (Thus far I grant;) But that the one judges his guide to be infallible, the other his way to be manifest. To this I answer, that here are two judges, 1. a Catholic, and his judgement is, that his guide is infallible, or rather speaking in his guide's language, that she has authority to direct him. This is true, but not all that is true; for he judges of his way too, namely that that way and rule, by which, and in which, his guide sets and directs him is manifest. And he judges of this more rationally, than a Protestant can, because the same that God appointed to be his guide, is both entrusted with this rule, and an explainer of it likewise to him, having not only words, but sense delivered to her. 2. A Protestant Judge; and his judgement is, that his way is manifest: it is true he judges so, but how injudiciously, hath been already shown. But does he not judge of his guide? or has he no guide to judge of? Yes, that is himself, or his own reason, and that he judges to be all sufficient, both for authority and prudence. He that in interpreting an Heathen Orator or Poet, would not trust his own judgement, or adventure his reputation to the world, without alleging authorities, by which he might justify his judgement: and much more, he that in a tenure of land would willingly submit his judgement to the authority of those judges whom the Law has deputed, will notwithstanding trample upon all authority, upon the traditionary interpretation of many ages, he will despise Fathers and Counsels, and adventure eternal happiness or misery upon his own single judgement: and when all this is done, will call it a judgement of reason and discretion. 7. In the third place, To speak properly, (saith he) the Scripture is not a Judge of Controversies, but only a rule, etc. This I grant to Mr. Chillingworth, and withal, that he is the first Protestant that I know of, that has spoken properly in this point. But he adds, and the only rule to judge them by. But the contrary I think I have already proved. Yet before I leave this passage, I desire to be informed what controversies are here spoken of; namely whether concerning points necessary or unnecessary? surely not of necessary, for how can there be controversies about such points, as according to his belief are set down in Scripture so plainly, that no reasonable man can doubt of the sense of them? and if of unnecessary, why will they confess that they quarrel unnecessarily? It follows, Every man is to judge for himself with the judgement of discretion: This is true if the sense be, that it is by the faculty of reason that he embraces and assents to divine revelations: not that such revelations are to be admitted or refused, according as they are consonant or repugnant to the principles of discourse of natural reason. It follows: And to choose either his Religion first, and then his Church, as we say. But what Church do Protestants choose, since (though in effect there are infinite Churches among them separating from, and damning one another; Yet) if the grounds of Protestantisme be true and reasonable, viz. 1. That the belief of necessary fundamental doctrines is sufficient to make a true Church. 2. Since all such points are so plainly contained in Scripture, that no reasonable man can doubt of the sense of them, much less disbelieve them. And 3. Since no Protestants will deny, but that in all Churches (even the Catholic also) there are reasonable men; it will follow that they must say, that indeed there is but one Religion and one Church, and so no choice at all. It follows, Or as you Catholics, his Church first, and then his Religion. For my part; I know no Catholic says so, nor any reason that should move Mr. Chillingworth to put such words in their mouths. For if we speak of one that is yet to choose Christianity, and is in pain to find a Congregation to join himself to, the difference between such a Director as Mr. Chillingworth and a Catholic would be this: Mr. Chillingworth would tell him, Search the Scriptures attested by universal Tradition, as will appear if you peruse all the Records since Christ's time; there you will find in it all things necessary to be believed and practised, but which, and how many such things there are, we cannot tell you: besides, they are dispersed up and down in Gospels, Acts, Epistles, and Revelation; so that it will cost you much trouble to collect all that are of the substance of the new Covenant in yours and our opinions; but to make short work, be sure to believe all in gross, and then you shall be sure to believe all that is necessary, and then choose what Church you will, for there can be no danger, since all cannot but agree in necessaries, only there is some danger in the Catholic Church, for she will oblige you to believe other things as well as Scripture for universal Traditions sake; and besides she will not permit you to think your own self wiser than the whole world. Or if you have the curiosity to live in the purest Church of all, than you must study all the obscure unnecessary passages of Scripture likewise (for such only can be controverted among reasonable men) and examine what every party has to say for himself, and then descend from your tribunal of judging, and associate yourself with them that you think the wisest, that is, those that agree with you in all your opinions, if there be any such, and there stay, till either they or you change opinions. But as for Catholics, to such a man that was to choose both Christianity and a Church, they would first tell him, that by his reason he might most certainly judge that this Religion was taught by Christ and his Apostles, since (besides Records) the universal agreement of the present age was, that they received it from an universal Tradition of former ages, (which is a testimony beyond all others most irrefragable.) 2. They would by the same way assure him, that this Religion was by the first teachers confirmed with miracles; and his reason upon examination both of those miracles, and the sanctity of this Religion in general, would most assuredly conclude, that the miracles were divine, and by consequence the Religion too, and therefore necessary to be embraced, since itself said so. 3. They would upon the same undeniable grounds of universal Tradition assure him, that among others, one necessary duty of this Religion was, to live in the Communion and under the authority of such a Church, as Christ had promised should be Catholic for place, and never to fail until his coming to judgement, which Church was one body consisting of a subordination of parts, among which by consequence, one must needs be supreme, and from which to separate, was to be divided from Christ himself; in this Church therefore he was to fix himself inseparably: And here is to be an end of his judging and choosing. For 4. being in this Church, his Reason had no more to do but to submit itself to the belief and practice of the special doctrines and precepts, which this Church should teach him. Liberty indeed he might have to search out interpretations of Scripture, yet so as that he must not contradict any traditionary doctrines. And he might draw consequences from doctrines, so that he would give leave to the church to judge whether such consequences were rational and fit to be received, abstaining from others that would not assent to his consequences. And this is the method according to which a Catholic would advise such a man to proceed: thus much liberty of judging he would allow to his reason before he did make choice of a church; and only so much afterward. 8. To these discourses Mr. Chillingworth adds some proofs out of Scripture to justify Private Reason's pretention to judge of the sense of Scripture: as first, those words of S. Paul, 1 Thes. 1. 5. v. 20, 21. Try all things, hold fast that which is good. But I answer, here is no mention either of Scripture or church, much less of interpreting Scripture against the church: the truth is, there were extant scarce any books of the New Testament when S. Paul wrote that Epistle. But the words before speak of Prophecying in the church, which perhaps S. Paul would have to be tried whether they were consonant to the doctrine which he had delivered to the church. Now who was to be the Judge of Prophets he shows in another place, 1 Cor. 14. 32. where he says, The spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets, not to the ignorant people. A second proof is, Believe not every Spirit, but try the Spirits, whether they be of God or no, 1. Joh. 4. 1. To which the former answer will suffice. A third, Be ye ready to render a reason of the hope that is in you, 1 Pet. 3. 15● I cannot imagine how from this Text this conclusion can be inferred, Ergo it belongs to all Christians to judge of the sense of Scripture, even against the authority of the Church. A fourth, If the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch. All the inference that I could possibly draw from this Text would be, therefore if men will not believe their teachers, but either will rush forward themselves, or follow others, that neither have authority nor ability to teach, they are likely to fall into the Ditch. For surely by blind are not meant the lawful Pastors of the Church, which on the contrary are in the Old Testament called Videntes, or Seers, and by S. Paul, eyes: when speaking of such persons as Mr. Chillingworth here gives the office of judging to, he saith, If the ear shall say, because I am not the eye, I am not of the body, is it therefore not of the body? If all the body were the eye, where were the hearing, 1 Cor. 12. 16. Whereby S. Paul shows expressly that the hearers ought not to usurp the teacher's office, expressly contrary to Mr. Chillingworths' Position. 9 I will conclude this discourse of Protestants exalting private reason against Catholic authority, with those memorable words of S. Augustine (Ep. 56.) Those, saith he, who not being in Catholic Unity and Communion, yet notwithstanding do boastingly usurp the name of Christians, are constrained to contradict the true Believers, and have the boldness to seduce as it were by reasons the ignorant and unskilful, although that our Lord is come with this preservative to ordain faith unto the people. But this they are constrained to do, as I said, because they perceive well, that without this there is nothing more vile and base than they are, if their authority be compared with Catholic authority. They endeavour therefore, as it were, to surmount the most firmly settled and most stable authority of the most surely founded Church, by the name and promising of Reason; for this is as it were an uniform and universal temerity of all Heretics. But the most clement Commander and General of our Faith hath strengthened his Church with this bulwark of Authority by the most famous Assemblies of Peoples and Nations, and by the proper Sees Episcopal of the Apostles, a●d by a few learned and truly spiritual men hath armed it with a plenteous magazine of Reason invincible. CHAP. XXXIX. An answer to Mr. Chillingworth's seventh and eighth grounds. 1. TO the seventh ground, viz. That a certain infallible Faith is not required, since reason, which is the only agent, is fallible, and the grounds not evidently certain, such a probability will serve the turn, as can produce in a mar obedience, etc. For answer hereto, I desire Protestants to consider. 1. Whether at the first planting of Christianity probable grounds of belief had been sufficient? if not, as most certainly not, how come they to be sufficient now? If it be replied, that we must either be content with probable grounds, or none; I answer there is no such necessity; because for all the substantial points of Christianity we have universal Tradition, and that with all advantages for assurance imaginable: insomuch, as if all men would call him mad, that should deny that there was such a man as King William the Conqueror of England, which is yet attested only or principally by a national Tradition there, that man would deserve a title worse than the former, that could doubt of the universal testimony of the Catholic Church all the world over, that such Traditions have come to them from their ancestors, etc. 2. I desire them to consider, what course they will take to convert the now Jew's, and Turks or Heathens to Christianity, if they shall once tell them, that they can give them no better then probable motives of our Religion? For they will doubtless reply, that they will never quit their own Religion, in which they and their ancestors have been bred, and of the truth of which they likewise have (at least in their own opinion) a probable Tradition, for a new one not assured. 3. To consider the example of the ancient Jews: For if those very persons, who were eye-witnesses of the miraculous delivery of the Law, and by consequence were most assured of the divinity of it, yet notwithstanding would not quit temporal pleasures and allurements for the future rewards therein promised; is it likely, that the Christians of these times will upon confessedly only probable grounds and promises, and those not to be expected till after death, renounce assured and present delights, and embrace assured and present miseries, mortifications, and abnegations? 2. To the eighth and last ground, viz. That since all Christians agree in necessary doctrines, which are express, they ought not to deny Communion the one to the other, for other doctrines contained obscurely in Scripture; and that that is the only effectual means of reducing and preserving unity among Christians. I answer, that it is apparently contrary to experience what is here said; For neither do all Christians agree in all necessary doctrines: nor in all which themselves esteem necessary: neither will they allow Communion to men differing in points by their own Confession nor esteemed so much as substantial. Yea let England witness, if our Presbyterian Calvinists do not think many thousand Hecatombs of Christian blood, a fit sacrifice to prepare a tyrannical introduction of a few circumstantial novelties: Therefore to say men ought, and it were well if they would do otherwise; and in the mean time destroy all Ecclesiastical authority to constrain them to what they ought to do, is to destroy all Christian Communion, indeed all manner of policy and society: For upon the same grounds we may as reasonably contend for an universal Anarchy, since all men ought by the law of reason and nature to live in justice, temperance, and peace; and therefore let laws be annulled, and Judges deposed. But God (whose imprudence is wiser than the wisdom of men) seeing our figmentum, our natural perverseness, hath appointed Civil Governors to overawe Delinquents with the whip, and with the sword; and Ecclesiastical Magistrates likewise, into whose hands he has likewise put a spiritual scourge and sword too, to correct or cut off putrified or mortified members: the whole foundation of which Policy and order would be undermined by such an allowance given to all sorts of Christians to become judges and interpreters for themselves in matters of Religion, upon a groundless and never-yet-accomplished hope, that they will all agree to use this power with meekness and charity. 3. Besides, let all the world judge of the extreme partiality of English Protestants, they say that no man ought to refuse Communion for differences in points in themselves not necessary or fundamental; and they acknowledge that Catholics agree with them in all points fundamental; and yet they not only refuse to communicate with them, but call their Communion damnable and idololatrical: Yea moreover seek to justify the execution of the most bloody laws against Catholic Priests performing their duties, that ever any Christian Nation heard of. 4. Mr. Chillingworth indeed maintains this their partiality of refusing Communion with Catholics upon this ground, because no man can be allowed by the Council of Trent to ente● into Catholic Communion that believes not all doctrines of faith therein defined to be of universal Tradition, many of which they disbelieving ought not, or if they would, cannot be received into Communion. Hereto I answer. 1. That the Bull of Pius the fourth requires subscription to the Council only from Priests, etc. 2. Can any ancient Church be named that has not always done the same? 3. Do not the Lutherans, Calvinists, yea the Church of England, both before and since the writing of his book the same? 4. Does not the omission of requiring an uniform profession of Faith, evidently destroy all Ecclesiastical authority, and leave every one in a liberty (hitherto unheard of in God's Church) of thinking, and believing, and judging, and saying, and doing what he himself pleases? 5. The unappealable authority of a General Council being once destroyed, would not Babel itself, and the seventy languages of it (as some reckon them) be order and unity itself in comparison with a Christian Church so confused and mangled, wherein not seventy, but seventy thousand languages might be allowed? For as for this fantastical Utopian way of Unity here first devised and proposed to the world by Mr. Chillingworth, let even the most ignorant of his judges give sentence; whether as long as men have passions, and as long as there is pride in their hearts, and tentations in the world, it be not utterly impossible to be compassed? and if upon an impossible supposition it were effected, whether such a kind of unity would deserve the name of unity, and not rather of an universal stupidity and Lethargy? CHAP. XL. An answer to Mr. Chillingworth's objection, concerning difference among Catholics, about the Judge of Controversies. 1. HAving thus far considered Mr. Chillingworth's general grounds concerning a Judge of Controversies dispersed in several places through his book, I will proceed to take a view of his principal objections against the Catholic doctrine concerning the authority of the Church; which objections are of several natures; for some proceed directly against it, others only against some consequences from it. I will therefore weigh first his objections grounded upon the different opinions of Catholics concerning that point. 2. His reasons directly proving (as he believes, that no church of one denomination can be infallible) and therefore not the Catholic Church. 3. His proofs that Catholics in their resolution of Faith are entangled in circles and, absurdities. 4. His arguments to demonstrate that Catholics can have no assurance, either of the authority of the church, or the validity of any acts performed by the Pastors thereof, etc. But before I attempt a discussion of these particulars, I may in general say of all his objections, that since they proceed only against the word Infallibility, and that word extended to the utmost height and latitude that it can possibly bear, Catholics, as such, are not at all concerned in them, seeing neither is that expression to be found in any received Council, nor did ever the Church enlarge her authority to so vast a wideness as Mr. Chillingworth either conceived; or at least, for his particular advantage against his adversary, thought good to make show, as if he conceived so. 2. But come we to consider his arguments against Catholics, grounded upon the different opinions among them in what subject this Infallibility or authority is to be placed. The most pressing and pertinent passage in his book concerning this subject is this which follows, viz. What shall we say now if you be not agreed touching your pretended means of agreement? How can you pretend to unity either actual or potential more than Protestants may? Some of you say the Pope alone without a Council may determine all controversies, but others deny it. Some that a General Council without a Pope may do so, others deny this. Some, both inconjunction are infallible determiners, others again deny this. Lastly, some among you hold the acceptation of the decrees of Counsels by the universal Church to be the only way to decide controversies, which others deny by denying the Church to be infallible. And indeed what way of ending controversies can this be, when either part may pretend that they are part of the Church, and they receive not the decree, therefore the whole Church hath not received it? Mr. Chil. c. 3. parag. 6. 3. Hereto I answer. 1. That there is indeed no need at all of an answer, since the very objection answers itself: for by saying there are variety of opinions among Catholics, acknowledged for such even while they differ, it follows that the objector is not obliged to submit to that Judge which any Catholic refuses. 2. None of these will deny that decision of the Council of Trent, viz. Ecclesiae est judi●are de vero sensu sacrae Scripturae, (that is,) It belongs to the Church to judge of the true sense of holy Scripture: And Protestants will not be urged to submit to any more rigid or higher expression. 3. Yea moreover, this indulgence, I am confident, will be granted them, namely, That no man will endeavour to oblige them further than to doctrines and practices determined by one or more Counsels universal, confirmed by the Pope, and actually received and accepted by all Catholics, that is as much as to say, to believe that there is indeed an obliging authority in the Catholic Church, to impose upon her children a belief of all doctrines proposed in her Ecumenical Counsels, let this authority be limited and straightened with as many Provisoes, and the sense of these doctrines enlarged and qualified with as many mollifying interpretations, as any approved Catholic Doctor hath thought good, that is indeed as any reasonable man remaining so can desire; only upon condition, that they do not prejudice nor grate upon the pure simple language, wherein the Church expresses herself, Christians are at liberty what particular Doctor's sense they like to embrace, or whether none at all, but will content themselves with the naked decisions of the Church as they lie, without making inferences, or building thereon further conclusions. CHAP. XLI. His reasons proving no Church of one denomination to be infallible, answered. 1. IN the second place we will weigh his reasons to prove that no Church of one denomination is infallible, and by consequence no Church at all. His words are, after he had said that he was willing upon courtesy to grant that Christ made a promise (absolute) of indefectibility to his Church, Mr. Chil. c. 2. parag. 139. etc. 3. per tot. etc. but be interprets it only in this sense, viz. That true Religion shall never be so far driven out of the world, but that it shall always have some where or other some that believe and profess it in all things necessary to salvation, and that such believers shall never err in fundamentals, for if they did, they were not a Church. But he denies utterly that there is any Church fit to be a guide in fundamentals, because no Church is fit to be a Guide but only a Church of some certain denomination, as the Greek, the Roman, the Abyssine, etc. For, says he, otherwise no man can possibly know which is the true Church but by a pre-examination of the doctrine controverted, and that were not to be guided by the Church to the true doctrine, but by the true doctrine to the Church. Now, says he, that there is not any Church of one denomination infallible in fundamnntalls is evident: for 1. If it were an infallible guide in fundamentals, she would be infallible in all things which she proposes and requires to be believed. 2. That being a point of so m●●n consequence, certainly the Scripture would have named that Church. 3. Because Catholics themselves build the assurance of the church's infallibility only upon motives very credible, but not certain. Lastly, because it is evident, and even to impudence itself undeniable, that upon this ground of believing all things taught by the present church as taught by Christ, error was held. For example, the necessity of giving the Eucharist to Infants, and that in S. Augustine's time, and that by S. Augustine himself; and therefore without controversy this is no certain ground for truth which may support falsehood as well as truth. The same may be said of the doctrine of the Chiliasts, which S. Irenaeus and S. Justin Martyr say was a traditionary doctrine from the Apostles times, etc. 2. To answer this discourse by parcels: And first concerning his exposition of Christ's promise of indefectibility to his Church, it has been answered in more than one place already. 2. Where he says, that there is no Church fit to be a guide in fundamentals: I desire to know whether those whom Christ has appointed in his church to be Overseers (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) Teachers (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) Governors & Assistants 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etc.) be not fit to be accounted guides, at least in Fundamentals? Again, whether an agreement of all these Governors meeting in a General Council be not the supremest authority? Thirdly, whether that authority which is indeed supreme, be not unappealable from, and necessarily to be submitted to by all particular subordinate persons? To say such persons have no authority to be Guides, is to contradict express Scripture: And to say that there can be a subordination of authority without one that is supreme: Or that that which is indeed supreme, may by particulars (persons, or churches) be opposed, or so much as appealed from, is to contradict not only what is assumed, but evident reason, and all order. 3. Where it is said, That no Church is fit to be a Guide in Fundamentals, but only a Church of one denomination, as Greek, Roman, Abyssine, etc. For otherwise no man can possibly know which is the true Church, but only by a pre-examination of the doctrines, and that were not to be guided by the Church to the true doctrine, but by the true doctrine to the Church. I answer, That a Catholic Church there is (as we profess in the Creed) and that this Catholic Church is visible and easily to be designed, plainly distinquishable from new Sects and innovating congregations; and that this body representatively united is the supreme authority on earth, and that every particular Church or member of this Catholic Church, as such, is a sufficient guide to those that live in her Communion. As concerning his phrase, a Church of one denomination; I grant that God has not apparently obliged himself to confine his Promises to any particular Dioecose, Province, or Nation, no not perhaps even to Rome itself: Only this may certainly be affirmed, that the Catholic Church shall by virtue of Christ's promises continue to the world's end a visible Church, teaching all substantial doctrines of Christianity, guided by a lawful succession of Pastors, under one visible Head, which visible Head has hitherto for above sixteen Centuries been the Bishop of Rome; and that is a fair presumption that it will be so to Christ's second coming: for I know nothing but a general earthquake there and swallowing up of that place that is likely to hinder such a succession, since it has already abidden all variety of oppositions and tempests, when the whole power of the Roman and infernal Empire sought to extinguish it, and when all sorts of Heretics and Schismatics sought to undermine it. But I shall speak more of this when I come to the last conclusion, concerning the perpetual visibility of the Church. 4. In the fourth place, to his first proof, that no Church of one denomination can be an infallible guide in fundamentals, because if so, than she should be infallible in non-fundamentalls also. I answer, that even by Mr. Chillingworth's own confession it does not follow that if Christ hath promised to preserve his church from all error in fundamentals, that therefore by virtue of that promise she should be exempted from all error whatsoever, and the reason given by Mr. Chillingworth is worth the marking. The Church, says he, may err, and yet the gates of hell not prevail against her: for seeing you (Catholics) do and must grant that a particular Church may hold some error, and yet be still a true member of the Church; Why may not the universal Church bold the same error, and yet remain the universal Church, unless every the least error be one of the gates of hell? 5. And indeed many Catholic Writers there are, who, upon the same grounds with Mr. Chillingworth, extend the promise of the holy Spirits assistance to the church, not to all inconsiderable circumstantial doctrines, but substantial and traditionary only; And for a further proof we may add, that there are some Fathers of great antiquity and authority, who hold (whether justly and truly or no, I debate not, but they hold) that there are real differences between the four Evangelists, in some circumstances of no considerable moment related by them, and by consequence there must of necessity in their opinion be an error, such as it is, in some one of them at lest: The which inconsiderable differences, whether real or imaginary, there being an exact demonstrable agreement amongst them all in points of Doctrine, do rather in S. Chrysostom's judgement (in Mat. Hom. 1) establish then invalidate, or any way prejudice the divine infallibility of their writings; since thereby it is apparent (says he) that they did not compose them by consent and conspiracy; for than they would have been scrupulously punctual in all, even the smallest circumstances, but in the ingenuous simplicity and sincerity of their hearts. In like manner S. Hierome tells us, that in his time some learned Catholics were of opinion, that the Apostles and Evangelists in the New Testament quoted some passages of the old Testament, and the Septuagint merely out of their memory, not looking into the books themselves, and that by that means their memory failing, their quotations were not exactly true, yet notwithstanding those Fathers were far from questioning the authority or infallibility of any one of the Evangelists, as concerning any substantial doctrine contained in any of their Gospels, etc. So likewise in the Latin Translation of the Bible, there are not only differences of senses from Originals, Hebrew, or Greek now extant, not only great and uncertain variety of reading in the ancient Latin Copies, but likewise, as the Protestants brag, very great diversity between the Impressions published by the Authority of Pope Sixtus Quintus and Clemens Octavus, since the Council of Trent (wherein notwithstanding they are mistaken, for though Sixtus Quintus had designed an Impression, and prepared a Bull for the authorising of it, yet God took him away before he effected his intent, thereby as it were, signifying that it was his pleasure to take away from Heretics all seeming advantages against his Church. But though this had been as the Protestants imagine, surely a more corrected reimpression does not imply that the Church wanted the true Scripture, since none of such differences are of such considerable moment, as to cause any uncertainty in points of Doctrine. For I conceive it was never heard that any error was grounded merely upon a various reading of any Text of Scripture.) But to proceed, certain it is that there were much greater differences between the ancient Italica and other Latin Translations of the ancient Church and this of S. Hierome; as likewise yet greater between the Septuagint and the Hebrew; and yet neither do the Apostles refuse to quote some passages out of the Septuagint, wherein the Translation is manifestly faulty, however in a matter inconsiderable: neither will any Catholic affirm that the promise of the holy Spirits assistance did fail the ancient Church, although it only made use of a Translation of the Scripture very imperfect, if compared with S. Hieromes; no not though upon such differences of reading it were possible to ground doctrines which might be circumstantially erroneous: It is true, such doctrines would be of no considerable moment; but however they might be erroneous, yet without any prejudice to Christ's promises to his Church. So that the Church, even when she does upon supposition err, yet she does not even then lead any man out of the way to heaven, or within the danger of hell gates; seeing the promises of Christ are infallible that his Spirit shall conduct, or rather preserve his Church in the belief and profession of all truths, at least necessary: and as for points supernumerary or unnecessary, neither unwilfull ignorance, nor unavoidable mistake shall be imputed as sinful to any man. 6. To the second proof, viz. That if the promise of infallibility had been made to any Church of one denomination, certainly the Scripture would have named that Church, and have directed all Christians to have recourse unto her, it being a point of so main importance. I answer, 1. The inference is not at all concluding, as I showed before in the first conclusion. 2. The Scripture has expressly mentioned such promises made to the Church, and if we will follow either reason or Catholic Tradition interpreting Scripture, we must at least apply those promises to the whole body and succession of the Catholic Church united under one Head; since no particular man or Church, considered only as a distinct member of the whole can pretend to these promises as peculiarly applicable to themselves. Now this whole body was as apparent and distinguishable from particular sects in the times of S. Augustine and S. Gregory, as if it had been a Church of one denomination, since they framed all their arguments and discourses from the apparent visibility of it: and surely to any one that would not shut his eyes, would have appeared as clear and demonstrable in Luther's time also. 7. To the third proof of Mr. Chillingworth, viz. That Catholics build their assurance of the infallibility of the Church only upon fallible and uncertain grounds and marks. I answer, that I have made the contrary appear in several places before, demonstrating that it is grounded upon the most firm unshaken foundation that reason can have, viz. Universal Tradition, by which it is more effectually proved then any particular book of Scripture hath been. 8. To his last proof against the Church's infallibility from his two examples, wherein the Church is said to have erred universally in points pretended to be of Tradition, as namely, about the giving the blessed Sacrament to Infants, mentioned by S. Augustine; and the doctrine of the Millenaries; by S. Justin Martyr and S. Irenaeus. For the first example, I refer myself to the satisfactory answer given by Cardinal Perron to the same objection made by King James. Perr. repl. l. 2. obs. 3. c. 11. 2. Concerning the other example of the doctrine of the Millenaries, etc. I answer, that S. Justin Martyr (dial. cum Trypho.) saith not that it was a Catholic Tradition, nor received by the whole Church, but only of himself, and many other Christians; but withal, that there were many also who were of a pure and pious Christian belief which did not acknowledge it. And when all that could be alleged to prove that doctrine to have been an Apostolic Tradition, was said, the proof ended upon the report of Papias, a very credulous man, one that loved to tell stories, many of which could not find belief in the Church, a man meanly learned, and by consequence one that might very probably mistake what he says S. John told him concerning that point. CHAP. XLII. An answer to Mr. Chillingworth's objection of circles and absurdities to the resolution of Faith of Catholics. 1. A Third rank of arguments with which Mr. Chillingworth combats the infallibility of the Church, is grounded upon the absurdities, Meanders and circles, which he says most unavoidably follow the resolution of the faith of Catholics. Let us hear the sum of his allegations in his own words, (cap. 2. 118. 119.) For God's sake (Sir) tell me plainly, in those Texts of Scripture which you allege for the infallibility of your Church, do not you allow what sense you think true, and disallow the contrary? and do you not this by the direction of your private reason? if you do, why do you condemn it in others? If you do not, I pray what direction do you follow? Or whether you follow none at all? If none at all, this is like drawing Lots, or throwing dice for the choice of a Religion: If any other, I beseech you tell me what it is. Perhaps you will say, the church's authority; and that will be to dance finely in a round thus; To believe the Churches infallible authority, because the Scriptures avouch it; and to believe that Scriptures say and mean so, because they are so expounded by the Church. Is not this for a Father to beget his son, and the son to beget his Father? For a foundation etc. The Church you say is infallible; I am very doubtful of it. How shall I know it? The Scripture you say affirms it, as in the 59 of Esay, My Spirit that is in thee, etc. Well I confess I find there these words, but I am still doubtful whether they be spoken of the Church of Christ: and if they be, whether they mean as you pretend. You say, the Church says so, which is infallible. Yea but that is the question, and therefore not to be begged, but proved: neither is it so evident as to need no proof; otherwise why brought you this Text to prove it? Nor is it of such a strange quality above all other Propositions, as to be able to prove itself. What then remains, etc. But Universal Tradition (you say, and so do I too) is of itself credible, and that has in all ages taught the church's infallibility with full consent. But that it has, I hope you would not have me take upon your word; for that were to build myself upon the Church, and the Church upon you. Let then the Tradition appear; for a secret Tradition is somewhat like a silent Thunder. You will perhaps produce etc. 2. For answer hereto: 1. If Mr. Chillingworth's adversary had grounded the doctrine of the Church's authority merely and only upon Texts of Scripture capable of contrary senses, there might have been just ground for Mr. Chillingworth to have pleased himself, as he oft does, in insulting thus on him, and entangling him thus in his circles: But Mr. Chillingworth himself absolves him toward the latter end of the former passage, where he says; But universal Tradition (you say, and so do I too) is of itself credible, and that has in all ages taught the Church's infallibility, etc. Whereby he shows clearly that his adversary, though he serves himself, (as reasonably he may and aught) of some Texts of Scripture to fortify the Traditionary doctrine of the Church's authority, yet makes not those Texts understood in his own sense his only foundation, but universal Tradition, which is the proper foundation even of the credibility of Scripture itself; and therefore all Mr. Chillingworth's inferences and retortions do not, even in his own opinion, in any degree wound, nor so much as incommodate his adversary. 3. Secondly I answer, that whatsoever arguments have been or can be made by Protestants against the manner of Resolution of Catholic Faith, do not touch the Church at all; since she has not intermeddled in that Scholastical nicety of the Resolution of Faith: If particular men to exercise their wits, and to boast their subtlety, do busy themselves in this last inquisitive age about such curiosities, undebated and unheard of among the ancient Doctors of the church, what is that to the church herself, or her Traditionary doctrines, which were proposed and believed before that new language of the schools was invented? 4. But thirdly to demonstrate that Protestants do vainly flatter themselves in supposed advantages against Catholics about this point of Resolution of Faith, I will endeavour as briefly and as perspiovously as I can to set down the state of that controversy, which when I have done, I believe that without any further trouble, it will justify itself not to be obnoxious to those circles and absurdities which Protestants charge upon it. 5. Now for a preparation thereto, I will lay down these grounds, viz. 1. That that is the thing into which we say Faith is last resolved, which is the prime motive or authority for whose sake we believe. 2. In all kinds of belief the prime authority which deserves Faith must have two qualities, viz. Knowledge and veracity. 3. In divine Faith the prime authority is always the prime Verity, or God. 4. In divine Revelations we are to distinguish the faith or assent which we give to the truth revealed from the knowledge or assent to the Revelation, or act of revealing. 5. In immediate divine Revelations we believe the truth itself for the authority of the revealer or relator himself, which is God: and we assent to the revelation, having a certain knowledge thereof, either by the help of our senses external and internal, or without them immediately by our understanding. 6. But if divine revelations be conveyed to us by a second hand, that is, by the report of others, yet then faith is not resolved into the conveying authority, but into the prime. 7. To make faith by virtue of the prime authority certain or firm, I must have assurance of the certitude of this conveying hand, that is, not only that this conveying hand did receive those revealed truths, but the true sense of them likewise, and withal was not subject to error in the propagating of them. 6. Having laid these grounds, we will make application of them to the present purpose in a few examples. The first shall be of a revelation made by God immediately either by express language, or dreams, or visions, or the Oracle of Urim, etc. (for all these are of the same nature, as much as concerns certainty) as when God revealed to the Prophet Isaiah the mystery of the Conception of the Messiah of a pure Virgin: In this case the Prophet (it is to be supposed) was assured by a certain knowledge, that this revelation was real, and not imaginary: so that he believed the truth revealed with a most firm faith for the authority of God the prime verity, whom he knew to be the revealer; for if he had not assuredly known this, he could not have adhered firmly to the mystery; though in itself never so true and infallible. A second example shall be of an immediate revelation also, but yet somewhat of a different nature from the former, viz. Of our Saviour teaching the Jews that he was the Messiah, the eternal Son of God, and confirming this truth by divine Miracles. In all outward appearance he seemed to be but a man, and therefore what he taught could not be the object of divine Faith, neither could his hearers have assurance of his authority, unless they were assured of the truth of his miracles. A third example shall be of the same revealed truth, viz. That Christ was the Messiah, etc. but proposed to persons living in the second or third ages after that time, by those, who either were themselves eye-witnesses, or received it from those that were. In this case the persons, living in the second or third age, if they had not certitude that those that told them this did not lie, could not with a faith rationally firm and certain, assent to those truths. But certain they might be, and most undoubtedly were: and the grounds of this certainty were, as I have largely showed before, a certain knowledge both that they all heard these and all other substantial truths of Christianity from their Ancestors, as a Tradition Universal (whether written or no, it matters not) and that it was as impossible, that all their ancestors all the world over should conspire to seduce them with a lie, as that their own eyes and ears should deceive them In all these examples there is the same resolution of Faith; for both the immediate witnesses of these revelations and their successors do resolve their faith in these supernatural truths finally and only into the authority of the prime verity; For if any of them should be asked, Why do you believe that Christ is the eternal Son of God? They would all answer, because God has so revealed, neither could they proceed any further: But if they were asked, how are you certain that there was such a divine revelation? the immediate witnesses would say, We saw and heard Christ himself publishing these truths, and with a world of stupendious miracles confirming them: And their successors would say, we receive the same truth by an Universal Tradition, not only in itself, and of itself credible, and in a high degree certain, but such an one as has more advantages to demonstrate its certainty, than any other that ever was. Now what has been spoken of the second and third ages, may upon the same grounds be verified of the fourth, fifth, and all following to the world's end. And likewise what hath been exemplified in one or two supernatural truths revealed, may be extended to all the substantial points of Christianity, all which, as I before demonstrated, arrive unto us by the same conveying hand of Universal Tradition by several ways, as writing, public profession and practise propagated. 7. Now among these truths or doctrines coming by Universal Tradition, (and for that reason believed most assuredly by all Catholic Christians, and by consequence most certain and indubitable) one principal one is the authority of the present Church, considered not as a relator only, but as authorized by Christ to teach this and all other doctrines, so as to oblige all men to belief and obedience: Which special doctrine, though it were only testified in Scripture (as it is evidently enough) were sufficient against those that acknowledge only Scripture for their rule: yet we are certain of the truth of this doctrine by the former Rule, which can neither fail us, neither can we be mistaken in it, viz. Because it is universally believed in the present church, as a doctrine Traditionary; and moreover it is attested by all ancient Records of the Fathers of the church, nemine explicite contradicente, and it has been practised by Counsels in all ages, not one Catholic renouncing his obedience; In so much as to my understanding there is not one Christian doctrine delivered with so full an assurance, nor in the sense and meaning whereof it is less possible for a man to be mistaken. Now by virtue of this special truth of the church's authority Universal Tradition (which of itself is most credible and certain) being believed and attested by the present church, becomes most necessary to be believed by us, the Church supplying the place not only of a witness, but of an Ambassador likewise instructed and employed by Christ himself (as S. Augustine most effectually maintains) so that in believing and obeying her, we believe and obey Christ himself, according to Christ's own expression, He that heareth you heareth me, and, If any one heareth not the Church, let him be to thee as a Heathen and a Publican. And therefore they that believe Christian doctrines only, because they think they find them in the Scripture, and believe the Scripture only, because their reason or fancy (which they miscall the testimony of God's Spirit) tells them that it is the Word of God, though the doctrines themselves believed by them be true, yet it is a hazard, as to them whether they be so or no, or however whether that be the sense of them or no, it being all one, as if a man by some casualty had found a transcribed copy of some part of an Ambassadors Patent or instructions: Whereas Catholics receive the commands of their heavenly King and Master from his Ambassadors own hands, which not only will not conceal any thing necessary or requisite from them, but likewise will be able upon occasion to clear all manner of difficulties that may arise about the sense of the said instructions or Patent, having received glorious promises of continual residence among us, and of divine assistance to preserve him from any, at least dangerous error. 8. These things thus supposed, Mr. Chillingworth's pretended circles and absurdities in the Resolution of Catholic Faith do clearly and evidently vanish: For a Catholic does not only or chiefly believe the Church's authority, because to his private understanding and reason the Scripture seems to say so: but because he knows that the present Catholic Church teacheth so, both by profession and practice; and that she teacheth this as a Catholic Tradition, believed and practised in all ages; than which it is impossible there should be any testimony more assured and infallible; so that if a man can be sure of any thing done before his own times (as all reasonable men do agree that one may) he cannot avoid being most sure of this, if his passion or interests do not hinder him from searching into the grounds of it. I need not therefore particularly give an answer to Mr. Chillingworth's discourse before produced, since it wholly proceeds upon a mistake of his adversaries, and other Catholics grounds; and since himself in the close of it seems to confess, by objecting to himself Universal Tradition, that if this doctrine of the Church's authority could be made appear to be grounded upon Catholic Tradition, it would be as much credible, as if the Scripture had expressly testified it (since in his opinion the Scripture itself, and nothing besides, enjoys its authority, because it is delivered by Universal Tradition) and by consequence would not be liable to any circles or absurdities. So that truly I wonder why (seeing Mr. Chillingworth could not be ignorant that Catholics do generally pretend that this doctrine comes from Tradition, besides the proofs of it out of Scripture) he should notwithstanding dispute against it, as if there were no other ground for it, but two or three questionable passages of Scripture. CHAP. XLIII. An answer to Mr. Chillingworth's allegations of pretended uncertainties and casualties in the grounds of the faith and salvation of Catholics. 1. THere is in Mr. Chillingworth's book another rank of objections, which though they do not directly combat the churches (infallibility, or) authority, yet they had great effect upon me, because they seemed to infer that the faith and salvation likewise of Catholics depended upon extreme uncertainties and casualties, and by consequence that a Catholic could not give any assurance that his faith was safely grounded. For thus he argues (c. 2. parag. 63. ad. 68) The salvation of many millions of Papists (as they suppose and teeth) depends upon their having the Sacrament of Penance duly administered to them: This again upon the Ministers being a true Priest, which is a thing that depends upon many uncertain and very contingent supposals, As 1. That he was baptised with due matter. 2. With due form. 3. With due intention. 4. That the Bishop which ordained him Priest, ordained him likewise with due form, intention, etc. 5. That that Bishop himself was a person fitly qualified to give orders, that is, was no Simoniake, etc. 6. That all that Bishop's Progenitors were fitly qualified: and so till he arrive to the fountain of Priesthood. Now he that shall put together, and maturely consider all the possible ways of lapsing and nullifying a Priesthood in the Church of Rome, I believe, saith he, will be very inclinable to believe, that in an hundred seeming Priests, there is not one true one. But suppose this inconvenience assoiled, yet still the difficulty will remain whether he will pronounce the absolving words with intent to absolve you; for perhaps he may be a secret Jew, Moor, or Antitrinitarian; which if he be, than his intention, which is necessary to the validity of a Sacrament, will be wanting, etc. 2. Hereto I answer. 1 That such kind of pretended uncertainties or nullities in particulars, do not prejudice the authority and stability of the church in general, but that if it be true, which has always been believed in the church, viz. That Christ has promised to continue till the world's end a church governed by lawful Pastors, and preserved in all truth, he will engage his omnipotency to make good his fidelity, and by consequence he will take care to prevent or remedy all obstacles that can be imagined to be otherwise able to evacuate such his promises: and I suppose two such Attributes of Christ are a foundation strong enough to build a faith not obnoxious to such a world of casualties, as Mr. Chillingworth suspects. 2. That Mr. Chillingworth's whole discourse proceeds upon a mistake of the established doctrine of the Catholic Church, which has not declared all those things to be nullities, nor any of them in the sense that he alleges. It is true in the Canon law, and among C●suists there are mentioned many nullities of Orders and other Sacraments, as Simony, or Heresy, or Schism are said to nullify the Ordination of a Bishop or Priest: But how to nullify it, by taking away the Character wholly? No. But the Church to show her detestation of those sins suspends the authority of exercising those Offices from any one that is guilty of those sins; and likewise from those that are ordained by such simonical or Heretical Bishops, till they have given satisfaction to the Church: And therefore in that moderate judgement of Pope Melchiades, (so much commended by S. Augustine Ep. 162.) when he decreed, that if the Donatists would return to the Catholic Communion, their Bishops, if the more ancient in any City, should be acknowledged the lawful Bishops of such a City, or if the younger should succeed upon the first vacancy, there was no mention made of a reordination of such Heretical or Schismatical Bishops, or of any Priests made by them. 3. It is not true, that the salvation of Catholics doth absolutely depend upon the Sacrament of Penance lawfully administered: For though it be necessary to the being of the Church in general, that that and all other Sacraments be lawfully administered, and by consequence we may be assured, that Christ will in general prevent all real wants and obstacles thereto: yet it is not necessary that this should be affirmed of each Catholic in particular: For to Christians which are adulti, that is, capable of the exercise of Faith, Hope and Charity, even actual Baptism lawfully administered is not absolutely necessary, for in such persons the Votum Baptismi will supply all wants or defects impossible to be avoided; and much more certainly will the same Votum serve for other Sacraments, as the Eucharist, Penance, etc. 4. Concerning intention, which the church in the Council of Florence (in Instr. Arm.) and in the Council of Trent (Sess. 7. ca 11.) has indeed defined to be a necessary requisite to denominate a Sacrament to be lawfully administered in these words of the Council of Florence; Sacraments are perfected by three things, the Matter, Form and Person of the Minister conferring the Sacraments, with an intention of doing what the church doth; of which if any one be wanting, the Sacrament is not perfected. And these of the Council of Trent, If any man shall say, That in Ministers when they administer the Sacraments there is not required an intention at least of doing what the church doth, let him be Anathema. Mr. Chillingworth might, and I am confident did know, that the Intention required was such an one as might be found even in Pagans, Heretics, Jews. etc. administering Baptism, so they do it, as executing the Office hypocritically intruded into by them in the due form, and with a right pronunciation of the words of the church, although in the mean time in the secret of their hearts they did renounce, deride and detest that Sacrament, and all the efficacy ascribed to it, as appears by the Decisions of ancient Counsels against the Donatists, and the Rescripts of Pope Nicholas the first, and Alexander the third. De consecr. d. 4: cap. à quodam. And hereupon S. Thomas treating of this subject, p. 3. q. 64. à. 8. ad. 2. delivers his sense in these words, Some answer better, says he, that the Minister of the Sacrament doth operate in the person of the whole Church, whose Minister he is; and in the words of the church which he pronounctth is expressed the church's intention, the which sufficeth to the perfection of a Sacrament, unless there be an outward expression of the contrary on the part of the Minister, or receiver of the Sacrament. Upon which grounds I suppose it was that Salmeron the Jesuit, and Scribonius Marius a learned Franciscan, highly esteemed by Cardinal Perron, (besides some ancient Schoolmen) do after this manner with a far greater latitude then generally Controvertists or Schoolmen do allow, Salm. in Ep. Paul. l. 1. p. 1. disp. 2. scrib. Mar. de Sacr. disp. 1. endeavour to express their sense of S. Thomas, and the Decrees of those two Counsels, viz That in the Minister there may be a twofold intention. 1. Merely speculative, inwraped in the secrets of his heart, and of which no outward sign does appear, nor indeed no sufficient one can; of this intention the church judgeth not. 2. Practical, which relates to the outward act; and is thereby really accomplished: The former, say these Authors (unless the church shall define the contrary, as hitherto to their seeming she has not) can neither profit nor prejudice in conferring Sacraments: If it be an ill, malicious intention, it may help to damn the person, but it will not hinder the validity of the Sacrament, nor the efficacy of it. The later practical intention, is that which is only to be considered here. As a servant that is sent by his Master to deliver possession of a house, if he really perform the legal ceremonies, and pronounce the words requisite, whatsoever thoughts of unwillingness, reluctancy or contradiction lurk in his breast, the delivery will be valid. And truly it seems not intelligible, how it can be possible for a Minister, as a Minister of the Church, not compelled by force, nor drawn by promises, that knows what he does, and clearly shows that he will do what he knows, should as the church commands him, with all due formality perform a Sacrament, and yet at the same time intent or resolve not to do what he does: He may possibly have in his wicked heart inward wishes that the Sacrament might want effect, or a misbelief that the Sacrament is nothing valuable, but a mere superstitious, vain or noxious ceremony. But as for the thoughts by which performing a Sacrament he would endeavour to intend not to do that which he intends to do, such thoughts seem to be mere aerial fancies. Indeed if he show his contradiction or intention by any outward sign by which it may be judged, that though he observe all the requisite formalities, yet he intends them merely in a mockery, as if an Actor upon a Stage should personate the conferring a Sacrament, and much more if he neglect the due form of words. He will thereby declare that really, that is not a Sacrament which he performs, but a mere mockery and malicious scornful Pageantry. Those learned, and as yet uncensured Authors, therefore (whose opinions I do here relate only historically) do conceive the meaning of the church in the forementioned Decisions to be only this, viz. That it is requisite to Sacraments that they be only this, viz. that they be not administered jestingly, histrionically and ridiculously, but after such a manner that it may reasonably be judged, that he who administers them intends to perform his duty and office imposed on him by the church; that is, to perform and confer a Sacrament, and not to play the fool: Not that the church ever intended that the Sacraments should be valid or null, according to the inward fancies of the administrer, or that it should be in the power of an atheistical or malicious Bishop or Priest to damn all his Diocese and Parish. And for a further proof of this, it is observable, that even at the very time when this Article concerning the necessity of intention was debated and concluded in the Council of Trent, Catharinus Bishop of Minori declared openly this sense of that Article against certain disputing Schoolmen, and during the sitting of the Council, published a book to the same effect, no man censuring or condemning him; Although indeed his manner of expression was far more unwary, and more approaching to the sense of the Lutherans and Calvinists then the forecited Authors, Salmeron, and Scribonius Marius; the further fitness of which opinion I leave to the judgement of the Catholic Reader, my intention being only to make a Narration of what I was told or did read in others. 3. And these are the principal arguments produced by Mr. Chillingworth against the infallibility (as he loves to call it) of the Church; at least such of them as had the greatest effect upon me, during my time of Protestancy, to hinder me from submitting myself to the authority of the Catholic Church, or indeed to any authority at all, as obliging in conscience; which arguments (when I came to examine them) appeared to me in general, not to touch the established doctrine thereof at all. Whether they were of greater force against his particular adversary, it concerned not me, neither had I commission or authority to examine. 4. It is not my purpose in this Narration to give particular answers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to all his objections: Only this I profess, that I do neither remember any one through his whole book, which formerly had any strong influence upon me, nor (since my becoming a Catholic, after not a perfunctory per-usuall of it) have I met with any, which to mine own understanding, upon the grounds by me formerly laid, do not seem to me easily answerable. And I am confident, that if any Protestant shall apply Mr. Chillingworth's discourses to the established doctrine and expressions of the Catholic Church, he will acknowledge that, notwithstanding any thing said by him, this may remain true, That the Catholic Church hath authority to propose points of Faith, and to interpret Scriptures; and that no particular Churches or Christians may or aught to contradict or refuse to submit to her determinations and interpretations. Insomuch, as if Mr. Chillingworth had been so fortunate as to have undertaken no more then to examine the doctrine of the church, he would scarce have made use of, and much less would he have relied so confidently upon the strength of any of those arguments which he has produced against his adversaries Positions: He must have been forced either to acknowledge the truth of the church's doctrine, or have put himself to the trouble of inventing other kind of arguments, than any I could yet meet with, either in his, or any other Protestants writings. CHAP. XLIV. Dangerous consequences of Protestants doctrine against the authority of the Church. 1. I Will at length put an end to this tedious (but that it is so necessary) discourse upon this second conclusion concerning the Judge of Controversies, and authoritative interpreter of Scripture, by showing, among many, some special enormous and unavoidable consequences of the doctrine of Protestants concerning this point, who refuse, yea oppose the consent of the present and ancient Catholic Church, propounding doctrines of Faith, and interpreting Scripture, and submit to their own particular reason, or private Spirit. 2. The first is an impossibility of Unity, yea though reason were suffered to proceed simply without mixture of passion and interest, as experience and reason itself shows, and it hath been already proved. 3. The second, an evident contradiction to Universal Antiquity, which will not afford one example of any Catholic Writer, that either hath affirmed, that in interpreting Scripture every man is to follow the guidance of his own reason or private Spirit, against the authority of the present church; or that hath himself refused, or taught others to refuse upon any pretence to submit to the determinations of the present Catholic Church. 4. The third is, that if the universal testimony of the present church, either by her public profession and practice, or in her decisions in a General Council do not indispensably oblige all Christians to obedience upon this pretended exception that no express mention is made in Scripture of such an unlimited power given to any church of one denomination; than it will follow, that those churches and Counsels which have assumed to themselves this authority to exact subscription to any decisions of any doctrines, other than express quotations of Scripture to be understood by every one, according to his own fancy, and that hath accursed all gainsayers, are guilty of insupportable uncharitableness, injustice, and tyranny: Upon which grounds all Protestants are obliged to anathematise the four first General Counsels, as well as all the rest which follow, yea above all other the Council of Nice, since therein were anathematised all those that did not subscribe to an expression of one Article of Faith, which notwithstanding those Fathers acknowledged to be so far from being contained expressly in Scripture, that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (which occasioned so many Tragedies) was not so much as of Tradition, but only invented by them, as proper to oppose the Heresy of the Arians, and to express the sense of the Traditionary doctrine of Christ's eternal Divinity and equality with the Father. 5. The fourth is, that upon Protestants grounds it is impossible they should rationally call any doctrine Heresy, or any separation Schism, without condemning themselves: For concerning Heresy, if they, following the ancient Church, define Heresy to be a relinquishing or opposing the belief of any doctrine generally professed in the Catholic Church, or defined by a lawful Cowcell, they will include themselves within the lists of Heretics, since if for several ages before Luther, there were either any Church's Catholic, or any authority to make a lawful assembly; they have done apparently the same. But defining, as they do, Heresy to be a contradiction of a Fundamental Article of the Christian Faith expressly contained in Scripture; and not naming, but rather explicitly renouncing any visible Judge authorized to determine, whether such or such an Article be to be accounted to be expressly contained therein against those who deny it, it is impossible to come to an issue between parties contradicting one the other. 6. I will give only two instances in two points acknowledged in England: the first in that great point controverted between the English Protestants and the Socinians. The English Protestants call the Socinians Heretics, because they deny the eternal Divinity of the second Person in the blessed Trinity, because this is, say they, a fundamental Article of Christian Faith, and expressly contained in Scripture: But this the Socinians confidently deny, yea they profess that the contrary rather is expressly contained in Scripture; for, say they, Neither the word Trinity, nor Personality, nor Consubstantiality, etc. are to be found in Scripture, neither can any Texts be produced, which witness in formal words, that the Son is equal to the Father, in respect of the Godhead, yea many Texts expressly say, that he is inferior. But now what Texts are there to be found so evidently expressing the eternal Divinity of the Son of God, as there are for appropriating the Divine Nature to the Father only? (Viz.) these two Texts, This is eternal life to know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent. And, To us there is but one God, even the Father, and one Lord Jesus Christ. 7. The truth is, if Tradition and the authority of the Church be not admitted to interpret Scripture, the Socinians, and other Antitrinitarians cannot by Protestants be condemned as Heretics upon the pretence of denying express Scripture, since if reason alone be judge, those Texts cannot be called express, which may be confronted with others seemingly contradicting, or which are capable of a sense, it may be less probable, yet so as that without much racking, the words will be able to bear: a case which to have happened in this controversy, every reasonable man will confess, that shall cast his eyes upon the several positive Texts alleged by Crellius in his book De uno vere Deo. I may add further, that if the universal Tradition of the present Church in the time of the Council of Nice had not prevailed for the stating of that great controversy against the Arians, so many objections those Heretics heaped together, not only out of Scripture, but likewise out of the writings of such Fathers as preceded that Council, that perhaps they might have endangered the cause, as will appear to any one that shall cast his eyes upon a world of passages quoted by Heretics, out of Clemens Alexandrinus, Tertullian, S. Justin Martyr, Origen, Lactantius, etc. 8. The Second instance is the Heresy of Rebaptisation renewed by the Anabaptists of these times, and in conformity to Antiquity condemned by English Protestants: it is more evident than the Sun, that express Scripture alone being the Rule, and private reason or Spirit the Judge, the Anabaptists cannot upon Protestants grounds be accused either to err in a point fundamental, or however in a point fundamental contained expressly in Scripture. 9 In the last place, that upon Protestants grounds no separation among them can justly be called Schism (in the notion of Antiquity) appears yet more evidently: For among those ●● of S●●●● now in England, which abhor and renounce the Communion of one another, 1. There is not any one of them that has the assurance to style themselves the Catholic Church with exclusion of all others not in actual Communion with them: Now Schism is only a separation from the external Communion of the Catholic Church, at least, if universal antiquity may be allowed to be the judge. 2. There is not any one of them which dares apply to themselves in particular those words of Christ, Tell the Church, and if he will not hear the Church, let him be to thee as a Heathen and a Publican, or those Promises of his, Upon this Rock will I build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And, I will send the Comforter which shall lead you into all truth. And, Behold I am with you to the end of the world. Now there is no Schism, but from such a church to which those eulogies and promises belong. 3. All the means and remedies left them to deal with those they call Schismatics or Heretics are, not to excommunicate them in a General Council, as the Catholic Church has continually upon occasion done; for what a ridiculous affembly must that be, to which they should presume to attribute the name of a General Council? And how more ridiculously would an Anathema sound, being fulminated by a Synod of Charenton, or Gap, or D●rt, etc. But their proper course in such cases, is to persecute, imprison, or perhaps burn one another, as Calvin did Servetus; and by this means the weaker and sufferer would be the only Heretic and Schismatique. But of Schism, more in the following Conclusion. CHAP. XLV. The third Conclusion. The point of Shisme slightly considered by Protestants: which notwithstanding aught above all others to be chiefly considered. THE 3d. CONCLUSION, viz. That there is one only Church of Christ: and that all Heretics who believe not all Christian doctrines taught in her, and all Schismatics, who, breaking the bond of Charity, divide themselves from her visible and external Communion, are separated from Christ himself. 1. IN my discourse upon this Conclusion I need not separate Heresy from Schism, since I do not know any Sect in these times precisely Schismatical, that is, without any mixture of Heresy, (as the Donatists were in the beginning, who agreed in all doctrines with Catholics, but separated upon a quarrel grounded upon a matter of fact. Therefore hereafter when I speak of Schism, and inquire upon what party it is to be charged, it is to be supposed that Heresy must accompany it, seeing the foundation of all the present separations among Christians is ●heir disagreeing in points of faith and doctrine. 2. Now though this divine truth, viz. That the true Church of Christ is only one, and by consequence, that an injustifiable separation from it, is in a high degree damnable, be acknowledged by all Christians that I know, since it is an express article of our Creed, Credo unam sanctam & Catholicam Ecclesiam, that is, I believe one holy Catholic Church; and therefore there may seem to be no necessity to put one's self to the trouble of proving it: Notwithstanding I will not refuse that trouble to make a collection of quotations, both out of Scripture and Fathers; to the end, both to get a distinct notion of what was anciently understood by this word, Schism: and to set forth (according to their conceptions) the abominableness and extreme sinfulness of that sin; and this the rather, because a sad meditation upon such passages enforced me to consider in what a state I had formerly lived, and likewise made me wonder, that heretofore above all other points I had not bend my thoughts and studies to inquire and determine (since it is apparent that there is a Schism in the church) upon which party the guilt of so horrible and exterminating a sin did lie. 3. But the truth is, my wonder decreased, when I considered that hitherto I had not met with any Protestant Writers that have throughly considered this point of Schism, which yet above all others ought to have been most exactly ventilated and examined, as S. Augustine (lib. 2. cont. lit. Petil.) saith, in the case of Schism against the Donatists; The whole question therefore is, whether you do not ill, you I say, to whom the whole world objects the sacrilege of so geeat a Schism? the exact examination of which question whilst you neglect; all that you say is superfluous: and whereas you live like thiefs, you boast that you die as Martyrs. And again, (Ep. 164. ad Emer. Don.) Wherefore in the prime place this is to be enquired, for what reason you made a Schism? To the same effect said Optatus before him concerning the same Donatists, (lib. 1.) The business in hand is concerning separation: In Africa, as in all other Provinces likewise, there was but one church before it was divided by those who ordained Majorinus in the Chair, upon which by succession thou art set. The matter therefore to be considered is, which of the two parties have remained in the root with the whole world? which of them went out? which of them is set upon a new Chair (Episcopal) which heretofore was not in being? which of them has raised an Altar against a (former) Altar? which of them made an Ordination during the life time of him who was before ordanied? Lastly which of them is obnoxious to the sentence of S. John the Apostle, who foretold that many Antichrists would go out of the Church? 4. The almost only considerable Author among Protestants, who seems to have written largely and purposely upon this argument of Schism, was that unfortunate Apostate M. Antonius de Dominis, Archbishop of Spalleto, who, as appears by the Index of the heads of his books and Sections, allowed an entire book to this subject: but by what means it came to pass, whether through guilt, or what other mystery I know not, but in the publication of the three volumes of his works, that book which he intended, or had written de Schismate appears not, there is an hiatus in that place not yet supplied. But to proceed to the quotations. CHAP. XLVI. Quotations out of Scripture and Fathers to show the sinfulness and danger of Schism. 1. THe passages of Scripture which I especially took notice of, concerning the sinfulness and extreme danger of Schism were these, viz. those words of our Saviour, (Mat. 18. 7. Woe unto the world because of scandals, for it must needs be that scandals come; notwithstanding woe to that man by whom the scandal cometh. Now the Fathers generally by scandals understand Heresies and Schisms. Which interpretation S. Paul seems to justify, joining together Schisms and scandals as Synonyma, or words of the same importance, when he says, Rom. 16. 17. I beseech you brethren, observe those who make Schisms and scandals, contrary to the doctrine which you have been taught, and avoid them. For● such men serve not our Lord jesus Christ, but their own belly, and by kind speeches and benedictions seduce the hearts of the simple. Again, saith our Saviour, Hereby shall men know that ye are my Disciples; if ye love one another. Add to this his last legacy, Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you; As likewise that saying of his, which S. Hierome quotes from Tradition, Nunquam l●ti sitis, nisi cum fratres vestros in charitate videritis, that is, Be yet never joyful but when you see your brethren in charity. To all which I will subjoin that passionate exhortation of S. Paul, (Philip. 2 1.) If there be therefore any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any bowels of mercy, fulfil ye my joy that ye be likeminded, unanimous, thinking the same things, doing nothing through contention or vainglory. 2. The same affection and zeal did the ancient Fathers and Doctors of the church express to Catholic Unity, with incredible efficacy, showing their detestation against Schisms and Divisions: Witness S. Irenaeus (lib. 4. c. 62.) God will judge those which make Schisms in the Church, ambitious men, who have not the honour of God before their eyes, but rather embracing their own interest then the unity of the Church, for small and light causes divide the great and glorious body of Christ, etc. For in the end they cannot make any Reformation so important, as the evil of Schism is pernicious. Witness S. Dionysius of Alexandrina, Eus. Hist. eccles. l. 6. c. 45. writing to Novatian, A man ought rather to endure all things then to consent to division of the Church of God, since Martyrdom, to which men expose themselves, to the end to hinder the dismembering of the Church, are no less glorious, than those which a man suffers for refusing to sacrifice to Idols. Witness S. Cyprian, (de unit. Eccles.) Do they think that Christ is amongst them when they are assembled? I speak of those which make assemblies out of the Church of Christ: No, although they were drawn to torments and execution for the confession of the name of Christ, yet this pollution is not washed away, no not with their blood: this inexplicable and inexcusable crime of Schism is not purged away, even by death itself. That man cannot be a Martyr that is not in the Church. And again, He shall not have God for his Father, that would not have the Church for his Mother. Witness S. Pacian (ad Sympr. cp. 2.) Although that Nova jan hath been put to death (for Christ) yet he has not received a crown. And why? Because he was separated from the peace of the Church, from concord, from that Mother, of whom whosoever will be a Martyr, must be a portion. Witness S. Optatus (lib. 1.) Among other Precepts, the divine injunction hath likewise forbidden these three, Thou shalt not kill. Thou shalt not go after strange Gods, and (in capitibus mandatorum) in the head of the Commandments, Thou shalt not make a Schism. He means I suppose those words in the preface of the Decalogue, The Lord thy God is One, thou shalt have no other Gods but me. Again (lib. 2.) The unity of the Episcopal Chair is the prime endowment given to the Church. Witness S. chrysostom (in Eph. hom. 11.) There is nothing doth so sharply provoke the wrath of God, as the division of the Church; insomuch as though we should have performed all other sorts of good things, yet we shall incur a punishment no less cruel by dividing the unity and fullness of the Church, than those have done, who pierced and divided Christ's own body. Witness the fourth Council of Carthage, (Can 1.) out of the Catholic Church there is no salvation. 3. Witness S. Augustine (de Symb. ad Catech. l. 4. c. 10.) For this cause the conclusion of this Sacrament (he means the creed) is terminated in the Article concerning the holy Church: and the reason is, because if any man be found separated from her, he shall be excluded from the number of children; neither shall he have God for his Father, that would not have the Church for his Mother: and it will nothing avail him to have rightly believed, or to have done never so many good works, without this conclusion of the sovereign good. Again, (in Psa. 21.) Whosoever has charity is assured. But as for charity, no man transports it out of the Church. Again, (de Bap. con. Don. l. 1. c. 8.) Those whom the Donatists heal of the wound of I dolatry and infidelity, they themselves wound more dangerously with the wound of Schism. Again, (sup. gest. Emar.) Out of the Catholic Church a Heretic may have all things but salvation. He may have the Sacraments, He may sing Allelujah, He may answer, Amen. He may keep the Gospel, He may have the Faith and preach it, only salvation he cannot have. Again, (l. 3. cont. Petil. c. 5.) No man preaching the name of Christ, and carrying or ministering the Sacrament of Christ is to be followed against the Unity of Christ. Again, (cont. adv. Le. & Proph. l. 1. 6. 17.) If he hear not the Church, let him be to thee as a Heathen and a Publican; which is more grievous than if he was strucken through with a sword, consumed by flames, exposed to wild beasts. Again (l. de Past. c. 12.) The Devil saith not, let them be Donatists and not Arians, for whether they be here or there they belong to him that gathers without making a difference: Let him adore Idols, saith the Devil, he is mine: Let him remain in the superstition of the Jews, he is mine: Let him quit Unity, and pass over to this or that, or any Heresy, he is mine. 4. Witness likewise S. Fulgentius, (de rem. pec. cap. 22.) Out of this Church neither the title of Christian secures any man, neither doth Baptism confer salvation, neither doth any man offer a sacrifice agreeable to God, neither doth any man receive Remission of sins, neither doth any man attain to eternal life, for there is one only Church, one only Dove, one only wellbeloved, one only Spouse. Again, (de Fid. ad. Pet. D. c. 39) Hold this most firmly, and doubt not of it in any wise, that every Heretic and Schismatique whatsoever baptised in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; if before the end of his life he be not reunited to the Catholic Church, let him bestow never so many alms, yea though he should shed his blood for the name of Christ, he cannot obtain salvation. Witness lastly S. Prosper, He who does not communicate with the Universal Church is a Heretic and Antichrist. (de prom. & praed. Dei p. 4. c. 5.) 5. Surely no man can justly blame, if a serious consideration of such testimonies of Scripture, such a conspiracy of all the Saints almost of the ancient Church agreeing to condemn Schism, as the most heinous inexcusable sin that a Christian was capable of committing, not to be redeemed with Faith, Sacraments, Alms, Miracles, no nor Martyrdom itself, awakened me from the Lethargy I was in, and from the presumption which I had, viz. that since I myself had no influence upon the beginnings of the Separation, but on the contrary approached as near in my belief to the Catholic Church, as Truth in my opinion would permit me; and lastly, since I judged charitably of the state of Cutholiques, that therefore the guilt of Schism should never be imputed to me. Not content therefore to rest upon these imaginations in a matter, upon which my eternal happiness inseparably depended, if the express words of Scripture, and unanimous consent of Antiquity were to be believed, I proceeded to examine the present state of Protestant etc. Churches in separation from the Roman, by the marks which the ancient Fathers afforded me to judge by, whether of the two parties were guilty, and to which of them this so heinous low, viz. 1. They all agreed that Schism was a thing of itself evident, & whereof the most ignorant understandings might inform themselves: For this being the foundation of all their disputes of the Catholic Church, that it is a congregation so visible and illustrious, that it cannot be hidden from the eyes of any man that does not willingly shut them, it does necessarily follow, that they who are not in visible communion with that visible church are apparently Schismatics. 5. Secondly, and by consequence, that the mark of Schism and Heresy was not a separation from the true faith simply; but from that faith which is openly professed by the Church: For otherwise, if they had defined Schism with respect only to the true Faith, all the evidence of Schism would be utterly taken away, since it would be always ambiguous and disputable which of the parties in a Schism held the true doctrine; of which ignorant people could not be Judges; and the learned would never acknowledge themselves guilty. Besides, the parties evidently in Schism would be sure, either not at all to acknowledge, or at least to excuse and extenuate their fault, by saying, that though they were in some sort divided from the (Catholic) Church, yet this was not so unpardonable, since they left the Church only in points not fundamental, for in such they agree with Catholics, and by consequence remain the same church still in substantials. This is at this day the plea of many Protestants, as it was anciently of the Pelagians, according to that of S. Augustine, (de Pec. Orig. l. 2. c. 22.) Pelagius and Goelestius saith he, desirous cunningly to avoid the odious name of Heresy, affirm that the question concerning Original fin may be disputed without endangering Faith. But this assertion of theirs he confuted particularly in his fourteenth Sermon, De Verbis Apostoli; and in general against both Heretics and Schismatics proves, that whatsoever in particular their opinions are, yet since they profess otherwise then the church does, and requires of them to do, they are in a damnable estate, because thereby they virtually renounce one fundamental Article of faith, viz. of the authority and unity of the Catholic Church; and therefore if they break communion, though but for one doctrine, and that of itself of no great importance; their orthodoxness in all other points will not avail them wanting truth, and especially renouncing charity and obedience to the Universal Church. Hereupon the same Father (in Psal. 54.) saith of the Donatists, We have each of us one Baptism; in this they were with me: We celebrated the Feasts of the Martyrs, in this they were with me: We frequented the solemnity of Easter, in this they were with me: But they were not in all things with me: In Schism they were not with me: In Heresy they were not with me: In many things they were with me, and in some few things they were not with me: But in those few things in which they were not with me, those many things do not profit them in which they were with me. So again the same Father (Ep. 48.) Speaking to the same Donatists, You are with us in Baptism, in the Creed, in other Sacraments of the Lord: but in the Spirit of unity, in the bond of peace, and finally in the Catholic Church you are not with us. 6. Thirdly, that the proper (to all eyes visible) and essential mark of Schism (for what cause soever it matters not) is a wilful separation from the external Communion of the Catholic Church. So S. Augustine (de unit. c. 4.) Those who do so descent from the body of Christ, which is the Church, that their Communion is not with the whole wheresoever it is spread, but are fowd in some party separated, it is manifest that they are not in the Catholic Church. And again (de util. cred. c. 2.) There is one Church, if you cast your eyes upon the surface of the earth, more abundant in multitude, and likewise as those who know by experience affirm, more sincere in truth then all others: but concerning truth that is another dispute. And again (cont. Pet. l. 2. c. 95.) Division and dissension makes you Heretics, and peace and unity make us Catholics. And Uincentius Lerinensis (cap. 9) O admirable change! the first Authors of the same opinions are called Catholics; and the Sectators, Heretics, (namely because they separated for them.) And S. Prosper (the prom. & been. Dei p. 2. l. 5.) He who communicates with the Universal Church is a Christian and a Catholic: and he who doth not communicate with it, is a Heretic and Antichrist: Hereupon it is that the Fathers understand and interpret the word C●tholique, not with respect to doctrine or belief, but Communion external. So S. Augustine (collat. car. d. 3.) We show by the testimony of our Communion that we have the Catholic Church. And again (brevic. coll. l. 3.) The Donatists (saith he) answered that the word Catholic (or universal) was not derived from the universality of Nations, but from the plenitude of Sacraments, that is, from the integrity of doctrine. And again, (Ep. 48. ad Vinc. Reg.) Thou thinkest that thou hast spoken subtly when thou interpretest the name Catholic not of Universal Communion, but of observation of all precepts and divine Sacraments, or Mysteries. 7. And to the end to demonstrate to Schismatics that they could not pretend to any portion in the Catholic Church, the Fathers ordinarily silenced them from any claim thereto, by ask them whether they could address communicatory letters unto, or receive such letters from all Catholic Bishops, which they not being able to do, were supposed to be sufficiently convicted. So S. Augustine (ep. 163.) speaking of Fortunatus the Donatist, I asked him if he could send communicatory Letters (which we call Formatas) whither I would name etc. But because the thing was manifestly false, they quitted that discourse with confusion of language. Hence it was that the ancient Schismatics, not being able with any the least pretence to challenge the title of Catholics, were forced to repair themselves, by laying an aspersion or diminution on that name, as when Sympronian told S. Pacian, (ep. 1.) That none under the Apostles were called Catholics: and when Gaudentius the Donatist affirmed that the word Catholic was a humane fiction, which S. Augustine calls, Verba blasphemia, Blasphemous words. lib. 1. con. Gaudent. 8. Notwithstanding in some cases the Fathers allow, that a man may possibly be separated from the external communion of the Catholic Church without imputation of Schism, according to this discourse which I have found quoted out of S. Augustine. Often times also it happens, saith he, that the divine Providence permits that some good men should be cast out of the Christian Congregation by some over-turbulent sedition of carnal men, which injury done unto such men, when they shall bear it patiently, for the peace of the Church, and shall not attempt any innovations of Schisms or Heresies, they will instruct men with what true affection, and with how great sincerity and charity we ought to serve God. The design and resolution therefore of such men is, either to return when the tempest is calmed, or if that be not permitted them, either by reason that the tempest yet continues, or out of fear lest by their return another tempest should be raised more violent than the former, they preserve a will and affection to serve even those, to the violence and commotions of whom they have given place, defending to the death (without making any separated conventicles) and maintaining by their testimony the faith which they know is preached in the Catholic Church: Such as these the Father who sees in secret crowns in secret. 9 I remember that Monsienr Grotius, from this speech of S. Augustine, and a suitable action (I think) of S. Chrysostom's, defends the non-association to the Catholic Church of himself, and such peaceable Protestants as himself: But surely in vain, for first this discourse of S. Augustine supposes that such persons do not hold any doctrines condemned by the Catholic Church. 2. That whensoever leave or opportunity shall be given, they will readily embrace her Communion. 3. That they do not communicate with any Sects manifestly in separation from it: None of which suppositions can he applied to Monsieur Grotius, etc. and therefore such a Communion in voto, or desire cannot in the judgement of Antiquity avail them; since if it could, no Heretic nor Schismatique could be culpable; or that in such a sense doth not communicate with the Catholic Church: for there is not any of them but would willingly communicate with her upon these terms, viz. That she would change the clauses and conditions of her Communion, and reform herself according to the patterns of their particular respective Sects. 10. A fourth mark of Heresy and Schism is, when the first Authors of them can be named, and by consequence can be proved to be in time posteriour to Catholic Unity: And particularly for doctrines, such were esteemed Heretical, which could not be maintained to be Apostolical, that is, (not which the Authors did not pretend to be deducible out of Apostolical Writings, for all Heretics generally alleged Scripture for all their blasphemies: but) which they could not prove to have been professed in the church, and deduced successively from Age to Age since the Apostles times: Thus S. Athanasius (in Dec. Syn. Nic. cont. Arian.) Behold we have proved the succession of our doctrine delivered, from hand to hand, from Father to Son: But as for you (Arians) new-Jewes and children of Caiaphas, what progenitors can you show of your speeches? So likewise S. Pacian (Epist. 3.) For myself, holding myself assured upon the succession of the Church, and contenting myself with the peace of the ancient Congregation, I have not learned any studies of discord. CHAP. XLVIII. An Application of the former marks of Schisms to the present Controversy; and a demonstration that they do not suit to the Roman, but only Protestant Churches. 1. HAving thus informed myself of the mind of Antiquity concerning the nature and marks of Schism and Heresy, and applying them to the controversy in hand, between the Roman and Protestant etc. Churches, it appeared as clear to me as the Sun at noon day, that if the same Fathers and Bishops meeting in the ancient Counsels to condemn the Arians, Nestorians, Eutychians, Novatians, and Donatists etc. had lived in these times, they must of necessity upon the same grounds have condemned the Lutherans, Calvinists, English-Protestants, Socinians etc. For it being apparent, that there is really a Schism among the Western Christians since Luther's Apostasy, in as much as so many Sects do not only actually separate from the communion of that church, which before that separation they all called the Catholic Church, but likewise impute superstition, idolatry, and other crimes unto it, thereby to justify such their separation, by which means not a Schism only, and that most properly so called, is happened, but Heresy likewise is to be imputed to one of the parties divided: That neither of these titles belongs to the Roman Church, and therefore that both of them are justly and necessarily to be charged upon the Church of England (and by consequence, much more upon all other Sects of Protestants, as being much more violent and uncharitable against the Roman Catholic Church) may to my understanding be demonstrated most evidently after this manner, viz. 2. First with respect to separation from external communion: In a manifest Schism (as this is apparently) those who are but a part, who are new beginners, whose prime authors may be named, who have introduced among Christians novelties, not heard of in the world, even by their own confession, for above a thousand years, and have actively separated themselves from the external communion of the whole, in which they did formerly remain, those and those only are Schismatics; and such are Protestants, as is evident. For 1. The English church is at the best but a particular church, which in the beginning of the reign of King Henry the VIII. did live in external communion with the then whole Catholic Church, but afterward in the same King's days divided itself from the same external communion, by renouncing obedience to the Pope, whom before they acknowledged the visible Head of the Catholic Church. 2. The same English Church in the days of his Son King Edward the VI but especially to his Daughter Q. Elizabeth, to the former Schism added an alteration of several other points of doctrine, confessedly for very many ages universally embraced by all Catholics, and conspicuous in the public profession and practice of the church: and in this double division both from the Faith and external communion of the Catholic Church has the English Nation continued ever since. Therefore according to the notion of Schism, which we have from Antiquity, and plain express reason, the English-Protestant-Church is properly Schismatical and Heretical. 3. On the contrary, the Roman Church (acknowledged by all Englishmen to have been the Catholic Church; and even since the separation allowed by English Protestants themselves to be at least a true member of the Catholic Church) has continued to this day in the same form of external communion that she had before, has not actually nor actively separated from any church pre-existent, much less from the whole body; has changed nothing of doctrine etc. therefore if she was the Catholic Church before, she is so still: however she cannot in any the least show of reason be called Schismatical. 4. For further proof of this, let us consider the first beginners of separation, Luther, Zuinglius, or (to apply this discourse to the Church of England) tindal. I desire to know whether when tindal alone, of his own head, without any authority, either civil or ecclesiastical, yea in open desiance of both, began to disperse doctrines unheard of among his countrymen, all Catholics, dividing himself from the external communion of the whole world, whether, I say, tindal thus standing alone, as supposed, as yet not to have gained Proselytes, was properly and truly a schismatic, or no? If he was, I would fain know by what right he or his followers came to lose that name, when he had perverted a company, suppose a Parish, or Diocese, or Province, yea that whole Kingdom, is it become a meritorious thing to gain Proselytes to Schism or Heresy? Is one single person when he is out of company a child of hell, and being joined with seven other as wicked, or perhaps more wicked than himself, does he thereby become a child of God? Then certainly all Pharisaical Sectaries have good reason to do what our Saviour says of the Pharisees, namely, to travel Sea and Land to make Proselytes, since ill company, it seems, may bring them to heaven, whereas if they had been alone they could not avoid sinking into helll. But if tindal so standing alone in real separation from all other Christians, was no Schismatique; then, since by confession on all sides the Catholic Church cannot fail, it will follow, that tindal in his own single person was the Catholic Church, and the whole body of Christians divided from him were Schismatics. 5. If this way of arguing be not demonstratively concluding, both out of the forementioned grounds of the Fathers and evident reason, yea even palpable sense, it will be impossible to make a Syllogism, or to conclude rationally from any principles whatsoever; we must alter Dictionaries and all forms of language, and affirm that there is no means left to understand one another, though we endeavour to speak never so plainly: For if he be not a Separ●●tist, who doth by his own confession actually separate, and he an Innovator, who doth actually innovate: And if that church which in An. D. 1516. was confessed not to have been Schismatical, because then all things were peaceable, no Schism was yet begun, if the same church continuing without any alteration in doctrine or practice till the year following, that Luther taught and divided against it, and so ever since be to be called Schismatical, because others would stay no longer in it, then to change is to be constant, and to be constant, to change; to run away is to stand still, and to stand still to run away. 6. If Protestants reply, that though in respect of the then present state of the church, Luther, tindal, etc. did make alterations, in regard of some precedent ages before Luther, in which the church had been wholly drowned in error and superstition, they did indeed innovate; Yet since they sought to reduce the present distempered church to the form and soundness of the ancient Apostolical church, they were neither alterers nor innovators, but rather took away all alterations and innovations. I answer, that if Luther's or Tindalls judgement alone deserved to be balanced with the whole world, and if there were any suspicion that Christ had forgot his promises, or were become unable to perform them, there might be some pretence for such a plea; otherwise such an excuse doth augment their guilt, in as much as they do dishonour Christ, calumniate the one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church; charge themselves with the extremity both of infidelity and pride, or (in the language of S Augustine) blasphemy and intolerable madness. CHAP. XLIX. A continuation of proofs, that Schism and Heresy cannot with the least show of reason be imputed to the Roman Church; but only and wholly to Protestants, etc. 1. A Further proof as evident as the former, viz. that the imputation of complete Schism with Heresy annexed, is only to be charged upon Protestants, etc. and not with the least show of reason upon the Roman church, and that with respect of doctrine innovated, is this. 2. It is first confessed that all the doctrines, which the Protestants call errors, and those in themselves damnable (unless where invincible ignorance shall perhaps excuse) and therefore obliging all Christian people after having received a new light by the preaching of Luther, tindal, etc. to forsake them, and the communion of all those that persisted in the maintaining of them: I say it is confessed that all such pretended errors were spread through the whole Catholic Ch●rch in Communion with the Roman in the age before Luther began his Apostasy, nemine contradiceute. (Now by the way, how this can agree with that sense which they give to the promises of Christ, that he would preserve his Church in all truth, so that the gates of hell should not prevail against it, I confess I cannot comprehend: For if all Heresies be the gates of hell, as the Fathers say; then much more Heresies in themselves damnable, although the church had not condemned them, because against essential truths. Besides they will not deny, but that invincible ignorance may possibly excuse Pelagianism, Photinianisme, Arianisme, etc. so that upon their grounds, notwithstanding the promises of Christ, all Christians for above a thousand years together might as well have been infected with these Heresies also. 3. It is secondly confessed, that excepting two or three, and those not of the most considerable opinions, all the rest (now condemned by Protestants, were publicly and generally embraced and professed for several ages before Luther: I will add, by all ages and churches till S. Gregory's days inclusive, that is, for about one thousand years: I might go further, and justify my assertion clearly and evidently: but for the present let us pitch upon S. Gregory's time. For warrant of what I have said, besides the testimony of S. Gregory's writings, Liturgy, Ritual, Missal, etc. and besides the ancient ecclesiastical history (especially of England) and the Synods anciently assembled there, I appeal to the confession of the most learned Protestants, as Humphrey, Fulke, the Centuriators of Magdeburg, etc. whose words describing the Religion brought into England by S. Gregory, and S. Augustine, The Benedictin Monk, Hamp. l. Jesuit rat. 5. p. 5. Car. Chron. l. 4. p. 567. Bal. in Act. R. pont p. 44. Osiend. cent. 6. p. 288. Magd. cent. 6. 748. & 369. Fulk. conf. purge. p. 333. are these, They brought in, say they, Altars, holy Vestments, Images, Chalices, Candlesticks, Censers, sacred Vessels, holy Water and sprinkling with it, Relics and the translations of them, Dedication of Churches, with the bones and ashes of dead men, Consecrations of Altars, of Chalices, of Corporals, of Baptismal Fonts, of Chrism, of Oil, of Churches by using sprinkling of holy water, celebration of the Mass, use of the Archiepiscopal Pall in the solemnising of the Mass, books of Roman rituals, and a burden of ceremonies, freewill, merit, and justification by works, penance, satisfaction, Purgatory, single life of Priests, public invocation of Saints, and worship of them, veneration of Images, Exorcisms, Indulgences, Vows, Monachisme, Transubstantion, Prayer for the dead, exercise of the Jurisdiction of the Roman Bishop, and his primacy over all Churches, in a word, the remaining chaos (as they call it) of Popish superstition. 4. It is thirdly evident that within that time in several Counsels (Provincial at least) most of the points in debate between Protestants and the Roman Church, have been either decided, or the belief of them supposed, and all the practices (which Protestants condemn) justified and commanded: no better proof of which assertion need be sought for, than that Tome of English Synods published by Sir Henry Spelman. And on the contrary that it does not appear in any Synod that any of those doctrines or practices have been condemned, nor in the least degree censured: so that if there were any authority in the Catholic Church for above one thousand years together, if she could challenge either belief, or but noncontradiction to her decisions, they cannot be excused, who not only not receive, but oppose, yea condemn, yea blasphemously calumniate her both for doctrines and practices so unanimously professed and embraced; and all this even then when they acknowledge her to be the object of that Article of the creed, Credo unam, sanctam, Catholicam, Apostolicam Ecclesiam: But how (unam) if they may, yea ought to divide and tear her in pieces? How (sanctam) if defiled with so much profaneness, superstition, and Idolatry, and all this not only permitted, but commanded by her? How (Catholicam) if contradicting the ancient universal church? Lastly, how (Apostolicam) if so evidently condemnable by Apostolic writings, as is pretended? 5. In the fourth place, it was to me an irrefragable testimony of a strange watchfulness of divine providence over the church to preserve it from the gates of hell (that is, established and dangerous errors) that during those worst times thereof, when ignorance, worldliness, pride, tyranny, etc. reigned with so much scope, I mean during the time of about six ages before Luther; when the Popes, so wicked, so abominable in their lives, enjoyed so unlimited a power even over secular Princes themselves, and much more over the Clergy; yet notwithstanding we do not find that there was any innovation at all in any points that concern doctrine, defined by Counsels; nor particularly that the Popes, though in practice they assumed to themselves a vast exercise of external Jurisdiction, yet that they ever attempted, much less effected the introducing any decision, as de Fide, of their power above that which was universally believed, not only in the former ages after S. Gregory's times, but in times immemorial before that. 6. In the fifth place, concerning the time between the first Council of Nice and S. Gregory it appeared to me evidently that many points now in controversy have been defined expressly against Protestants: That many have been universally reputed Heteriques for maintaining the very same opinions now again innovated by Protestants, as Aërius, Vigilantius, jovinian, etc. That scarce any point of doctrine of the Roman church, but is expressly maintained by the Fathers generally. That whatsoever passages seemingly contradicting to Roman doctrines are out of the Fathers produced by Protestants, do at the most only argue want of memory in the Fathers, opposing that in one obscure place, which they had plainly affirmed in twenty: That those Fathers, who were so quicksighted to take notice of, and so zealous to condemn any innovation in doctrine or practice, yet neither have observed nor opposed any one point, either of doctrine or practice, received in S. Gregory's time, and continued to these, as an innovation: That the general language of the Fathers when they spoke ex professo concerning Prayer for the Dead, Purgaetory, the blessed Sacrament, the Primacy of the Pope etc. was like those of these times; the ancient outward form of the church like that of the present; And on the contrary, all these, both expressions and Liturgies, and outward face of the ancient Church much more unlike to the Temples of the Calvinists or Lutherans &c. yea or English Protestants, in things wherein they differ from the Roman, when they were from the Congregations of ancient Heretics. 7. In the last place, that the pretended proofs out of Scripture alleged by Protestants, proceed either because no mention is made of Scripture of such points, (a way of arguing generally renounced by the Fathers, who condemn many Heretics by Tradition alone without Scripture:) or because they, by drawing consequences out of Texts of Scripture, say they can confute such doctrines of the Roman Church, which yet upon their own grounds will not suffice to call the contrary opinions so pretended to be confuted heretical, and much less will they be a sufficient warrant to make such mortal divisions in the church, as are in these days. 8. From all which considerations it seemed likewise to my weak understanding, that this plea made use of by Protestants to excuse their Schism upon pretence of so many dangerous errors and heresies crept into the Catholic Church, necessary to be reform, was a plea of all others the most unreasonable, the most unjust that ever was, a plea so far from excusing them, that above all other things it will make them most unpardonable before God and man; a plea formally evacuating the promises of Christ, inevitably ruining all Ecclesiastical authority, rendering useless and ridiculous all the marks that Antiquity gives us, whereby to judge of Schism and Heresy. Lastly, a plea which English Protestants, by the just judgement of God, have to their own ruin put into the mouths of Calvinists, and all other Sects, for as they served the Catholics, so have the Calvinists used them, upon pretence of reformation, and Scripture, and the ancient Apostolic Church, they see themselves robbed of their church, of their faith, of their liberty, of their livings, and many thousands of their lives; and yet they that were the destroyers of all lawful authority, and exercisers of too much unlawful, complain of injustice; they that plucked down the hedges of God's vineyard, wonder to see so many several kinds of beasts rush in and eat their grapes; in a word, to use the expression of S. Augustine, Et tamen nec ser● saltem toties divis● atque conscissi, sentiun● quod feccrunt. i e. and yet for all this, seeing so many divisions among them, seeing themselves so torn in pieces, do they not yet perceive the fault that themselves have done. Cont. Parm. lib. 1. CHAP. L. A continuation of the former arguments, viz. that the guilt of Schism lies only and wholly upon Protestants. Catholics not uncharitable, for saying. That Protestancy unrepented is damnable. 1. THese Principles laid by the Fathers, with unanimous consent of the execrable nature and extremest dangerousness of the crime of Schism; together with the several descriptions and marks which they give to understand it by, seemed to me so reasonable; and these deductions which I made from the aforesaid principles, together with the application of those marks to the present state of controversy between the Roman and Protestant churches seemed so unrefutable: Lastly, the conclusion and result of the whole matter, viz. That the crime of heresy and Schism cannot with the least show of reason be imputed to the Roman Catholic Church, nor with the least show of reason avoided by Protestant Churches, since the Father's being Judges, there is not one mark of Schism which can be found in the Roman, nor one mark but is evidently found in Protestant churches. All this seemed to me so unanswerable, that unless I did resolve to put out mine own eyes, I could not but see that I had all my life hitherto continued in this fearful state of Schism● And (unless I did resolve to proceed to that desperate contempt of Scripture, of consent of Antiquity, and of all Ecclesiastical authority, as to think Heresy and Schism to be no other than counterfeit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or bugbears invented to fright such foolish Christians as would submit to any authority Divine or Ecclesiastical) I could not but think it more than time to avoid the precipice into which I was ready to fall, and and for that purpose, to range myself to that Communion, which both by testimony of Scripture and all Antiquity, and by visible experience could demonstrate that a full effect of all Christ's promises had been accomplished in her, which privilege not any other congregation (in our Western parts at least) did pretend to, any other way then by calling themselves a part of her, whom yet at the same time they called an Idolatress, and a Strumpet divorced from her celestial Bridegroom, or at least communicated with them that were guilty of such blasphemies. 2. I do profess in the presence of God, and all his blessed Saints and Angels, that I could could not myself imagine, nor find in any Protestant writer any exception or objection that came home to the point: this one essential mark of Schism viz. forsaking the external public Communion of the Catholic Church, being impossible to be avoided by them, since both all the world sees it, and they themselves confess it, though indeed under another and more plausible name. 3. I may therefore spare my pains of examining particularly what Mr. Chillingworth and other Protestants allege for their excuse, all which are evidently answered with applying to them that one saying of S. Augustine in his first book to Petilian the Donatist, I object to you the crime of Schism which you will deny: And I will presently prove, because you do not communicate with all Nations. I may add, speaking to Protestants, Not with any one Nation or church pre-existent to Luther. Calvin confesseth that he divided à toto orbe terrarum, from the whole world, and so do other Protestants: And impudence itself cannot deny, but that in respect of external communion they have to this day relinquished the whole world; attempts have indeed been made to get an entrance into the Greek church, but in vain, for they have been rejected, and remitted to the obedience of their own Patriarch, as appears by the letter of Hieremias Patriarcha etc. And therefore for a proof unanswerable, that the Schism of Protestants is a separation not from a particular church (as they call the Roman) but from all Christian Churches all the world over, let them suppose the same question proposed to them, which the Emperor Basilius made to Photius, the Pseudo-Patriarch of Constantinople, With which of the four Patriarches do you communicate? So that as the same S. Augustine saith in the same book, Hoc scelus & maximum, & manifestum, & omnium vestrum est. i e. This crime (of forsaking Universal communion) is both of all other the greatest, and a manifest one, and belongs to all the sorts of you. 4. If they say they preserve the bond of charity, allowing a possibility of salvation to Catholics, only they separate from Catholic errors which would be damnable to them being so persuaded. What is this to external Communion? Add hereto, that though English Protestants, for their own interests, to justify the lawfulness of their Succession, do allow such a degree of charity to Catholics; yet it is manifest that they renounce not the communion of Calvinists, etc. who deny that there was any true church in the world when Luther began his sacrilegious Apostasy, and so involve themselves in the same uncharitableness. Some there are that say (saith S. Augustine Ep. 48.) we thought it ●●de no matter where (i. e. in what Communion) we preserved the Faith of Christ: But thanks be given to the Lord, who hath gathered us from separation, and hath manifested that this is a thing pleasing to God who is One, to be served in Unity. Besides, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ‑ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 est etc. (saith Epiphanius Diaconus) It is a mere frenzy (an obstruction of reason) to blame, or impute error to all Churches. 5. If they say, we left only the abuses practised in the Catholic church, which no man can justly blame another for reforming; What is this still to an absolute forsaking of the external communion? Tell me (saith S. Augustine coat. Gaud, l. 1. c. 7.) whether the church at that time when you say she entertained those who were guilty of all crimes, by the contagion of those sinful persons perished or perished not? Answer, whether did the church perish, or not? Make choice of what you think good. If she then perished, what church brought forth Donatus? But if she could not perish, because so many were incorporated into her without Baptism; (he means, a second Don●tisticall Baptism) answer me I pray you; What madness did move the Sect of Donatus to separate themselves from her upon the pretence of avoiding the Communion of bad men? 6. Therefore Protestants do in vain please themselves with this word of Reformation: and with telling the world that many, even good Catholics, both in ancient and later times, have earnestly called for a Reformation. For no man denies but that there has been great need of it, and is to this day, viz. in respect of doctrines and practices of particulars, and those too too many. But can any one Catholic in any age be produced that called for a change of any one point of doctrine established in the church, or a reformation of any practice authoritatively settled there as unlawful? not one such as yet hath been produced, and I am confident not one can; and much less any one that upon such pretences hath either counselled or executed a division in the church. To what purpose then a separation from the external communion of the whole church upon this ground of reforming particular abuses, which may lawfully and without any blame be done by an inward Schism, or mental separation from errors and superstitions? 7. Therefore when Protestants beast so much of their purifications and reformations, Catholics may desire S. Augustine (cont. Gaud. l. 1.) to tell them for them, You have indeed great matters which you may flourish among your righteousnesses, (and reformations:) namely, ● division of Christ, an annulling of the Sacraments of Christ, a forsaking of the peace of Christ, war against the members of Christ, calumnious accusations against the Spouse of Christ, and a denying of the promises of Christ. The same Father (de unit. Eccles.) likewise will tell them, that if they would have thought good to follow our Saviour's example, they would not upon such pretences have forsaken the external communion of the church: For (says he) when he was to be circumcised was John sought after? for that thing was used to be performed by the Jews. And when a legal sacrifice was to be offered for him, was there any scruple made of that Temple, which was by himself called a den of thiefs? For the Lord which said, Be ye holy because I am holy, doth make his servants to converse among wicked men so unspottedly, if they preserve that holiness which they receive, as the Lord Jesus himself was not defiled with the least contagion of wickedness during the time that he lived among the Jewish Nation: neither when be being made under the law, underwent those first Sacraments according to that most perfect way of humility, neither afterward when having chosen his Disciples he lived in the company of his own Traitor even till the last (parting) kiss. For by his example not only those who do no wicked things, but those likewise who consent not to any wickedness are wheat securely remaining among chaff because they neither do such things, nor consent with them that do them; although being themselves good, they patiently suffer the wicked, continning in the same field, until the harvest, in the same floor until the winnowing; within the same nets, until the separation which shall be made upon the shore (i. e. at the end of the world.) 8. And this doctrine the same Father presseth so constantly, so zealously, that he professeth that any separation that is made in the Church upon what pretence soever before the day of judgement, is a sacrilege inexcusable. Let them therefore study what excuses they please, and conjure up as many objections as they think good, truth itself (speaking by S. Augustine's mouth Ep. 48.) will or aught to silence them for ever, Certi sumus neminem se à communione omnium Gentium justè separare potuisse. i e. We are assured that no man can justly separate himself from the communion of all Nations. And again saith the same Oracle (Cont. ep. Parm. l. 2.) Praecedendae unitatis nulla est necessitas. i e. There is no necessity to cut Unity asunder. And again (l. 2. cont. Gaud.) Aute tempus littoris damnabiliter separant. i e. Before the time come that the net is to be drawn ashore, the separations which men make are damnable. 9 Which speeches of S. Augustine will be true till the end of the world being built upon the promises of Christ, that his church should continue for ever in all truth, secure against the gates of hell; and upon the command of Christ, that no separation should be made of the tares from the wheat till the last day of harvest, in which Exibunt Angeli & separabunt, i. e. Angels (not mwn) shall go forth and separate: By occasion of which text the same Father annexes these powerful words, speaking to the Donatists, (con. ep. Par. l. 2.) Let them choose (saith he) whether of the two they will rather believe; Jesus Christ, that is, Truth itself saith, The field is the world; and Donatus saith, that God's field is Africa alone. Let them choose whether of these two they had rather believe. Jesus Christ, that is Truth itself saith, In the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, gather first the tares; and interprets it, saying, the harvest is the end of the world; And Donatus saith, that by the separation of his party, the tares are separated from the wheat before the harvest. Jesus Christ, that is Truth itself saith, the reapers are the Angels; and Donatus saith, that himself and his associates have done that before the harvest, which Jesus Christ saith that the Angels are to do at the harvest. Let them choose whether of these two they had rather believe. They call themselves Christians, we propose to them Jesus Christ and Donatus: Let them consider what will become of them, if they bestow only words upon Jesus Christ, and their bearts upon Donatus? So that this conclusion of his is unalterably true, not for his times only, but till Christ's second coming, viz. That all separation which is made before the drawing the net on shore (or before harvest, i. e. the end of the world) is a eamnable separation; Being Sacrilegium Shismatis, quod omnia scelera supergreditur. i e. being the sacrilege of Schism, which surpasses all other, crimes. (Aug. con. Ep. Parm, l, 2.) 10. Therefore to show the extreme in justice of English Protestants against the Catholic Church, and the just judgement of God upon 〈◊〉 for it, we may desire them to consider, that in their own congregations they are constrained to connive at both errors in doctrine, and abuses in practice to support a Schismatical Unity, which they would not suffer for Catholic Unity. So S. Augustine speaks to the Donatists (lib. 2.) Why do they, saith he, perniciously suffer such kind of men in the crime of a Sacrilegious Schism, which they might (and aught) to have tolerated profitably in the integrity of (Catholic) Unity? Again, let them consider with what justice they can condemn the other Sects, Presbyterians and Separatists, if they seek the same destructive way of reforming them, which themselves practised upon the Catholics: For the Presbyterians will allege Scripture, as well as they; they will pretend errors and superstitions, as well as they: And the Separatists beyond this will allege for themselves, that which it will be impossible for them to reply reasonably to, for they will say, Since you yourselves have taken away all obliging humane authority in points of Religion, give us leave to enjoy that liberty for our own consciences, which you have purchased us: we desire not to tyrannize over other men, only we would not suffer that you should pretend by a show of liberty to introduce tyranny. If Protestants shall oppose secular power or multitude to such allegations, that will be to confess that their reformation was a mere worldly design. If they shall say that it is not fit that a small conventicle of Sectaries should prevail against a national Synod of the English Clergy; then they must not take it ill to have those efficacious words of S. Augustine applied unto them, Is the just weighing of matters come to this pass, that a Council of the Maximianenses, who are an under-segment of your Sect, shall have no force or consideration against you, because in comparison of your numbers they are but a very few, and shall a Council of your own prevail against Nations, against the heritage of Christ, and the ends of the earth his possession? I wonder if that man have any blood left in his body, that should not blush at the mentioning of such a thing as this. Aug. Ep. 154. ad Emer. Don. 11. I will conclude this conclusion with a brief consideration of an accusation which Protestants lay against Catholics, whom they charge with extreme uncharitableness, for affirming, that Protestants dying in their Religion without repentance cannot be saved. Hereto it is answered, that Catholics do not pretend to judge of the salvation or damnation of Protestants in particular, yea they will not doubt to say that to many thousands of them neither their Heresy nor Schism shall prove de facto damnable, but that supposing they die with an intention to renounce whatsoever their opinions should appear to them to have been erroneous, their invincible ignorance caused by education, misinformation of Catholic doctrines, etc. may probably find pardon from our merciful Judge, in case they be truly penitent for all other faults committed by them, upon supposition that any such have been committed: But surely it is no uncharitable judgement to say in general, V. Lugo de fid. Disp. 12. Sect. 2. That it is damnable to die in a damnable or mortal sin without repentance: And therefore since even by Protestants confession Heresy and Schism are in a high degree damnable sins, and since Catholics are verily persuaded that Protestants are guilty of these two crimes, it may be called in them a mistake, but it cannot be called uncharitableness in Catholics upon such a supposition to make such a judgement. Yea on the contrary I wonder how the English Protestants, etc. who pretend that Catholics are guilty of these two crimes, can notwithstanding contrary to the doctrine of all Antiquity, affirm that such persons are not in a damnable estate; surely it is self-guilt, and not charity that makes them so charitable. CHAP. LI. The fourth Conclusion. Proofs of it out of Fathers. THE FOURTH CONCLUSION is, That the Catholic Church ever after the times of the Apostles was, is, and shall be visible, continuing in an uninterrupted succession of lawful Pastors and true doctrine to the end of the world. 1. FOr confirmation of this conclusion out of Scripture, Texts, sufficient both for number and perspicuity, have already been produced both out of the Old and New Testament in the second conclusion. 2. The same doctrine is no less conspicuous in the writings of the Fathers. It is easier (saith S. chrysostom Hom. 4. in Esa.) that the Sun should be extinguished, then that the Church should be obscured. And again, The Sun is not more manifest, nor the light proceeding from it, then the actions of the Church. The Church (saith S. Cyprian de Unit. Eccl.) being clothed with the light of our Lord spreads its beams through the whole world. Aug. cout. Pet. l. 2. c. 104. Id. con. Parm. l. 2. c. 3, The Church (saith S. Augustine) hath this most certain mark, that she cannot be hidden. And again, Do not these men grope at noon day as if it were midnight? It is a quality common to all Heretics, not to see the thing of all things in the world most clear (viz. the church) which is placed in the light of all Nations, out of the unity whereof whatsoever they do, though it may seem to be done with great exactness and diligence, yet can no more secure them from the wrath of God, than the spider's webs from the rigour of the cold. Hereupon the same Saint (de unit. Eccl.) calls Christ the most true declarer of his body, insomuch as be suffers us not to be mistaken neither in the Bridegroom nor in his Spouse. Upon which grounds he makes several exclamations to this purpose, (Id. cont. cres. l. 3.) O the mad perverseness of men! Thou conceivest that thou deservest to be praised for believing Christ, whom thou seest not; and believest thou shalt not be damned for denying his Church which thou seest: Since that Head is in heaven, and this body is upon earth. Thou acknowledgest Jesus Christ, and that which is written (of him) O God be thou exalted above the heavens, and dost not acknowledge the church in that which follows, and let your glory be spread through all the earth. The like expressions he hath upon Psalm 56. and in his 166. Epistle ad Donat, and on 1. Ep. of S. John Tract. 2. etc. And again (in Psal. 70.) The Christian world is promised, and this is believed (by them:) This promise is fulfilled, and it is contradicted by them. And again, If the church shall not continue here on earth even to the end of the world, to whom did our Lord say, Behold I am with you even to the end of the world. And again (de Bapt. con. Don. l. 3,) If from the time of S. Cyprian the church perished, from whence did Donatus appear? out of what earth did he bud? out of what See did he arise? from what heaven did he fall? And again (cont. Jul, l. 5.) If by those holy Priests of God and famous Doctors, Irenaeus, Cyprian, Rheticius, Olympius, Hilary, Ambrose, Gregory, Basile, John chrysostom, Innocent, and Hierome, the Manicheans have violated and corrupted the Church, Tell me (Julian) who was it that brought thee forth? was it a chaste Matron, or a Harlot, who in her travelling brought thee forth by the womb of spiritual Grace into that light which thou hast forsaken? I willingly omit infinite other passages, especially out of S. Augustine to the same purpose, because even Protestants generally do not question the substance of that truth herein contained. CHAP. LII. Application of these proofs, to the advantage of the Roman Catholic Church, and against Protestants, etc. 1. THe cause therefore is clear in the general Thesis, that the Father's opinion was, that by virtue of Christ's express promises, his church was to continue visible and distinguishable from all other unlawful congregations to the world's end. This I do not find denied by the English Protestants, I mean neither that this was the sense of the Fathers, nor that this sense was ture. 2. The great controversy therefore is in the Hypothesis, or application of the general Thesis, viz. whether that such conclusions as the Fathers deduce from the visibility of the Catholic church in their days, may rationally be inferred from the Roman Catholic church visible in these days. For example, that it is unlawful upon any pretence of errors or abuses in practice, to separate from the external communion of that church, which now calls itself the Catholic Church (which is only the Roman, for the Grecian churches, though they challenge the title of Catholic Churches, that is, true members of the Catholic, yet I do not find that they make an association to their external communion, a necessary condition to all Christians.) 3. The English Protestants say no, against all Roman Catholics, who unanimously affirm, that since such discourses of the Fathers were grounded upon Christ's promises to his church, which were to be effectual to the end of the world, that therefore they are as fitly and necessarily to be applied to the present, as to the ancient Catholic church, and that no other church, but that in communion with the Roman, can make any valuable or legitimate pretensions to that title. Though the truth is, if it be to be granted that there is any visible Catholic church at all, whose external communion is necessary, the Protestants are inexcuseably culpable, since they neither would nor could upon their grounds communicate with any church in the world that was in being, when Luther began his Apostasy. 4. In this controversy therefore, upon these following considerations and grounds. I fully satisfied myself, that the plea of Roman Catholics was just and reasonable. For ●. Though English Protestant's deny the Roman church to be the Catholic church (cum Emphase;) yet they acknowledge her to be a true member at least of the Catholic church; being forced hereto for their own interest to justify the lawfulness of their Ordinations, etc. And this acknowledgement alone is sufficient to condemn them for their separation as guilty of Schism, since he who separates from an acknowledged true member of the Catholic church, doth consequently separate from the Catholic church. 5. Secondly they acknowledge that the whole body of the present Catholic church enjoys the same privileges and authority, that it did in the times of the ancient Fathers: that a Schism from it is as pernicious as anciently: that a truly General Council now is as obliging and unappealable from as heretofore: And upon these grounds they will condemn themselves, since it is apparent, that if the Eastern churches were assumed together with the Western to make up the full body of the Catholic, most of the opinions and pretended errors, upon which they ground the lawfulness and necessity of their separation, will appear to be the doctrines of the church called Catholic even in their sense, as e. g. acknowledging the blessed Sacrament to be a proper Sacrifice propitiatory for quick and dead, the Real Presence (per modum transmutationis) Prayer for Dead and Purgatory, Invocation of S●ines, Veneration of Images, etc. And therefore if all the four patriarchs had met at the Council of Trent, they had Infallibly concurred in condemning the Protestants as Heretics in these points, and their separation upon such grounds is Schism, properly so called. 6. Thirdly it appeared evidently to me, that those communions and congregations of Christians which acknowledge subjection to the Pope, could only rightfully challenge the name of the Catholic church, For 1. I took it for granted that that which was called the Catholic church after the times of the four first General Counsels, when the A●●ans, Photinians, Macedonians, Nestorians, Eurychians &c. were anathematised, was indeed the only tru● Catholic church; by which account the Abyssine churches, as being (at least, anciently) Eutychians, and several Eastern churches, as Nestorians, Jacobi●es, etc. were and are to be excluded from that denomination; which yet the Protestants now, although they dare not communicate with them, would admit into the body of the church; but most unreasonably; for if the Abyssines continue yet Eutychians, the Protestants of England (who receive the four first General Counsels) do thereby acknowledge them to be Heretics; if they have quitted Eutychianisme, and really adjoined themselves to the Roman church (according to several Embassies mentioned by Damianus à Goes &c.) then Protestants will find it so much more to their disadvantage to argue any thing from the Abyssine churches. 2. I could observe nothing, which could make me doubt that that which was called the Catholic church from the four first General Counsels to S. Gregory's the Greats days inclusiuè, was indeed so. For if in S. Gregory's days there was a Catholic church (is Protestants grant there was) then that which was in communion and subjection to him was only it, since none that I know pretend to allow that title to any congregation divided from him. Now in the church of S. Gregory's time it is apparent that in a manner all points of Doctrine (now by Protestants called errors and causes of their separation) were universally acknowledged as Catholic doctrines, as I showed before by a joint confession of the most learned Protestant writers, by which they virtually confess, that if they had lived in S. Gregory's days they would as well have separated from him. Besides it appears by S. Gregory's Epistles that he as Pope enjoyed a supereminent authority, and solicitously exercised a care over all Christian churches: As for his Jurisdiction, as Patriarch, and the extension thereof, that I took not here into consideration, since it is not a point pretended to be an Article of Faith. 3. From S. Gregory's days, till the separation of the East from the external jurisdiction, rather than the Faith of the Pope and Western churches, the whole body of the church under one visible Head remained, as it did before, enjoying the title of the Catholic church, no other pretending thereto. 4. Since the Division of the East from the Western churches (caused as I conceive, upon a quarrel about the Pope's Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction, and not any point of Doctrine) the limits of the Catholic church seem to be much straightened. Concerning which Schism (if it be indeed a Schism properly so called) I apprehended no necessity to be very curious to inform myself, being persuaded during the time of my being a Protestant, that, as for that one point of belief, concerning the Procession of the Holy Ghost, wherein the Greek church expresseth herself otherwise then the Roman, if in substance and sense there be a real difference, that the Roman church was Orthodox. And besides that, I know not any point of doctrine wherein the Greek church agrees with Protestants to condemn the Roman church. It is true they communicate in both kinds, but I could never find that the Greeks made that point any pretext of their division from the Roman, neither indeed can they, since they also give the Eucharist to the sick only in one kind, acknowledging withal, that such communicants receive the whole effect of the Sacrament. As for the story of the Schism, it was begun by Photius the Pseudo-Patriarch of Constantinople upon ambition and interest, because the Pope would not confirm his illegal intrusion into that Chair; which generally has been a fatal occasion of almost all Schisms, as long since S. Cyprian hath observed. Lastly it is manifest that those rights of Jurisdiction also, which (since that Schism) have been denied by the Greeks to the Pope, were not then begun to be demanded, but had been possessed by him for several ages; so that there was at least injustice, if not error, on the Grecians part. 7. Fourthly, that the Pope, as successor of S. Peter, Prince of the Apostles, has a primacy and superiority over all Bishops and Patriarches, yea an authority over the whole Catholic church, so that he may truly be called the Head of the Church, has been delivered by so constant and universal a Tradition, that it cannot without extreme impudence be denied. Now how far this superiority and authority extends, I thought it needless curiously to inform myself, since, as far as I can learn, all that the church requires in this point even from ecclesiastical persons, is a subscription to this profession mentioned in the Bull of Pope Pius IV annexed to the Council of Trent, and collected out of the same, viz. Romano Pontifici Beati Petri Apostolorum Principis successori, ac Jesu Christi. Uicario, veram obedientiam spondeo ae juro. i e. I do promise and swear true obedience to the Pope of Rome, successor of blessed S. Peter Prince of the Apostles, and Vicar of Jesus Christ. 8. Now that thus much is of universal Tradition, what greater proof can be desired then may be afforded us in a late book entitled Les Grandeurs dell' Eglise Roman, where such a world of testimonies out of Counsels Occumenicall and Provincial, Popes, Fathers, both Eastern and Western Histories Ecclesiastical etc. are produced to maintain the Co-union of S. Paul with S. Peter in at least some degree of his universal authority, which not withstanding are not an hundredth part of that which may be alleged out of antiquity for S. Peter's Principality, and the Popes as his successor. Yea that great Council of Chalced on, (acknowledged and received in England (even when it endeavoured to deprive the Pope of some part of Jurisdiction, yet acknowledged this his superiority and authority as Pope, the Bishops there calling him their Head, and themselves with all Christians, members under that Head. Moreover Socrates and Zozomen (writers far from being partial for the Pope) yet mention ancient immemorial canons of the church, Socr. Hist. Eccl. l. 2. c. 8. Sozon●. Hist. Eccl. l. 3. c. 10. wherein at least a negative voice is given to the Pope in any thing that shall be introduced to oblige the whole church, To conclude, Monsieur Blondel, the most learned French controvertist that ever undertook their common quarrel against the Pope, in that large volume which is spent in confuting particular extravagant opinions concerning that subject, as touching the infallibility and Monarchical Omnipotence of the Pope, his Lordly and domineering headship, and a Monarchical power usurped by him by which to subdue all the members of Christ, etc. yet notwithstanding (which is very remarkable) he confesseth himself, that never any Council or Nation, Blondel page 16. 810. 855. 12. 316. 107. no not that of Florence nor Trent itself ever adventured to define any thing concerning such excessive titles and power as the Pope's Partisans do attribute to him. But on the contrary, that the titles of the Apostle S. Peter ought not to be put in debate, since that the Grecians and Protestants also do confess that it hath beone believed, and that it might be indeed that he was the Precedent and Head or Chief (Chef) of the Apostles, the foundation of the Church, and possessor of the Keys of the Kingdom of heaven. Yea moreover, That Rome, as being a Church consecrated by the residence and Martyrdom of S. Peter, whom antiquity hath acknowledged to be the Head (Chef) of the College Apostolic, having been honoured with the title of the Seat of the Apostle S. Peter, might without difficulty be considered by one of the most renowned Counsels (viz. that of Chalcedon as Head (Chef) of the Church: Which is in effect to acknowledge that the necessary doctrine of the Roman church concerning the Pope's Primacy and Authority is Orthodox. 9 Upon which grounds, since it appears to have been an universal Tradition of the church (besides express words of Scripture) that the Catholic Church was to remain visible to the end of the world, that is, a church possessed of all substantial Christian doctrines, preserved in all truth, governed by lawful Pastors, as one body consisting of ruling and ruled members under one visible head, (which S. Cyprian makes the foundation of Unity Ecclesiastical) I concluded (as I thought, rationally) that that part of the Christian world, which continued in Communion with, and obedience to this so acknowledged Supreme Authority, might and ought most justly to challenge the title of the Catholic Church. 10. Therefore though the privilege of an independent patriarchal church (which the English Protestants of late begin to challenge, to the end to excuse their church from the title of Schism, for withdrawing itself from the Pope's Jurisdiction) were just and legal; yet they will never be able to justify themselves for disbelieving what they together with all the other Western churches so many ages agreed to have been true, or for denying the title of Ecumenical Head to the Pope. Let it be supposed therefore, what some of them allege, that it is in the power of such a King of England, as Henry the VIII. with the forced consent of his Clergy, to erect the English church into a Patriarchate, as Justinian the Emperor did Justinianaea Prima: Or that England being an Island like Cyprus, might have the privilege to be independent of any Patriarch; all that will follow thereon, will be only, that the Pope as Patriarch of the West shall by this means be deprived of some patriarchal Jurisdictions, Investitures, Rights of Appeals, etc. which have anciently been endeavoured to be withdrawn from him by the African Churches, etc. Yet what is this to his title of S. Peter's Successor, and Head of the Church? Or was Justinianaea or the Isle of Cyprus so independent in matters of point of Faith or public practice on the Pope or other Patriarches, or however, on a General Council, as that they could dejure alter any thing established by Universal Authority? Could they renverse decisions of Ecumenical Counsels? Or did they ever usurp such an authority to themselves, as to impute superstition, idolatry, profaneness, heresies, etc. to all other churches, under a show of Reformation, ruining the whole order of Discipline and Belief, confessedly continued in the whole church for above a thousand years? Till they can produce examples of an authority of Reformation of such a nature assumed by any Catholic Prince or particular Kingdom, the other pretended right of exemption from Jurisdiction will be so far from excusing them, that it will make it apparent to the world, that it was merely their Prince's lusts, ambition and unquenchable thirst after ecclesiastical revenues, that first put the thought of Reformation into their heads, and that upon as just grounds they may expect from others a Reformation of their Reformation, which will perhaps prove more durable, when those baits shall be utterly taken away, which first whetned their wits to contrive that project of a Reformation. 11. For my own part therefore, seeing these several conclusions concerning the Catholic Church's indefectibility, authority, unity, and Visibility, so unanimously attested, confirmed, and made use of by all Antiquity, with so good success against all manner of ancient Heresies and Schisms: And on the contrary perceiving no such method practised by Protestants disputing with one another, no mention in any of their writings or arguments from Christ's promises to the church; but only presumptuous boastings of greater sagacity and cunning to wrest Scripture to their several purposes, without the least success of unity with one another, yea to the utter despair thereof: Having shut mine eyes to all manner of worldly ends and designs; yea resolving to follow truth whither soever it would lead me, though quite out of sight of country, friends or estate, at length by the merciful goodness of God I found myself in inward safety and repose in the midst of that City set ●pon an hill, whose builder and maker is God, whose foundations are Emerauds and Saphires, and Jesus Christ himself the chief Corner Stone: a City, that is at unity within itself, as being ordered and polished by the Spirit of Unity itself; a City not enlightened with the Meteors or Comets of a private Spirit, or changeable humane reason, but with the glory of God, and light of the Lamb: Lastly, a City that for above sixteen hundred years together hath resisted all the tempests that the fury of men, or malice of hell could raise against it, and if Christ's promises may be trusted to, and his Omnipotence be relied upon; shall continue so till his second coming. To him be glory for ever and ever. Amen. SECT. III. Containing a brief stating of certain particular points of Controversy, etc. CHAP. I. The Question of the Church being decided, decides all other controversies. How it is almost impossible that error should have crept into the public doctrine of the Church. Of what force objections out of Scripture or Fathers are against the Church. 1. AFter that Almighty God had changed that, which was to me a stone of offence, into a rock of foundation, making me to find repose of mind in submitting to the authority of his church, which by reason of my former misapprehensions I carefully avoided; as if the greatest danger that a Christian could be capable of had been to be a member of Christ's mystical body, which is his Church, or as if the harkening to the Church had been the way to make a man worse than a Heathen and a Publican, I then found an experimental knowledge of the truth of that speech of S. Hierome, (cont. Lucifer.) viz. that the Sun of the Church presently dries up all rivulets of errors, and dispels all the mists of natural reason: as likewise of that of the Prophet, Quicredit, intelliget, i. e. He that believes shall understand: For being arrived to the top of that mountain, upon which God had built his church, I found clear weather on all hands, I found that there remained nothing for me to do afterwards, but to hearken to, and obey her, that both Scripture and Fathers, and now mine own reason taught me was only worthy to be obeyed. And therefore the truth is, here should be an end of my Exomologesis, or account of my inward disputes about controversies concerning Religion, which quickly ceased, after that I left off to be mine own Guide and Teacher. 2. Notwithstanding among the particular controversies in debate between the Roman Catholics and other Sects, I will select especially six of the most principal, on purpose to show, that if any regard had been had either to the authority or peace of God's church, there would never have been any differences about them, and that in the judgement even of moderate Protestants, the differences are indeed of so small weight, that if there had been amongst them but the least measure of charity, or if Schism had not been esteemed by them a virtue; they would never have made such fatal and deadly divisions upon pretences so unconsiderable. 3. They indeed lay to the charge of the Catholic church novelties in doctrines and practices: and yet Catholics, even out of those few that remain, of the most ancient Ecclesiastical Authors, show clear proofs of these doctrines and practices, and desire no more of them, then that they would speak in the language of the ancient church: They accuse her of impieties, and idolatries, and superstitions, yet Catholics show them that the most holy, learned Saints and Martyrs that ever were in God's church practised and maintained such pretended superstitions, etc. They accuse her of Schism, for not separating from herself and and the whole world, and for not being able to hinder them from committing that most sacrilegious crime; and they impute Heresy to her, for being constant in maintaining the decisions of all Counsels, and the profession of all churches and ages. 4. But before I examine the vanity of these imputations by stating those six particular controversies, I shall desire our English Protestant's to meditate sadly upon two subjects especially. The first is, Which way they can imagine it to be possible that an error should imperceptibly creep into the belief and practice of the whole church, even setting aside the security we have against any such mischief by the means of Christ's promises? For was it not true, which antiquity testifies, yea and S. Paul himself expressly, that the Apostles and Apostolical men were instant in season, and out of season, to make known to the primitive Christians, and to inculcate diligently and laboriously into their minds the whole sum of Christian doctrine, not forbearing both publicly, and from house to house to reveal to them the whole will of God, not suppressing any thing that was profitable, (Act, 20. 20. 27.) And this so fully and effectually, as that if an Angel from heaven could be supposed to teach any thing, not only contrary, but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. besides that which they had taught, he was to be accursed, Galat. 1. 8. Then do not the Fathers tell us (and what proof can Protestants produce to make them appear to be liars, when they tell us) that at least for five hundred years all caution imagineable was used to prevent and exclude any novelties, that any Heretics, yea or any Christians, though as learned as Origen, or as holy as S. Cyprian, should attempt to introduce? May we not add hereto, that whatsoever novelties of the least moment should be obtruded by any, would discover themselves to be novelties, by thwarting the public profession and practised devotions of the church? as S. Cyprians Rebaptization would oblige all men to practise that which they had always forborn: and the Arian and Pelagian &c. impieties would constrain the church to alter the forms of prayers to the Son of God, and for God's Grace to cure the impotence and perverseness of nature, acknowledged in the daily public confessions. Upon which grounds, S. Cyril against Nestorius, and S. Leo against Eutyches, disprove the errors and impieties of their Heresies, by producing the profession and practice of the church in administering the holy Eucharist, whereby she testified her belief of a real presence of the very body and blood of Christ there, which could not consist with their Novelties. So that upon the same ground, if Invocation of Saints, Prayer and offering the most holy Sacrifice for remission of sins to the dead, Veneration of Images, etc. had been novelties, would not such practices have more directly thwarted the public devotions of the church, than the Heresies of Nestorius and Eutyches: How was it possible then that such doctrines should have been taught by any particular Father, (as confessedly they have been) and not any one appear that should discover and protest against such innovations? what charm was there in these doctrines above all others, to cast the church into a sleep, that she should not perceive them, or to silence the Fathers, that against their custom in all other innovations they should not open their mouths against them? And much more, how was it possible that the public Liturgies and devotions of the church should come to be changed by admitting such pretended novelties and superstitions, and yet no signs or footsteps be left that such a wonderful change has been made, not one writer to be found that can tell us of any one that opposed it. 5. The second thing that I desire them to consider is, That since it is at this day, and has been for many ages the universal belief of the church, that all such pretended Novelties were indeed Catholic and Apostolic Traditions, what arguments Protestants can reasonably esteem sufficient to disprove this belief, and to dispossess the church of her renure? Will the silence of one or two Fathers, think they, be of force enough to such a purpose? If so, I doubt whether the church would then be able to maintain any one Article of Faith. Would a few seeming difficulties and obscure, seemingly opposite quotations out of some writings of a few Fathers serve their turn? It did not so in the cause of the Arians, of the Pelagians, of the Novatians: etc. and why only in the present controversies? Will quotations of Scripture decide the questions against the present church? Indeed if it could be imagineable, that the whole Catholic church could at the same time, and with the same hand, deliver us Scripture and doctrines contrary to express Scripture, if she could be supposed either so foolish as not to see that which no body could be ignorant of, or so wicked, as (clearly seeing what God said) to command us not to believe him, but rather the quite contrary, than she might deserve to be styled Schismatical, because she continues in such a wicked unity; and Heretical, because she would not submit her judgement and aushority to the passions and lust of an Apostate Monk. But even Protestants themselves will absolve her from such a high degree of guilt, as to contradict express and formal Scripture. And as for Texts of Scripture, either obscure or ambiguous, or ●ationally admitting several interpretations, though to some prejudicated ears they may seem to sound otherwise then the church teaches, in all reason and honesty the church's interpretation of them ought to prevail against any private man's: I am sure all sorts of Sects will either submit their judgements to the sense of their particular churches, or at least will conceal their opinions, when they cannot submit them; this civility and duty teaches all men. But as for the children of the Catholic church, they have an obligation binding them in conscience to trust the same church for the sense of Scripture (especially in points which she says are of Universal Tradition) which they have trusted for the Scripture itself; and therefore S. Augustine said well, and like a perfectly good Christian and Catholic, The words of Scripture are so to be understood, as the world hath believed them, which that it should believe the Scripture hath foretold. And surely he that will duly consider of what weight the universal testimony of a whole age of the church is to prove a Tradition, will never think that a few objections, or obscure passages either in Scriptures, or two or three Fathers, who are apt to speak unwarily, when the matter is not in controversy; should decide the cause against it, especially considering that it is almost impossible to receive absolute satisfaction of the doctrine of former ages any other way, or at least any other way so well, as by the universal agreement of the present age, that so the former ages delivered to her, What shall we say then, when to the evident testimony of the present age for Catholic verities may be added a world of testimonies, both of Scripture and ancient writers, beyond all comparison far more than for her enemy's contradictory assertions, even those enemies themselves being judges, as will appear undeniably to any man that will consult that one book of Brercley's Apology of Protestants for the Catholic church. CHAP. II. Of the Real Presence, and Transubstantiation. Of the Adoration of Christ in the Sacrament, and of Communion under one Species. 1. THe six special controversies which I shall briefly consider, shall be; 1. Concerning the Eucharist, and therein of the Real Presence of Christ's body by way of Transubstantiation: as likewise, Of the Adoration of our Lord present in the Sacrament; and communion under one Species. 2. Of Invocation of Saints. 3. Of Veneration of Images. 4. Of Prayer for the Dead, and Purgatory. 5. Of Indulgences. 6. Of the Public Service in Latin. The reason why I make choice of these is, both because these are the especial controversies, wherein there is a real and manifest difference between Catholics and Protestants, who make these points the principal causes of their separation: For as concerning the debates about Grace and freewill, Predestination and Justification, as likewise the merits of good works, though ignorant-popular-preaching Protestants make a great clamour about them, yet I was most assured, that there was indeed a real agreement, when they came to explain themselves sensibly about them. As for the controversy concerning the Pope, I have spoken sufficiently in the 52. chapter, at the latter end of the fourth conclusion. 2. First therefore concerning the Real presence of Christ's body in the Eucharist, and that by way of Transubstantiation: In discoursing upon which, because my design is not to write the controversy in general, but only in reference to the doctrine, which, following the church of England, I was taught there; it will be sufficient for me to signify, that by that church I was taught that in the blessed Sacrament the body and blood of our Lord were really present, exhibited and received by the Communicants, really I say, not only as the objects of Faith, or not only as really exhibiting the effects of Christ's suffering; but as truly and properly as the Roman church professeth, only I was forbidden to say that there was any real change made in the bread and Wine, which remained after Consecration, as they were before: In a word, I was taught to say, what neither I nor any other was able to express, save only that the Romish doctrine was false, which taught that that presence was made by a presence of Christ's body under the Species (which only remained) of the visible elements. 3. Now when, I say, that I was taught to express my belief thus by the church of England, my intention is not that that church obligeth every one to believe thus; For the truth is, so a man will but renounce the two words of Transubstantion, and Consubstantiation, he may, preserving the term really, interpret himself; as if really signified only figuratively, or as the object of the understanding, as we see a world of writers allowed there to have expressed themselves: Yea in the 28. and 29. Articles of that Church there are certain clauses which require only a figurative sense to be understood, as when it is said, The body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten in the supper, only after an heavenly and spiritual manner; and the mean whereby the body of Christ is received and eaten in the supper, is Faith. And again, The wicked etc. are in no wise partakers of Christ, but rather to their condemnation do eat and drink the sign or Sacrament of so great a thing. Which clauses being allowed, those Articles do admit, yea require not only the Calvinistical, but even the Zuinglian sense concerning that point. Yet notwithstanding this, whether the calvinistical party there had with their usual importunity extorted the inserting of those clauses into the Articles, I know not, yet those that followed the Prelatical Governing Faction never considered those expressions, but without any calvinistical hypscrisie professed that they believed the Real Presence as truly and really and properly as the Catholics did: See the conference of Poissy. And so King James commanded Monsieur Casaubon to signify his sense to Cardinal Perron in the words of Doctor Andrews, than Bishop of Ely. 4. Now what other reason can be imagined should move the most learned and prudent part of the English Clergy to express themselves so near the Catholic sense, but only a conviction that besides the formal words of Scripture, the Ecclesiastical Tradition and general doctrine of the Fathers enforced such a sense? But by what mystery it came to pass that they should dispense with themselves for following Tradition no further; but that under a pretence that the Sacrament was a mystery inexplicable, they should forsake the same Tradition and Fathers, who generally profess, that that presence is made by a real transmutation of the visible elements into the very Body and Blood of Christ, this I confess I could never comprehend. 5. Now that such was the Traditionary doctrine of the Catholic church, (besides the testimony of the present age, which will be of infinite weight to any one that duly considers it) and to omit a world of quotations out of Counsels and Fathers, wherein expressions to prove the same are as full, yea perhaps more rigid than the Decision of the Council of Trent itself, I became convinced from these considerations, viz. 1. Because in all the ancient Liturgies that ever I saw, there are express mention of the verity and reality of this change, and not any the least intimation of a figurative sense: there are express prayers that God would by his omnipotent power cause the Bread and Wine to become the Body and Blood of our Lord, and not the least intimation, that the way of communicating of these mysteries should be only by Faith, or by the operation of the understanding. 2. Because in the form of communicating both in the Eastern and Western churches, (which form or Canon, S. chrysostom, S. Ambrose, S. Augustine, S. Basile, etc. attribute to the Apostles themselves as authors) there was required from the communicants a confession of their belief of the reality of this change; or to express it in S. Ambrose his language, (the Sacr. l. 4. c. 3.) The Priest (viz. presenting to thee that which before consecration was bread) saith unto thee, This is the body of Christ, and thou answerest, Amen, that is to say, it is true; That which the tongue confesseth, let the heart believe. 3. Because generally the Fathers when they speak of this argument, have recourse to the omnipotence of the Word of Christ, Vid. Iren. l. 4. c. 34. S. Cyril. Hier. Ca● Myst. 4. Amb. de sacr. l. 4. c. 4. Et de iis qui mist. init. c. 9 Gaudent. de rat. sac. Tr. 2. S. Greg. Nyss. ora. Cat. c. 37. Euseb. (non Emes hom. Pasc.) Ambr. ubi sup. and to wonderful operations exalted above all humane credibility, as the cause of this change, thereby leaving no doubt that they understood a conversion (not significative, but) real, true and substantial. 4. Because the same Fathers to make their auditors more capable of the mystery, exemplify in other kinds of changes or conversions, as of the change of the Bread which Christ did eat, into his own flesh; of the miraculous conversion of water into wine; of Moses' rod into a serpent; and the waters of Nile into blood. Which language would be extremely ridiculous, if they intended not a real and substantial change. 5. To prove that they understood not only a presence of Christ in the action of the Sacrament (as some English Protestants explain themselves) or a presence consistent with a Lutheranical coëxistence of the substance of bread and wine, S. Ambrose will satisfy us, who answering that very objection that the difficulties would be less if it were affirmed that the substance of bread and wine remained together with the body and blood of Christ after the consecration, hath these words, de Sacr. l. 4. To the first objection we must thus answer, That in matters of faith a man ought not to make choice of that which is accompanied with less difficulties, for otherwise we should affirm that in God there is one only hypostasis etc. But he ought to affirm that which is most conformable to the testimonies of the holy Fathers, and to the Tradition of the Church, although never so many difficulties present themselves, seeing that he ought to captivate his understanding under the obedience of Faith. So likewise S. Ignatius quoted by Theodoret in Dialog. 3. speaks of certain Heretics who received not the Oblations and Eucharists; because they believed not that the Eucharist was the flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ. Which is a proof undeniable, that the most primitive church taught this Catholic dgctrine of the real Presence; for if there had been only a spiritual presence, what pretence could those Heretics have to resuse them. Vid. Aug. Psal. 98. Ambros. de sp. 5. l. 3. Chrysost. in 1. Cor. Hom. 24: Nazian. Epitaph. Gorg. Theod. Dial. 2. 6. Because both the ancient Liturgies and Fathers of the church do testify the general custom of God's people to adore Christ present upon the Altar after Consecration: and this not only in the time of administration, but afterwards also, as supposing, that that which remained, was and continued truly the body of Christ, according to those words of S. Cyrill of Alexandria, Cyril. Al. Ep. ad Colosyr. I know what they say, namely, That the mystical benediction, if any relics remain of it to the next day, is unprofitable to sanctification. But they that say thus are mad: For there is not another Christ made, neither can his holy body be changed, but the virtue of the benediction and the quickening Grace remains perpetually in it. 7. Lastly, because by this argument of the real transmutation of the visible elements into the body of Christ the third General Council of Ephesus, and several ancient Fathers, confuted the Heresies of Nestorius and Eutyches, about the two natures of our Saviour, Concil. Ephes. anath. 11. Cyrill. Alexan. S. Leo P. as I mentioned occasionally before. So that such a world of testimonies of Antiquity concurring, the Tradition being so constant and uniform, S. Leo the Great had just cause to say (Ep. 23.) In the church of God this is so consonantly witnessed by evemans' mouth, that the truth of the body and blood of Christ is not even by the tongues of infants concealed among the Sacraments (or, Mysteries) of the common Faith. 6. An Universal Tradition therefore of the Real Presence hath been so forcible and unconquerable, as that it constrained even the English Protestants themselves to acknowledge it, and that simply and unhypocritically: How could I then defend myself from submitting and captivating my understanding to the same Tradition, as constant for a real change and conversion? I must profess ingenuously, that during the time of my being a Protestant, the only, or I am sure principal hindrance from an entire conformity to the Faith of Catholics in this point, was the inextricablenesse of those arguments which my reason suggested to me out of natural Philosophy against it, as, how it could be possible that the same body could be in heaven and upon the Altar at the same time? how accidents could remain without their proper subjects &c. considering with all the small, or rather no satisfaction which the Scholastical subtleties gave me. 7. But now if it be demanded, what new Philosophy I have learned, since I learned that the Catholic church was to be believed and obeyed, and what preservative I have found against those former arguments of natural reason? I must answer freely and ingenuously, that I have not learned to answer such arguments, but to despise them; and to say, God forbid that vain Philosophy should (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) make a prey of me, defrauding me of the most necessary communion with the church of Christ, and most essential virtue of captivating my understanding to the obedience of all Evangelicall Mysteries. I do therefore freely confess my ignorance, and inability to demonstrate how this particular Mystery can consist even with those rules of Philosophy which I myself receive; But withal, I must not conceal that when I was a Protestant also, I did the same for other points, as the Mystery of the blessed Trinity, the Incarnation of the Son of God, etc. And I did not find any scruple in those mysteries, because I could not reconcile them with Aristotle, or any other Patriarch of Heretics, as Tertullian calls the Philosophers. 8. I will further add, that that which gave me entire satisfaction, and obliged me in conscience to silence, and not to answer my reason, when it would raise objections against Transubstantiation, was, that the same authority, for whose sake I believed it, taught me to believe it to be a mystery inexplicable and incomprehensible, and that it was not lawful so to examine it, as that it should stand or fall according to the dictates of natural reason. Insomuch as S. Gregory (called the Divine) spoke like one that deserved that surname, in the second General Council of Constantinople, That it was not permitted to the Maobites and Ammonites to enter into the church of God, that is (saith he) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. to Logical and vainly curious and subtle discourses. I refer the Reader to an abundant collection of the testimonies of Fathers, forbidding this curiosity of examining the possibility of this mystery upon the grounds of natural reason, which are to be found in Cardinal perron's Reply to King James. (Repl. lib. 4. cap. 1. 2. etc.) Therefore far be it from me to determine this Mystery, by the subtle and too too curious disputations of the Schoolmen: I do not envy them their leisure to employ their fancies about such matters within their own walls; but if they begin to pass for competent Judges of this Mystery, I must profess that I disclaim them, and I cannot without grief remember what dangerous use Protestants make of their vain and sometimes ridiculous Philosophical Questions about this Mystery, who satisfy themselves that the Mystery itself is not true, because they find no satisfaction in the discourses and answers, which the Schoole-writers endeavour to give to a thousand foolish objections, which they conjute up out of Aristotle's Philosophy against this Mystery, to be adored and trembled at. It is only Scripture, testimonies of Father's, Ecclesiastical Tradition, General Counsels, and the Profession of the present Catholic Church, which are the proper Judges of this controversy, and whose authority, when it is employed as it ought, will assert this divine truth of the Reality of Christ's presence, by way of conversion in the blessed Sacrament, to the confusion of all Novelties and all Blasphemies of Heretics. The ancient, both Latin and Grecian Fathers, who certainly were of wits as subtle and piercing, as any that have succeeded them, yet never thought upon such nice inquiries, as now every young Philosopher can prattle of; and therefore I profess, since I am far from finding any obligation at all lying upon me to the contrary, yea since the Council of Trent (Sess. 13. c. I.) hath defined this point in the language of Antiquity, and not of the Schools, saying that Christ is present in the Sacrament Sacramentaliter, i. e. mysteriously, inexplicably, I will never endeavour to answer any Philosophical arguments any other way then with such words as these of S. John Damascene, The Bread and Wine is changed into the Body and Blood of our Lord; but this after an unsearchable manner: For of this matter we know no further, but only that the word of God is true, and efficacious, and omnipotent. Damasc. de Orthod. Fide lib. 4. cap. 14. Of the Adoration of our Lord Jesus Christ present in the holy Eucharist. 9● Let us now consider to what the church obliges all Catholics in this point. If any one (saith the Council of Trent Sess. 13. Can. 6.) saith that Jesus Christ the only Son of God ought not to be adored with the exterior worship of Latria itself in the holy Sacrament of the Eucharist; and that for that end it ought not to be proposed publicly to the people to be adored; and that those who adore him are Idolaters, let him be Anathema. Which worship of Latria is not given to the outward symbols of the Eucharist, but only to Jesus Christ himself there present. Daillé l. des Imag. p. 340. & 376. A certain degree of respect (even by the confession of the Calvinists) is due to all outward instruments of Religion, as to Chalices, to the books of Scripture, to the water of Baptism, and to the Species of Bread and Wine in the Holy Eucharist. And Catholics allow no more: But the true object which a Catholic adores with this sublime act of adoration or Latria, Test. Doc. Sorbon. is in the case in hand, Jesus Christ himself, who is to be adored every where wheresoever he is present, and therefore likewise in the holy Eucharist, in the which the Catholic church knows and acknowledgeth no other substance (as the Calvinists desire to impose on them) but only Jesus Christ. And if they be Idolaters for this, the Lutherans are so too, who teach the same doctrine, Kemn. Exam. par. 2. p. 92. though they express themselves in the point of the Real Presence after another new-invented manner: yet notwithstanding the Calvinists (when their worldly interests obliged them) could be content to communicate with the Lutherans, and could swallow their pretended Idolatry, but out of fear and hatred of Catholic union make even the church herself a prejudice against her doctrine. 10. For mine own part (whilst I was a Protestant) I profess I could never answer to mine own reason, why we should condemn the worshipping of Christ, whom we professed to be present in very truth, without figures or fancies. If he had not been there after a peculiar Sacramental manner, I might lawfully notwithstanding have worshipped him there, because I may and aught to worship him every where, as being God omnipresent: yea though his humane nature be locally present only at the right hand of the Father in glory, yet I may worship the man Jesus Christ every where; because that person, which is God and Man, is every where present (viz.) according to his divine not humane nature, and yet it seems when a new accession of another kind of Sacramental truly real presence is added to the former, though I acknowledge this later presence to be as real as the former, I must be forbidden to express that I acknowledge and believe it any other way then by saying with my lips that I do so; I must then deny unto him (in that place, at his own table and altar, and at that time, whilst are celebrated those mysteries, adorable even to Angels themselves) that worship and respect, which I would have given him at mine own table, or whilst I was doing the ordinary works of my calling. But it will be said perhaps, you are not forbidden to worship him, but you must not worship him as present there. And why for God's sake? Bid me rather believe that he is not after an epseciall manner present: But this is tyranny and injustice in the highest degree, to command me to believe that he is as truly, (though after another manner) present there, as at the right hand of his Father; and at the same time to command me by my works to belie my belief. No, no. quam magis ingenuè Peribonius! How much more ingenuous are the Socinians, than all other Sects! for whereas the rest would gladly pretend Antiquity, and take much unprofitable pains to make a Father now and then speak a word in their favour: The Socinians instead of puzzling themselves to untie, cut asunder all such knots and difficulties, they with an impudent resoluteness break through all obstacles. Let the ancient church determine what it please, and let the ancient Fathers agree to speak as they have a mind, if what is spoken and decreed either suit not with what they fancy that the Holy Ghost does mean, or (natural reason being Judge) ought to mean, or if the Holy Ghost in their opinions hath been silent in it, without more a●o they presently reject and condemn it; upon which grounds they strain not to alter all the language almost of the church, they know no such thing as a Sacrament, they acknowledge no promises to, nor no ●ffects of such ceremonious actions, as the church and all Christians call Sacraments, they scoff at the Real Presence, and abominate the adoration of Christ in his Mysteries: Let S. Ambrose (de Sp. 5. l. 3.) say, By his footstool is meant the earth, and by the earth the body of Christ, which every day we adore in the mysteries, and which the Apostles adored in our Lord Jesus. Let S. Augustine (in Psa. 48.) say, For he took earth from earth, both because be conversed here in very flesh, and gave us likewise very flesh to eat for our salvation. Now no man eats that flesh, but that he adores it first: And thus a way is found how the Lords footstool is adored. And again (Epist 120.) expounding that of the Psalmist, All the rich of the earth have eaten and worshipped, And they also (saith he) are brought to the table of Christ, and partake of his body and blood; but they adore him only; they are not satisfied, because they do not imitate him. Let S. chrysostom (in 1. Cor.) say, This body the wise men worshipped in the manger, etc. Let us at least imitate those barbarous men, we, who are the Citizens of heaven; Thou seest him not in a manger, but upon the Altar; not a woman holding him in her arms, but the Priest himself present, and the Spirit abundantly poured upon the sacrifice presented there. Lastly let Theodorct (Dial 2.) say, The mystical symbols are understood, which are celebrated and believed, and adored likewise, as being the very things which they are believed to be. What is all this to a Socinian, though all antiquity agree in the like language, and not one Father explicitly descent from it? But as for Protestants, not having the confidence to renounce the Father's authority, they make it their task to prove out of such places, that the Fathers intended by such speeches, that it was Idolatry to worship Christ present on the Altar. But- Nobis non licet esse tam disertis. Of Communion under one Species. 11. This is not a matter of doctrine; but mere practice: The church says not, it is unlawful to take it in both kinds; but only that upon reasons sufficiently prevailing with her, she thinks fit in the ordinary practice it should be so administered: The Governors Ecclesiastical therefore are to be answerable for it. But to demonstrate that even those, who is their private opinion think it were better it should be administered in both kinds, yet ought not upon pretence thereof to break forth into a sacrilegious separation, I will only recommend these few considerations to our English Protestants, viz. 1. That there is no explicit command in Scripture, that the Sacrament should be communicated under both Species. If they urge the example of our Saviour, and the manner how he administered it; they know that they themselves allow authority to the church to alter forms not essential to the Sacraments; and accordingly practise both the form in Baptism, and the holy Eucharist, otherwise than they were first instituted. 2. That it is evident, and no ingenuous Protestant will deny it, but that even in the Primitive churches it was an ordinary practice in several occasions to receive it only in one kind. 3. That not one proof can be showed that the sick ever received the cup. 4. That notwithstanding in the opinion of Antiquity, those who received it so were believed to have enjoyed the whole benefit and virtue of the Sacrament. 5. That the Greek church, though she gives it ordinarily in public in both Species, yet neither in private, nor to the sick, no nor (as it is said) in Lent. Neither doth she make that difference any ground of her separation from the Roman church. 6. That Protestants confess, that those who have a natural antipathy against wine, may receive the body alone, and may notwithstanding assure themselves that they want no fruit or effect of the holy Eucharist. Upon which grounds, if they would duly consider what a horrible crime Schism is; they would no doubt believe that this were not a sufficient excuse for them. 12. The only proof that I will give of the opinion and allowed practice of antiquity in this point, shall be to set down here in English, the 289. Epistle of S. Basile, ad Caesariam Patriciam, a memorable monument of the usage of private communicating of the holy Eucharist, and that only under one Species among the ancient Christians, His words are these, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etc. that is, And truly every day to communicate and participate the holy body and blood of Christ, is a good and profitable thing, seeing he himself hath said in express words, He that shall eat my flesh, and drink my blood hath eternal life. Now who does doubt but that daily to participate of life, is no other thing but daily to live? Therefore it is that we ourselves do communicate four times every week, to wit, on our Lord's day, on the fourth day, on the sixth day, and on the Sabbath day. And moreover upon other days, if the memory of any Martyr be celebrated. Now it would be superfluous for me to demonstrate that that custom is not to be condemned, by which Christians were necessitated in the times of persecution, in the absence of the Priest or Ministsr, to receive the Communion (privately) with his own hands, since an inveterate practice hath effectually confirmed it. For all those who lived Monastically in the Deserts, where there was no Priest, reserving the Communion in their Cells, received it of themselves. In Alexandria likewise, and in Egypt, each one of the common sort of people, for the most part, hath the Commnnion reserved in his own house. For the Priest having once offered the Sacrifice, and distributed it, he that receives it entire all together, and afterward daily communicates of it, aught to believe that he communicates and receives the very same which the Priest gave him. For likewise in the Church itself the Priest delivers a part (of the Sacrifice) and the Communicant receives it, with an entire power to dispose of it, and so with his own hands lists it to his own mouth. Now it is the very same in power (or virtue) whether any one shall receive one only portion from the Priest, or many portions together. Hitherto S. Basil. CHAP. III. Of Invocation of Saints. Of Veneration of Images. Of Prayers and Offerings for the Dead, and Purgatory. Of Indulgences. And of public service in the Latin tongue. With what charity and modesty the doctrines of the church are to be examined. 1. COncerning Invocation of Saints, to show the opinion of the ancient church about it, it may suffice to take notice that for denying the lawfulness of it Uigilantius was accounted an Heretic, as Dr. Fulke, Hierom. cont. Vigilant. c. 2. 3. Ful. Resp. ad Pseudo-Cath. Cent. 4. Gol. 1240. the Centuriators, Osiander, etc. acknowledge out of S. Hierome. I am sure S. Ambrose says in the very language of the Council of Trent, We ought to pray unto the Angels in our own behalf, who have been given for guards unto us, we ought to pray unto the Martyrs, whose bo●●dies remaining among us, seem to be as it were a gage and hostage of their protection. And S. Augustine (in Psal. 85.) in the language of the Church Litanies, All Martyrs intercede for us, adding, To the end that they may rejoice in our behalf who pray for us. And Theodoret (l. 8. de Martyr.) gives the very sense of the present church in this point, We do not adore the Saints as Gods, but we pray unto them as divine men, that they would intercede for us. A Tradition this was of the ancient Jewish church also, as those words of Josophus witness, The pure souls which hear those that call upon them, obtain in heaven a most holy place. And the same Tradition was so constant in the ancient Christian Church, Origen in Num. c. 31. H●m. 26. that Origen asks; who doubts but that the Saints do aid us by their prayers. Add hereto, that the ancient Liturgies of S. Basile etc. have the same prayers to Saints, in the same form as they are found in the Misfall and Breviaries at this day. And, that not any Father condemns the practice of it, either as a novelty or superstition, which in all other cases upon all occasions they have done. 13. To show the innocence of the church, far from deserving such behaviour from her children, as she has found in this regard. Consider first, that all that the church decides in this point is, that they may be prayed to. 2. That by the church no man is obliged or constrained to pray to them, or to any but to God. 3. That this is only that they would intercede for us, a thing which we sinners desire at the hands of other sinners greater perhaps than ourselves. 4. That (excepting only the Litanies which are rather ejaculations and wishes, then form prayers; and excepting some few Poetical Hymns, to which a greater licence hath always been allowed) the Church, both in the Missal and Breviary directs the prayers, which she makes with respect to Saints, immediately to God himself, desiring him to hearken to the intercession which his Saints make for us, and by their ministry to aid us. And therefore whereas Protestants make their chief difficulty in this matter to be their uncertainty, whether our prayers can arrive to the Saints hearing; though it may be resolved out of express Scripture even out of those words, There is joy in heaven over one sinner that repeurs; ●ot certainly, when the prayers are directed immediately to God, as the church does, no man will doubt but they may arrive thither. I cannot choose but on this occasion to publish the ingenuity of the Socinians once more, who deal with Religion as they would do with an Astronomical Hypothesis, framing and changing heaven and earth according to their phaenonema; And therefore they, to take away the trouble of examining either Scripture of Fathers, dissolve the whole controversy, with framing a new point of Philosophy, viz. that separated souls have no apprehension, nor parception at all, but are indeed as senseless as the bodies, contrary to millions of stories, which are surely not every one false, contrary to express Scripture, This day shalt thou be with me in Paradise, and S. Paul's judgement, Whether it was in the body, or out of the body (that I was wrapped into Paradise) I cannot tell, God knows: by which words, though he knew not which of these two ways it was, yet he gives to understand, that he might have been raped in Spirit without the body. Of Veneration of Images. 3. Concerning Images, we may consider, 1. That they had them in the ancient church, Tertullian puts it out of all doubt, Tert. de Pudic. c. 7. Ambr. de invent. corp. Geru. & Prot. who makes mention of the l●st sheep generally graven upon the Chalices: And S. Ambrose saith, That a person appeared to him, which seemed like to S. Paul, the features of whose countenance I had learned, says he, from his picture. The profession and practice of S. Paulinus is so clear in this behalf and so confessed by Protestants, that it is lost labour to quote him. 2. No man can deny but that the sight of holy stories in picture, do both more easily represent to weak capacities, and put even the best men in mind of good things, than the reading them in a book. 3. The Council of Trent (Sess. 25.) expressly professeth, that the ground of Catholics Veneration of them is not that it is believed that there is any divinity or virtue in them, for which they ought to be venerated: So that all occasion of superstition is evidently cut off. 4. That things which have any regard to Religion are to be respected and treated with reverence, this nature teaches, and the Calvinists acknowledge, as I took notice before out of Monsieur Daillé. 5. That by reason we have not words enough to express all our conceptions, nor variety enough of outward actions and postures to express our inward intentions and notions, hence all the trouble and contradiction among Christians in this point hath proceeded. And therefore as the ancient Jews applied the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the posture thereby represented, viz. prostration both to the supreme degree of adoration due only to God, and to the reverence of honourable persons: So likewise the second Council of Nice, for want of words applying the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (which imports the same) to images, therefore it was, that till the misunderstanding was cleared, the Western Church in the Council of Francford rejected their decision. But those who love Schism will needs most unjustly reassume a voluntary misapprehension of the church's intention in this point, which clearly distinguishes and makes an infinite distance between the respect, which they give to Images, and that which they render to God, and gives little more to Images, than Protestants themselves confess to be due to all holy things pertaining to Religion. The Jews at this day (the greatest enemies certainly of Idolatry that ever were) yet will not unfold the volume of their law till after many humble declinations of their bodies, and kiss of their hands; neither will any sober Christian enter into a church (though he do not pray) without uncovering his head, to show that he makes a difference between that place, and an ordinary profane house. The ground of the lawfulness and fitness of these outward expressions is this, because since we cannot choose but in our minds and thoughts make a a difference between holy and profane objects, it is as fitting to express that difference by outward shows. So that if Catholics be to be suspected of superstition and idolatry in this behalf; certainly the Calvinists are much more guilty, for exhibiting an outward reverence to the Bread and Wine in their Cene, seeing they will not allow a distinction between the several respects which Catholics acknowledge. 6. That the church obligeth no man (hîc & nunc) to exhibit any veneration to Images, etc. Only they must not condemn it in those that allow and practise it. Of Prayers and Offerings for the Dead: and Purgatory. 4. The denial of this made Arrius a Heretic; and besides him I do not find since Christianity begun, till the last age, any one single person that denied or questioned it; never was there found any Liturgy without it; nothing so frequent in Fathers and Ecclesiastical histories as the recommendation of it: In a word I am confident there is not one doctrine or practice of Christianity delivered with so full unquestionable a Tradition. So that a man may as well make an Apology for being a Christian or believing the Gospels to be the word of God, as for this. The truth is, the more sober and learned sort of English Protestants do confess the immemorial antiquity of i●; and would the State there suffer them to upbraid the sacrilegious usurping of such infinite revenues, as have been ravished both from the living and the dead in that Nation, there is no doubt, but that practice would have yet continued there, for the English church itself hath decided nothing against it, excepting only in consequence by denying Purgatory, which is necessarily supposed in prayer for the dead. Yet I may say they do not indeed deny Purgatory in the whole latitude, as the church has decided it, which obliges no man to any particular conceits about it, though perhaps received as a certain Tradition by many credulous Catholics, as if it could be nothing else but a certain subterraneous mansion full of tortures, fire and brimstone, etc. None of which the church expressly acknowledgeth, but only Purgatorium esse; animasque ibi detentas sidelium suffragiis, potissimùm verò acceptabili altaris sacrificio juvari. i e. That there is a Purgatory, and that the souls detained there are benefited by the prayers of the faithful, and especially by the acceptable sacrifice of the Altar. (Council of Trent Sess. 15.) Yea in the following words, that Council expressly commands Bishops to take care that neither any uncertain groundless or subtle discourses of it should be published to the people in Sermons, but only what is found delivered by the holy Fathers and sacred Counsels; which is in sum, that the souls of Christians, not dying in a perfect estate, romain in a condition which may be eased and meliorated by the prayers, Oblations and Charity of the living; according to the express assertion of S. Aug●stine; We ought not by any means to doubt but that the Dead are helped by the prayers of the holy Church, by the saving sacrifice, and by the Alms which are distributed for their souls, to the end that God may deal with them more mercifully than their sins have deserved: For that is a thing which the church observes; having received it from the Tradition of the Fathers. (Aug. de Verb. Apost. Ser. 32.) Of Indulgences. 5. That which the church commands to be believed as Catholic Traditionary doctrine, touching this matter of Indulgences, is briefly contained in the Bull of Plus IV. (relating to the 25. Session of the Council of Trent) in these words, I believe that power of Indulgences hath been given and left in the Church by Jesus Christ; and that the use of them is very healthful to Christian people. The ground of which doctrine, according to the position of Alexander of Hales, Durand, Paludanus, and others, quoted at the end of this discourse, is the practice of that severe discipline and correction, which in the most primitive times was exercised against (especially public and scandalous) sinners, those severe penitential Canons then executed, those painful Exomol●geses, prostrations, cilices, weep, covering themselves with ashes, rigorous fasts, but principally those long abstentions and banishings from the most holy Sacrament, yea even from entering any further than into the porch of the church, which the primitive zeal imposed upon Delinquents, which are mentioned in the most ancient Ecclesiastical writers, and most expressly in Tertullian and S. Cyprian. An example of which severity more rigorous than all before mentioned, S. Paul hath left us in that censure of his upon the incestuous Corinthian, whom he delivered over to Satan, to be tormented by him in the flesh. for the saving of his soul, l Cor. 5. which censure he calls by a general word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. an objurgation by (or, before) many, 2 Cor. 2. 6. from whence ecclesiastical censures were called in the 7. & 8. General Counsels 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Notwithstanding to show that Ecclesiastical. Governor's ought to mix Christian charity and meekness with their severity, especially when they see great signs of compunction and amendment in the Penitents, the same Apostle hath left an example likewise of Indulgence and favour to the same person, which he expresseth by the two verbs 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. graciously to spare, and to comfort. In conformity to which rule, the Primitive Churches, as upon occasion they used great severity, so likewise great benignity also to Penitents, which S. Cyprian calls the giving of Peace. 6. But in succeeding times zeal and servor of devotion growing cold, and generally Christians not being able to support so great a rigour, the church in wisdom thought fit to qualify both the severity of penalties imposed, to shorten the times of abstention from the holy Eucharist, and to grant remission and Indulgence, especially in Articulo mortis generally unto all Penitents: hence came it that the intercessions of Confessors and Martyrs in behalf of Delinquents were admitted by the Bishops, as we read frequently in S. Cyprian; hence the two favourable Canons of Indulgence (viz. the 10, and 12.) of the first Council of Nice. 7. In these last and most wicked times, wherein the ancient Ecclesiastical Discipline is almost wholly lost, not through any fault of the church, (which enjoins all Priests to have before their eyes the ancient penitential Canons, and by them to regulate their penances) but through the general overflowing of coldness in devotion, profaneness, and impatience of suffering, and likewise through the impudence, covetousness, and partiality of Priests: no man can yet deny, but that as the power of inflicting censures remains in the church, so likewise doth the power of Indulgences. 8. Concerning which Indulgences, all Catholics do unanimously agree to these two points. 1. That they are profitable: and 2. That the Church hath power to grant them, according to the Decision of the Council of Trent. But as for the extent of the virtue of Indulgences, and as touching the conditions required to the receiving them fruitfully, Catholic Divines are divided in their opinions. For 1. concerning the extent of their virtue, Bellarmine (l. 1 de Indulg. c. 7.) sets down this as an opinion maintained by Catholics, viz. That Indulgences are no other than relaxations of Penalties enjoined by Confessarii, or which ought to have been enjoined according to the Canons. Which opinion, saith he, is maintained by grave Authors, Alexander of Hales, sum. Theolog. p. 4. q. 23. memb. 2. Durand and Paludanus, Pope Adrian 6. in 4. Sent. q. de Indulg. And likewise by Soto the Dominican, and Card. Cajetan, both which teach, that Indulgences are never granted but for Penalties enjoined. Now both these were appointed by the church to maintain the Doctrine concerning Indulgences against the late Heretics. Likewise Maldonate the learned Jesuit (in his book de Sacram. c. 2. de Indulg. q. 1. 2. p.) saith, that the opinion, That Indulgences are only relaxations of the Penalty either enjoined in the Sacrament of Penance, or ordained by Ecclesiastical Law, seems to him to be the most true opinion, because it is held by good Authors, and seems to be demonstrated by unanswerable arguments. And in pursuance hereof the same Author produceth eleven reasons; the substance of the three first of which, is this, Because we ought to believe, that the Indulgences now in use in the church, are the same that were anciently practised, as the Council of Trent expressly says: Now, saith he, we find no other Indulgences in the ancient church and Counsels, but such as we have mentioned. Again, It was the custom of the church to add this Particle to the Indulgences given, De Pooeitentiis injunctis; since therefore, saith he, the church hath so warily expressed herself, it would be temerarious to interpret her meaning otherwise. The same doctrine is strongly maintained likewise by Estius in 4. Sent. dist. 20. ●. 10. 9 In the next place, concerning the conditions required to receive benefit by Indulgences, all Catholics agree that these three are necessary. 1. Authority in him that grants them. 2. A just reason for the granting them. 3. Due dispositions in the party receiving them. Now for this last point, Card. Cajetan (as he is quoted by Bellarmine l. 1. de Indulg. c. 12.) maintains, That besides the conditions of being in the state of Grace, and of accomplishing the actions ordained for the gaining of Indulgences, there is a third condition necessary to him that would receive fruit by them, which is, that he have a will to satisfy God by his own labours, as much as he can; and that Indulgences are of no profit to those who will not satisfy for themselves when they can. From whence he concludes, That in such an infinite number of persons that visit the churches in the times of the solemn Stations, and the like Indulgences, there are but very few that reap the profit of them indeed. This opinion, saith Bellarmine, is profitable and pious, though perhaps it is not true. But since Card Bellarmine, the learned Estius Chancellor of Douai, professes his belief, that this opinion is not only profitable and pious, but very true. See his Comment. in 2. Ep. ad Cor. cap. 2. v. 11. as likewise in 4. Sent. dist. 20. Sect. 10. The like is strongly maintained by Comitolus a learned Jesuit, in Resp. Moral. q. 36. who confirms his opinion by the testimonies of Antisiodorensis, Henricus à Gandavo, Adrian VI Boniface VIII. Sylvester, etc. Now the aforesaid Authors, who teach that Indulgences are only relaxations from Penances enjoined, vel ab homine, vel à. Canone, do not therefore believe that they are satisfactions only to the Church, and not to God; for Maldonate expressly declares the contrary in these words, in the forecited place, cum injungitur poenitentia ab Ecclesia, etc. when the Church enjoins any Penance, she enjoins it not only to the end that by such a Penance we should satisfy the Church, but God also. Now the Indulgence is answerable unto the Penance enjoined, and by consequence it is granted us, not only to the end that this penalty should be remitted us before the Tribunal of the Church, but before God's Tribunal likewise. And from thence he concludes, that though Indulgences do regard directly only Penances, which are enjoined to be accomplished in this world, notwithstanding they do consequently deliver from the pains of Purgatory likewise. For (saith he) since God does not punish the same fault twice, and since the penalty which men pay in Purgatory, is the same with that which they ought to have paid in this world, if the Church, by the means of Indulgences, does remit the penalty, which in this life is due to the Justice of God, it follows, that she remits likewise that which shall be due in Purgatory, that is to say, that which those living persons, to whom such Indulgences are granted, ought otherwise to suffer in Purgatory. Now whether this Doctrine deserve a separation, let all reasonable, moderate Christians judge. Of Public service in the Latin tongue. 8. This is a matter which concerns only the outward order and decorum of the church, an whereof Ecclesiastical Governors are only to be judges and disposers, so that if there be any excess or inconvenience, they only are answerable before Almighty God, particular persons are not at all concerned in it. Indeed if the Church had appointed her service in the Latin tongue on purpose that the people should not understand it: Or if she had decreed that it was a thing unlawful that any body should praise God with the understanding, but only Priests, and Bishops, and learned men, Protestants might have some pretence for their clamour, in this regard. But 1. since the Church found her Liturgies in the same tongue through all the Western world from the beginning of Christianity. 2. Since no example can be found in any ancient churches, Jewish or Christian, Eastern or Western, that the languages of Public Service have been altered, though those of the Countries have been; insomuch as in our Saviour's time the Jewish Devotions were performed in Hebrew, when the people only understood the Syrian tongue; so the Cophtites, so the AEthiopians, and so the Jews to this day. 3. Since it is apparently, both of great comeliness and benefit, that there should be an uniformity in Gods public worship, so as that wheresoever a Christian travels, he may as well join himself with other Christians in the service of God, as when he stayed at home. 4. Since particularly for the Mass, the greatest part of it from all Antiquity was performed in a low voice by the Bishop or Priest, the people neither hearing, nor in the ancient Church seeing him, by reason of a vail or curtain, which was drawn between the Altar & the people, excepting only at some certain peculiar times, as at the Elevation, etc. 5. Since the church permits the translating and publishing of her Liturgies, since she commands the Priests to explain and inculcate unto the people the meaning of all mysteries; and since she furnishes even the most ignorant persons with devotions suitable to their capacities, and far more beneficial to them then the hearing the Psalms and other parts of Scripture read, so difficult and abstruse, that even the most learned must confess their inability to comprehend them. Lastly, since an indiscreet promiscuous exposing of Scriptures hath been the occasions of so many inconveniences, a better though sadder proof whereof cannot be given then in the present state of England, where every one reading Scripture, and all visible authority of interpreting it (so as to oblige others to receive such interpretations) being disclaimed, every one of those infinite numbers of Sects believe that they find in Scripture sufficient warrant for all such horrible seditions and murders as have lately been committed there: Therefore the Catholic church hath esteemed it a thing befitting her wisdom to continue an uniformity in her public worship received from our Fathers, and her care and charity to appoint respectively to every condition and state of Christians their proper allowance and dimensum of spiritual food, and to imitate our Saviour, who would not reveal even to his Apostles themselves all the mysteries of the Kingdom of God, during the times of their infirmity, when they were not able to bear them. 9 These being the principal points of controversy between Catholics and Protestants, I judged fit to signify how (when I considered what the church had declared to be her sense of them, separating them from private opinions, to which no man is obliged) they appeared so reasonable, and so consonant to antiquity, that if I should have continued in a separation from her for their cause, I must at the same time have professed to have renounced all interest in the most glorious Saints and Martyrs that ever the church enjoyed. And if it were Gods good pleasure that all other Protestants, lovers of unity, would think fit not to judge of the Catholic church by the character given of her by Calvinist Controvertists, who lay to her charge whatsoever imprudent or erroneous positions they find in any particular Catholic author, insomuch as I am confident not one objection among twenty in their writings proceeds directly against the church, but that, if they would be persuaded to hear her testifying of herself in her public doctrine, they would find that they have been cozened into the guilt of this pernicious exterminating crime of Schism, by the passions and iuterests of men, enemies to peace and Christian charity, and that they have been enemies to God's church for telling them the truth, that perhaps themselves believed in the sense and latitude that she proposeth it. Lastly, if they would but think the judgement of their own Bucer (in Mat. c. 26.) worthy to be harkened to, who tells them, Nihil esse damnandum quod ul ● ratione bonum esse queat. i e. That nothing is to be condemned (especially in the Church the Spouse of Christ, and Mother of us all) that by any way (or in any sense, or respect) can be good, they would think themselves obliged to consider the doctrines of the church with all possible caution, modesty, humility, and charitable construction, and not ruin their souls by forsaking her Communion, till they found that charity herself, which covers a multitude of sins, could not excuse her, that is, till they found that notwithstanding the promises of Christ, the gates of bell had, actually prevailed against her. CHAP. IU. The Holiness taught and practised in the Catholic Church a great motive to embrace the Doctrines. The Author's former exceptious against certain practices ascribed to the Church, with their answers. Of the Carthusians. Of Mystical Theology, &c, 1. I Will now discharge the promise which I made in the XVII. chap. of the first Section, which was to give a narration what effect the eminent rules of holiness and true solid devotion, which contrary to my expectation, I found in the Catholic Church, had upon me, and that not only to incline my will to love them, and desire the practice of them, but to dispose my understanding also to be more docible, and more easily persuaded of the truth of speculative points, which were professed in a Church so enriched, and by persons whose whole employment was to love, serve, glorify, and admire the goodness, wisdom, and all other perfections of Almighty God, to meditate day and night upon the holy Mysteries of our Salvation, and to mortify all manner of vice, passions, and lusts, far more intrinsically, spiritually, and perfectly, than any thing that I had seen or read before could give me a notion of. I hope I need not be ashamed to profess this, and however I will not forbear to publish mine own shame, by professing, that the life and Counsels of S. Charles Borromée, and the truly Christian Spirit of humility and meekness shining in the writings of Monfieur Sales, Bishop of Geneva, gave more satisfactory answers to all the objections of Protestants, than any I had hitherto found in all the volumes of those famous Cardinals, Baronius, Bellarmin and Perron, or at least that the former gave a point and a piercing virtue to the discourses of the later, which in former times I had often and without much effect perused. 2. That way of satisfying doubts and controversies was the stranger to me, because it came directly contrary to my expectation; for I must profess I had in former times a far stronger aversion from the Catholic Church, considered by me as an enemy to Holiness, then as an enemy to truth. I had observed, 1. In general, that most of the points in controversy between Catholics and Protestants were such as contributed either to avarice or ambition. 2. I saw that rich men, (to whom our Saviour said it was impossible that they should enter into the Kingdom of heaven) were the easiliest admitted of all others by the prostitution of pardons and Indulgences. 3. I saw that many Casuists had handled the sins of great men, Usury and Simony, so tenderly and favourably, allowing so many qualifications, that it was become almost impossible to deprehend them. 4. I saw the ancient discipline of the church almost quite vanished; and absolution given upon a small penance for such sins (adultery, blasphemy, and that most horrible and atheistical gallantry of Duelling) which the ancient church would scarce have pardoned after ten years macerating of the body and soul with fastings, weep, and yet greater austerities, and for which she would not have received to peace the persons guilty by recidivation, by admitting them to the Communion, no not in Articulo mortis. See the annotation of Petavius upon S. Epiphanius, ad Haeres. 59) 5. I saw (me thought) that absolutions were given as of course; and that persons, though habitually addicted to mortal sins, yet upon an outward profession of sorrow expected and challenged pardon and admission to the blessed Sacrament, and all this toties quoties. 6. I saw that attrition i e. sorrow for sin, merely out of fear of being damned, with the Sacrament, was counted a sufficient qualification to remission of sins, whereby in my opinion, charity itself became unnecessary: Such prejudices as these was I possessed withal, all which I imputed to the church herself; insomuch as though I suspected that my understanding might be overreached by subtle Disputants to excuse the errors, which I believed to be in the Roman church, yet I was resolved that it was impossible my will should be seduced so far as to approve such enormous practices. 3. Now the occasion and manner how I came to be satisfied of the eminent sanctity taught and practised in the Catholic Church, and concerning those practices, not that they were excusable, but that they were not to be imputed to the church (which was most innocent of them) was as follows. It happened not long after my arrival at Paris, that my curiosity led me among other places to visit the Monastery of the Carthusians, whom we deprehended in their ordinary employment of prayers, and in the place of their almost continual residence, the church: A sight that was, which made a strange impression upon my mind, being at that time also in some unquietness, by reason of certain scruples already entertained concerning Religion. For there I saw persons so utterly secluded from the world, that they never visited other men, and rarely and with unwillingness admit-other men's visits, yea excepting a few hours weekly, renounced the conversation and sight of one another, but only in the church, where their conversation was only with God: Persons so mortified in their looks, so immovable in their postures, with countenances so intent upon their present devotions, as if they only lived with their rational faculties, and so far from observing, that they were observed by others, that truly I believe they knew it not: persons (as after enquiry I was informed) that through the whole course of their lives practise a strict abstinence, and for a greater part, a rigorous fast; persons that every day allow near eight hours to vocal prayers, and laborious singing in the church, and almost all the hours besides in their private cells to meditation and contemplation: persons that no incommodity of weather hinders from their midnight watches, and devotions in the church for several hours together; persons, whose inseparable clothing is haircloth, and whose other more private mortifications and austerities they do most solicitously con●●al from the world, and account it of all other the most rude mortification, if they should come to be discovered: persons, who are so far from desiring the esteem of the world, that they never would publish any miracles done in their solitude, nor seek the canonisation of any of their Saints, no not their Founder S. Brun● himself: persons who notwithstanding all these austerities, express in their conversation the greatest repose, and contentment, and cheerfulness of mind imagineable, the greatest compassion toward others, that would seem to compassionate them, and protestations, that if there were no happiness to be expected in another world, yet that the inward ravish of soul; the spiritual embraces, which their celestial Bridegroom affords them many times, deserve to be purchased with far greater worldly losses, and with far greater austerities, than any that they have or can suffer. Lastly, persons whose order has continued now without interruption for about six hundred years, without the least scandal, without the least need of Reformation, growing the more perfect according to the declination of the rest of mankind, as if God intended it, in an especial manner, to be the defence and security, the chariots and horses of Israel: An order whose increase of revenues are perceived not by themselves, but the poor only, who are accordingly more amply and frequently sustained; insomuch, as that which has been the corruption of other orders, is the purifier and refiner of this; and I may add this observation with respect to England, an order that Almighty God did principally choose, by which to condemn Schism at its first entrance there, viz. by suffering them, that is, piety and innocence itself, to be the first victimes and sacrifices offered to it. 4. I must confess, that as I could not consider these things without astonishment and admiration, so I could not free myself from some degree of envy and indignation, that I could not find any thing in any of our Churches to oppose to such a spectacle: I was willing enough to suspect that there might be some mixture of a secret hypocrisy, and pride, and ostentation, even in such renouncings of pride and ostentation: But then I confuted my own suspicion by this most sure observation, that Almighty God did not usually of all other vices suffer hypocrisy even in a single person to be long undiscovered, much less in a whole order, and for six hundred years together. Therefore I began to discourse thus within myself; Is it possible if the Roman church be so deeply guilty, and so intolerably depraved, as I have hitherto believed, that Almighty God should suffer such servants of his to lie in those dregs and pollutions, exposed to eternal perdition so many years together? Has their continual meditation been in the holy Scriptures, and yet never one beam of divine light be sent from heaven to irradiate any of their understandings, and to convince them, that their whole Religion is apparently contradictory to the same Scriptures? Is it likely, that if the Faith of the Church was of necessity to be changed, and the practices to be reform, that God should make choice of such Apostles as a debauched, perjured, sacrilegious, Apostate Monk of Germany; or a seditious, uncharitable, malicious Picard, or a furious Gladiatour of Switzerland, and in the mean time leave such persons inflamed with his love, still lying in their deadly ignorances' and impieties, never suffering one of that order to be converted, yea leaving Heresy more confirmed in them now, then ever before that such a pretended new Evangelicall light discovered itself? 5. Some time I spent in such meditations, which I could neither hinder nor satisfy myself in; yet because it seemed dangerous to me to build resolutions upon the manner and method of God's Providence, which is inscrutable; therefore I thought it as necessary for me to examine (not the outward shows, but) the Rules of Holiness practised in the Roman church, as the doctrines therein professed; for if the former appeared to be according to the Spirit of Christ, they would strongly argue for the truth of the later. Having this design, I provided myself of the best Methods of Devotion and Spirituality that I could meet with, and upon all occasions I made conversation with such Religious persons, as were in opinion eminent for a spiritual life; The success whereof was strange and incredible: For whereas I had always been of opinion, that that which in the Roman church was called mystical Theology, was, if compared with the ordinary Practical Divinity, as I took the Moral Philosophy of the Platonists to have been, compared with that of other Philosophers, viz. the same ordinary doctrines and precepts of virtue, but only clothed in abstruse, sublime, and Metaphorical terms, rendering the professors thereof not more virtuous than other men, but more fantastical and self conceited: But I found that the notion I had of it had no affinity with the thing itself; Mystical Theology being nothing else in general, but certain Rules, by the practice whereof a virtuous Christian might attain to a nearer, a more familiar, and beyond all expression comfortable conversation with God, by arriving unto, not only a belief, but also an experimental knowledge and perception of his divine presence, after an inexpressible manner in the soul; wherein he is taught first to purge himself of all pollutions of sin and worldly lusts, to possess himself of all Christian virtues, and by such means to prepare himself for an union with the heavenly Majesty; the general instrument of all these blessings being a constant exercise of Mental Prayer, that is, meditating with the understanding upon heavenly mysteries, but especially inward ejaculations, aspirations, and immediate acts of the will, loving, praising, adoring, and perfectly resigning itself to the most perfect will of God, by which in time there is made a perfect denudation, mortification, and annihilation of a man's own private will, and a suffering one's self to be enacted and moved immediately by Almighty God, and at last a contemplation of the divine essence without any medium, without all help of grosser imaginary forms, an absorption of all operations (called by them a divine idleness) whereby the soul reposeth securely, and with unspeakable pleasure in the bosom of her heavenly Bridegroom. I speak not now of strange effects, outward and respecting the body, as Elevations, Ecstasies, etc. which though admired at by others, yet are neglected, and even prayed against by spiritual persons themselves. 6. Now to prove that these are neither dreams of ignorant souls, nor sublime extravagances of soaring spirits, we may consider that. 1. The greatest understandings that many of the last ages have brought forth (as S. Bernard, S. Thomas Aquinas, S. Bonaventure, and I. Picus Count of Mirandula &c.) have all written uniformly upon the same subject, and have showed clearly, that what they wrote was not mere speculation, but comprehended, practised, and felt by them. 2. That even the meanest capacities have arrived to the perfection of contemplation, as S. Isidore a plain husbandman in Spain, S. Teresa, S. Catherine of Sienna, and of Genoa, (silly ignorant women) & that unparallelled young Eremite, Gregorio Lopez. Insomuch as whosoever shall with a true resignation & pure intention enter into this life of the Spirit, though his understanding be not able to give him entertainment for meditation, yea though he be not able to help himself with reading others, yet if, being informed of the necessary points of Catholic Faith, he humbly & constantly move his will to frame cordially acts of love and resignation, etc. to God, even such a man or woman shall not fail to arrive, it may be, to a higher degree of union, than the most learned and skilful Doctors, even to that perfection of which S. Paul speaks, Crucifigor cum Christo: & vivo, jaem non ego, sed vivit in me Christus. i e. I am crucified with Christ: and I live, yet not I, but Christ liveth in me. 3. To the end to be secure of delusions it is observable, that whereas in other Sects ●●●re are certain counterfeitings of such a mystical familiarity with God, joined with strange motions and effects, as awong the Anabaptists, Famulists, Quakers, Ranvers, etc. (strange examples whereof (in the last age) we may read in Florimundus Raemundus, yet now daily outdone by those Sects in England, as at Malton in Yorkshire, London, and other places, where they abound) yet such illuminations discover their black Author, in that the persons are far from being cleansed of their carnal lusts, pride, malice, etc. and the design appears commonly to be the troubling the world with some new pretended Revelation and Reformation etc. Whereas among spiritual persons in the Catholic Church, the inseparable qualification for contemplation is a deep humility, a most tender charity and love of Catholic unity. 4. Lest a suspicion should arise that this mystical Theology and doctrine of contemplation should be an invention of Religious Orders to magnify themselves in the world's opinion, as having means to a nearer approach to Almighty God, than the rest of the world: We may consider both that the same rules for substance are found in the writings of the ancient Fathers, as S. D●onisius Aroopagita, S, Augustine, S. Basil, Joannes, Cassianus, S. Hierome, etc. and that even those most active Fathers and Bishops of the church have notwithstanding attained to a great perfection of contemplation; yea that in this last age there have not appeared any more perfect therein, than those two famous Bishops, viz. B. Francis de Sales, Bishop of Geneva, and S. Charles Barromée, that most unwearied solicitous Archbishop of Milan and Cardinal, and Antonio de Roias' a Spanish secular Priest: Though withal it cannot be denied, but that a retreat and disengagement from the world, solitude, silence, and other austerities be very powerful and effectual dispositions thereto. But concerning Mystical Theology I shall refer those that desire further information, to the writings of Thaulerus, Harphius, Rusbrochius, the Bishop of Geneva, S. Teresa, and many others: Particularly the several Treatises, as yet Manuscripts, of that late very sublime contemplative, F. Augustine Baker, a Monk of our English Congregation of the Holy Order of S. BENET; The yet imperfect sum of whose methodical instructions concerning Internal Prayer, having happily met withal at Rome, I found myself pressed to hasten my reconcilement to the Church, because I thirsted to become capable of practising those heavenly instructions. And afterward in France, but especially in my passage through Cambray, having seen many more of the same Author's writings, the Spirit of which did eminently show itself in the lives of those excellently devout and perfectly religious Benedictine Dames there; and being by them informed (which within a few days mine own eyes assured me of) that the same doctrine was received and practised by their Fathers at Douai. I presently, contrary to all my former resolutions, to dispose myself only among strangers in a religious life, determined to fix myself at Douai. I forbore in the former Impression to mention this Author among the rest, because I thought his books were confined to Cambray, where they were written, or to his own Convent at Dowvy: But being since assured, that they were largely dispersed, even among the secular Clergy, I could not without ingratitude now omit his name, and I hope that e'er long a full account of his spiritual instructions concerning the several Degrees of Internal Prayer, shall be happily communicated to the world, methodically digested, & authoritatively published, to the glory of God, & great advancement of devout souls in his divine love. 7. For my present purpose it will suffice that by that short enquiry I made, I satisfied myself, that in no other Congregation, but the Catholic Church only, were to be found either rules in writing, or living directors for a true spiritual life in any comparison approaching to those before named. Insomuch as I have often wondered why Protestant's would not at least borrow and transcribe such writings for their own use and practise; and all that I could say for answer to myself was. 1. That according to that saying of the Fathers, Spiritus sanctus non est extra Ecclesiam. i e. The Holy Spirit resides not any where out of the Church, that is, disperses not his extraordinary favours, and sublimer gifts any where else. 2. Because Protestant Religion, etc. renouncing all Evangelicall Counsels of perfection, as voluntary poverty, chastity etc. and their avarice having swallowed all the revenues, which nourished men in a solitary life of meditation and contemplation, they both want such effectual helps thereto, and dare not for fear of being censured as half-Catholiques, commend or practise the means proper and conducing to it, insomuch as the very name of Contemplation is unknown among them, I mean in the mystical sense: for all that is understood among them in their Treatises of devotion by that word, is only the descanting upon any mystery of divinity, or passage of Scripture. 8. Finding therefore not only beyond, but contrary to my expectation, such a trea●ure in the Catholic Church as true Devotion, an union with, and participation of the Divine Nature, and the means to purchase this treasure being so obvious there, and so unknown all the world over besides; could I do less than say, Quis dabit mibi pennas sicut Columba? Who will give me wings like a d●ve, that I may fly into the wilderness, retired out of the world, and be at rest? that wilderness into which God has promised that he will bring his chosen ones, in which loquetur ad cor corum, i. e. He will communicate himself familiarly unto them: I do freely confess my partiality, I could not choose but wish that truth might appear to me to be the companion of Holiness, and that that church which could give such admirable directions to love God, might not deceive us when she would instruct us to know him. In a word, I was the easilier persuaded to believe and submit to the church's authority, because thereby I was sure to evacuate pride, and an esteem of mine own sufficiency to be mine own director, and by consequence to exercise at least an act of humility and obedience, if not of faith. 9 As for the prejudices and accusations before mentioned, which I once imputed to the Catholic Church, the clearing of them is not at all difficult; for as for the first, the whole force of it lies in this, ● that Christ is accused to have taken care both for the subsistence and honour of his servants and Ministers; a fault that no sect can forgive, as if they intended to be revenged upon their seducing Ministers, by exposing them to beggary and dishonour. But this was never the disposition of Catholics, they have always willingly afforded this double honour to the Clergy, and yet never any Church upon earth laid so heavy censures upon avarice, Usury and Simony, as the Catholic Church both done. Concerning the 2. the prostitution of Indulgences and Pardons is in formal words condemned by the Council of Trent: So that it is not the Church, which opens Paradise so freely to rich men, but only particular avaricious Priests, who I fear do by such vain promises shut it both against themselves, and such customers. To the 3. the imputation only concerns two or three private Casuists, so far from being justified by the church, that the Pope hath expressly censured and condemned them. Concerning the 4. I fear indeed the scandal of prostituting absolutions for the greatest crimes upon ridiculous penances is but too common; but yet without any fault of the church; yea we may reasonably judge of the mind of the Council of Trent in that respect, by the zealous practices of S. Charles Barromée (than whom no man had a greater influence upon that Council) who immediately after its dissolution spent himself wholly in endeavouring to restore the ancient discipline, as far as this wicked age could bear it, according to the mind of that Council. For the 5. as the rest, it only reflect; upon particular persons, and touches not the church at all. The like may be said of the last, which speaks of Attrition, and the sufficiency thereof with the Sacrament of Penance to qualify a person guilty of sin for Remission: Upon better enquiry I found that all Catholic Authors, though they assent to that doctrine in gross, yet they do not all agree in their explication of the notion of Attrition. For in direct opposition to my preconceived prejudice, I find, that (not to speak of Jansenius and his followers, who profess to embrace S. Augustine's Doctrine therein) the learned Estius and Silvius (the former in l. 4. sentent, didst 16. 9 and the latter in suppl. D. Tho. ad 3. p. a. 1. q. 1.) do thus express themselves, that there are four acceptions of the word Attrition, according to four Motives unto sorrow for sin. 1. Out of mere natural and humane motives, as loss of goods, fame, health, etc. 2. Out of fear of hell, and not at all the love of God. 3. For the offence indeed committed against God, but yet this out of an in-efficacious, suspended, and mere optative will. Now none of these three, say they, are sufficient, even with the Sacrament, to qualify a sinner for the remission of his sins: But only the fourth, which is indeed essentially Contrition, but an imperfect one, according to the expression of the Council of Trent, being a Grief for sin, because God is offended, joined with an absolute purpose no more to offend him, and proceeding from a will to please him, as deserving to be loved above all things, though this will be as yet feeble, remiss, and imperfect. This they say is the lowest qualification that with the Sacrament can suffice to remission of sins. And this they resolutely contend to be the sense of the Council of Trent; grounding themselves upon this, to their seeming firm foundation, viz. That it is against Scriptures, and the Doctrine of the ancient Church, to say, that a man without any degree of true charity can be capable of the remission of his sins, or the favour of God. But very many dissent from the ri●ou● of this ●●eir expl● cation. That which the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (〈◊〉. 14. ●●. 4.) concerning this point, is, That Attrition (called there imperfect Contrition) excluding a will of sinning, and joined with a hope of pardon, but arising from a consideration of the filthiness of sin, and fear of punishment for it, although without the Sacrament of Penance it cannot of itself bring a sinner to justification, yet it disposes him to the obtaining the Grace of God in that Sacrament: And that it does not (as Calvin affirms) make a man a hypocrite, or more a sinner then before; but on the contraery, that it is a gift of God, and an impulse of the holy Spirit not yet inhabiting in man, but only moving him, by whic● a penitent being helped, doth prepare unto himself a way unto righteousness. Then which what could be spoken more moderately, cantelously, and piously? To conclude this argument, Scandals there will and must be in the church to the end of the world, as our Saviour foretold; and withal, as he foretold a grievous woe to the authors of them; and a blessing proportionable to those that would not be scandalised, that is, that neither would join in heart to consent to such scandals, nor out of hatred of them to usurp the Angel's office (who only are deputed to separate and pluck up all scandals at the end of the world) or to rend the mystical body of Christ. CHAP. V. The Conclusion: wherein the imputation of inconstancy charged upon the Author, is answered: as likewise of forsaking a Religion, because it was persecuted. 1. BEfore I wholly take off my pen from this paper, I will, though not without some indignation and grief, answer two imputations which have been charged upon me since my declaring myself a Catholic; the first of which is inconstancy: That which raises these passions in me, in regard of this, is only my respect and charity to the authors of such an imputation, which I fear precedes from a poisonous root of bitterness, I mean a contempt of Religion in general: They that would not account it a fault for a man that had found out a new mystery or trade of thriving, to embrace that, and forsake another in which he had spent the whole former part of his life: They that would not impute this as a fault to a man to renounce one sect of Philosophy, and to embrace another, either for the greater probability of it, or even the gracefulness of being new, or a Paradox: Yea they that would impute it as a folly and morosity, if a man did not conform himself to any fashionable novelty in clothes, or language, or opinion: Such men as these, who think that profit, or fancy, or vanity may excuse inconstancy, and make it commendable; esteem it a vice only, when conscience and the glory of God, and eternity is in question. Religion is the only thing that must be left to the hazard, whether good or bad it must not be changed, and it is dishonourable for a man that is in the way to hell to avoid it, or to accept of heaven, unless he was born with a right to it. So that the Jews, who, to keep themselves to their old Rabbins; and the Pagans, who, to maintain their old even in their own opinion ridiculous Idols, rejected our Saviour, shall in such men's opinions deserve the commendation of constancy, and the Apostles for harkening to him, who only had the words of eternal life, shall not escape their censure. For my part I profess, though I had not believed the Fathers, who with one mouth protest that Schism and Heresy are most mortal and almost unpardonable sins; if I had only esteemed them as less good to my soul, I would have done that right to my reason, as both to have rejected them, and to profess likewise the rejecting them. The Apostle commands us to try all things, and thus far I suppose that such objectors, if it were only for curiosities sake, would agree with him; but he adds further, hold fast that which is good: but here they would leave him, and say, Hold fast that which you held before, whether it be good or bad, let your reason judge of good things, but withal let it reject even the best, rather than be unconstant. Indeed if by being a Catholic I had relinquished any good thing whereof I was possessed being a Protestant; if my fidelity to temporal Superiors, my love to my Country and friends, etc. were not even increased by this change, I should blush to hear such an objection for mine own sake; whereas now I both blush and grieve only for their sakes; and my only revenge on them, shall be to beseech God to bless them, with bestowing on them this very fault of inconstancy, that they may live to change at least this little less than Atheistical opinion. To conclude, I desire them first to meditate well whether they be not concerned in that character which S. Augustine (the Bapt, cont. Don. l. 2.) gives certain persons in his time, who (saith he) whilst they are afraid to be reprehended for a small time here for inconstancy, are not afraid to be damned for eternity. And next, whether I be not absolved in another speech of the same Father, saying, (cont. Cresc. lib. 3.) As it is a landable thing not to be removed from a true opinion, so it is a unblamable thing to persist in a false one; which never to have held is the prime commendation, but the second, to change it; that either that which is true may remain from the beginning, or at least by rejecting the false one, the true one may succeed: And likewise in another parallel one of S. Ambrose, (Ep. 31. ad Valent. ●mp.) I am not ashamed to be converted with the whole old aged world; seeing no age is too late to learn that which is good: Let that old age blush which cannot amend itself, etc. it is no shame to change for the better. 2. This objection only reflects upon my discretion; but the next wounds me in the point of honesty; for I am charged with ingratitude for leaving a church, (wherein I had been bred, and received more than ordinary favours) in the time of her affliction and persecution. Whereto I answer. 1. That if God was pleased to make affliction an occasion of illumination to me, who was I that I should wilfully shut mine eyes against his light? 2. If I had, following the example of many, passed over from the persecuted party to the persecutors, there might have been some ground of an ill suspicion. But it was so far from that; that I made choice of a Church, whose only portion both in war and peace was persecution, and this to be expected by her whether party soever prevailed; if the King was restored, all that her members could hope for, was to return to their ancient pressures, not only upon their goods, but lives also. This was the portion of that church which I embraced, if that party had been victorious. But on the other side, if the bloody designs of the Presbyterians (who only then appeared) had succeeded, what a cup of bitterness and terror was prepared for the poor Catholics? what less than utter desolation even to sowing with salt was to be expected from persons, who profess a tyranny even upon the souls of all men, that dissent from them in the sleightest opinions; from persons, who were the contrivers of those bloody laws against Catholics, not so much out of conscience, or out of hat●ed to them, as for their worldly designs, and against the King's interests, yea to be a snare unto him; for what disadvantage could it be to his Majesty, that his Subjects should enjoy the liberty of their consciences? and what more fatal engine did they make use of to ruin the late King withal, then by calumniating him with suspicions of Popery, either when any new ceremony was instituted, or when the rigour of the law was mollified against an innocent Priest? from persons lastly, who could not forbear to threaten ruin even to their best friends; who, whereas they had been solicited by them to expose their lives to free their souls from tyranny, saw themselves ready to be a prey to the most ingrateful prodigious tyranny that ever was. It is true, of late God has been pleased most miraculously to break the jaw bones of those Lions, and to commit his people to more merciful hands; they may be permitted to hope for some ease from Governors, whose profession is to leave men's consciences to God, to whom only they are naked and in the light; especially considering that they themselves have by God's particular goodness escaped that danger, whereby God's purpose seems to have been to teach them mercy in the School of Experience. But these were things almost above my wishes, much more above my hopes, when I first embraced Catholic Religion. I was then so far from forsaking a church, because it was persecuted, that it was persecution I fled to, persecution suffered with most admirable patience and joyfulness; it was persecution that invited me to become a Catholic; for this I relinquished present fortunes, and all hopes of future; this made me esteem the loss of my natural Country, hindered, and most dear friends a great gain and preferment. Lastly, for this I can without murmuring hear myself styled a desertor of my Religion, because it was persecuted, even when I embraced a Religion, which was persecuted by that very church that complained of the injustice of persecution, and when she complained so, yet persecuted Catholics. 3. Therefore rejoicing and glorying in such a happy crime as inconstancy, and in so unreasonable an imputation, as forsaking truth for persecution, and neglecting such unreasonable accusers, I will as I ought, turn myself to the blessed Author of this change, and confessing unto him in the language of the same S. Augustine, (Soliloq. c. 33.) Gratias tibi ago illuminator & liberator meus, quoniam illuminasti me, & cognovi te. Serò novi te Veritas antiqua, serò novi te Veritas aeterna. i e. I give thee thanks O God my enlightener and deliverer; for thou hast enlightened me; and I have known thee. It was late before I knew thee, O Ancient Truth, it was late before I knew thee, O Eternal Truth. I will pray unto him in the words of the same S. Ambrose, (de Penit. l. 2. c. 8.) Serva, Domine, munus tuum, Custodi donum quod contulisti ettam refugienti. i e. Preserve O Lord thine own freegrace, keep that gift of thine, which thou hast been pleased to confer upon me, that even fled from thee, and was a long time unwilling to receive it. Amen. FINIS. AN APPENDIX: WHEREIN Certain misconstructions of this Book, published by some Protestants, especially by I. P. Author of the Preface, before the L. falkland's Discourse, touching Infallibility, are cleared; And likewise the grounds of that Discourse examined. CHAP. I. A brief Recapitulation of the design, and contents of the whole Book. 1. DEar Catholic Readers though this book was commanded by the unworthy Author to address itself, especially to Protestants, to whom the account therein is given; yet since not only it, but whatsoever shall be said by others to its prejudice (as it can scarce be avoided, but that writings of such a nature will find either Contradictors, or at least severe Interpreters) may perhaps fall into thy hands, and though but for novelties sake be perused by thee? I judged requisite in this re-impression to bespeak thy candour and charity both in perusing it, and whatsoever thou shalt read or hear concerning it. 2. To dispose thee therefore to exhibit (not to the author's person, but his cause, which is thine also, as thou art a Catholic) the effects of such candour and charity, thou art earnestly entreated to take into thy consideration that the Author's design was not to publish a book of Controversies, nor to venditate any particular opinion of his own in any point, now in debate between Catholics and Protestants, but to perform an act of obedience; And being in his own intention then ready to take his farewell of the world, (in conformity to the command of others,) to leave as it were a Yestamentary legacy to all Christians, therein satisfying Catholics, that his Union with them was not an effect of interest, or any sudden humour of discontent, or inconstancy, but the fruit of as much advisedness and reason as he was capable of; and tacitly inviting Protestants, if his proceedings could approve themselves to them, by his example and Method to get a view of truth, disintangled and unclouded from preconceived, unjust prejudices, and out of love to that truth and most necessary care of their own safety, in heart at least to forsake the dwelling, which they might feel begin to shake and tremble under their feet. 3. Whosoever therefore shall vouchsafe to read this Book, if he will give a right judgement of it, must let the Author's meaning be the spirit of it; and then he will look upon it and consider it, as Tabulam Votivam, in which is represented the Author's safety and happiness procured by a ship wrack, and his liberty effected by a captivity, and by suffering his hands and feet to be restrained by chains never, by God's grace, to be cast off. In a word, he will there for the time, be a witness and Auditor to one that has been persuaded simply and ingenuously to tell a homely, but most true story of the fortunes, which happened to him in a strange country, discovering by what unexpected means, and with what unseen snares, Divine Catholic Truth (Gods merciful providence so disposing it) did unawares most happily entangle, arrest and fasten him in the Catholic Church, at a time, when of all others he lest apprehended a captivity from that Coast. 4. The instruments employed by God to effect this Captivity, were especially these two. 1. The conversation of a worthy, prudent and learned friend, namely Doctor H. Holden, Doctor of the faculty of Paris. And 2. the perusal of a little book, entitled, Reigle Generale de la foy Catholic, written in French by Mons. Francois Veron, Doctor of Divinity, and Pastor of the Catholic Congregation at Charenton. These two proceeding in all points almost upon the same grounds, and in the same order, in a short time effected that Conviction in me, which many volumes of Catholic Controvertists, formerly used, and a world of Verbal disputes had in vain attempted. 5. In brief, the method and proceeding, by which these two successfully effected their charitable designs upon me, was this. I was at that time, (more than in their opinion, for they said it was in their certain knowledge) out of the Church; and according to mine own persuasion, in at least a faileable and fallible Church, a Church that could pretend to no authority over my conscience, as a Christian, but merely over my external actions and profession, as an Englishman; And withal, such a Church as in the then present circumstances was become very languishing, and in a very doubtful condition for subsistence. Herupon I became solicitous (upon an imagined supposition of her future defaillance) how to make the least imprudent choice, among all other separated Congregations and Sects, in case I should really be put upon such a necessity. 6. Being full of these thoughts, and vexed to the heart, both at myself, and all other Sectartes, that I was become so hard to be pleased, and that none of them could represent themselves to me with any qualities fit to invite me to join with them, neither could I induce myself to overlook or pardon a world of defects and deformities, which I could not but observe in each of them: In these circumstances, being obliged by many occasions and businesses to frequent the conversation of the foresaid worthy friend, than my neighbour, and not being able to conceal the agitation of my thoughts; he beforehand knowing that, whether the Church of England failed or no, I stood in absolute need of a Church for my Soul, & now perceiving that I was in quest after a treasure, in places where it was not to be found, he gave me a prospect of the Catholic Church by quite different lights, than I had ever before viewed her: For in his discourses, as likewise in the forementioned book of ●●ed upon her in her pure simp●●●● had been no kind of multiplicity of p●●● among her children; 〈…〉 as ●● conspiring in the belief 〈…〉 profession of h●●●● Doctrines 〈…〉 those Doctrines 〈…〉 to cut off 〈…〉 produced such Authors, 〈…〉 among Catholics, as with the greatest freedom from partiality on ime●●sts did interpret those Doctrines, and which imposed no greater burdens, nor straightened the paths in which she would have her children to walk, more than she intended and declared. 7. By this means I found that all the furniture, with which I had for so many years provided myself to combat against Catholics, or to defend myself from them, was taken out of my hands: I perceived that in the depth and centre of my spirit, I was really, though unknown to myself, a very Catholic, before I was a Catholic: For all the necessary declared doctrines of Catholic Religion, (as they are expressed in the language of the Church) I found I had never rejected: and as for those points, which I could not digest, and for which I had been averted from the Church, I found that they were particular dogme's either of some popular controvertists or Schoolmen, or affixed to certain Orders, and as freely renounced from the notion of necessary Catholic Doctrines by other unsuspected Catholics, as they had been by myself. 8. Hereupon that inward satisfaction of mind (which attended this discovery) love of unity and a complacence in the security of an established state of mind, made me hasten to profess myself our Lords and his Churches Captive. I was quickly weary of that former licentious freedom, which I enjoyed, to believe what I would, so I would not publicly contradict what the Laws and interests of particular S●●es and Sects among Protestants thought good to order: whereby it came to pass, that into whatsoever Church amongst them I should ●●●pen to change my residence, I was as much obliged, if not more, (supposing that I would enjoy the privileges of that Congregation) to change the outward profession of my Creed, as my habits or fashion of life. Having an immortal soul, I was glad to find an immortal faith, to enrich it with; a Faith not fashioned according to the humour and garb of Nations, Cities and Villages; a Faith, the very same in variety of States, well or ill ordered, of Monarchies or Aristocracies, or popular governments: a Faith, upon which neither the passions interests, or Tyrannies of Princes & Governors, nor the various mutations of ages had any influence: It was alone unchangeable, when nothing, besides it, was exempted from change. 9 Charity to myself obliged me to embrace this Faith: and charity to others made me, being required, not unwilling to communicate o● others the treasure I had found, and to discover the ways how I came to find it. And this I have done, God knows, imperfectly enough in this Treatise, yet in some sense perfectly, because sincerely. In which there is nothing of Doctrine, which I acknowledge to be mine, but what thou (dear Catholic Reader) wilt challenge to be thine by as good a right, it being the Common Faith of all Catholic Christians, Whatsoever there is, that seems Doctrinal besides this (excepting it may be, some expressions not warily enough couthed) belongs to particular Catholic Authors, mentioned by me, not with intention to show myself a Proselyte of their opinions, but only to declare the convenience that I reaped by them, in that I found I was not obliged to retard my assent to Catholic Doctrine, contained in essential Truths; since by their means I found a world of particular disputes cut off, and, though I was not, I found that I might without danger have been of their Opinions. CHAP. II. Grounds upon which certain passages in this book have been misunderstood by some Catholics, and those mistake cleared. 1. WHen I was employed about the first publishing of this Book, the haste of the Printer, and my thoughts then busy about a matter of much greater importance to me, than the printing or publishing of books, viz. about soliciting an admission and unchangeable abode among the French Carthusians, made me that I could not allow myself the leisure to examine what I had written, nor to qualify some phrases, which I did almost suspect, might, as it hath proved, be obnoxious to misconstruction. I forgot likewise to quote the Author's names, whose particular interpretations and opinions had been so beneficial to me, though I had no Obligation nor intention to assent to them. However this neglect of naming them, derived upon myself the censures of those, that having been taught otherwise, judged every thing to be Heterodox and unsound, that was not favoured by their particular Masters, or that was delivered in such Phrases and expressions as their ears had not been acquainted with Whereas if the Authors had appeared● either their authority would have justified what they taught, or at least I should not have been accountable for it. 2. Had it not been for these (●s the case then stood with me) not inexcusable omissions, I had doubtless avoided some ●igorous imputations and censures, which (as I have been informed) certain, questionless, well meaning Catholics have given of this inconsiderable Book. 3. God forbid I should condemn the Authors of such censures, since I am confident the ground of them was not any passion against me (a stranger to them, and only known by the happiness befallen me of being a Catholic) but a zeal to the Purity of Catholic truth. The Method of the book, and the manner of stating controversies in it, was indeed somewhat new in England, and therefore no wonder if some were startled at it. Besides, if I had had the Providence or leisure to have softend some expressions, and to have made it appear, that that latitude in Disputes, which in England will not pass so freely, yet in France and other Catholic Countries is very receiveable, they would have seen, that it was not my fault, but my fortune only to displease them. 4. In this Review of my Book, I have endeavoured to give them all the satisfaction possible, I have added the explanation of several phrases, which were before hard of Digestion, I have quoted the several Authors, whose larger Opinions I had occasionally made use of; I have protested my disengagement from particular Dogmes; Nay I have not refused to retract and cancel, what I judged fit to be retracted, and more I could not do with a good Conscience. For the general argument of the book, being a story of what was passed, it was not possible for me to alter any thing in the Narration; for God himself cannot make that which has been, not to have been: Or if I should publish myself so palpable a liar; as because some passages do displease some persons, therefore to say that such things were not such, what good or convenience would proceed from a lie? God is my witness, in matters of this nature, I despise credit: Nay more, I know not how, but I find a gust in making a Retractation, whensoever I can conceive it requisite, For I count it no virtue to write plausibly, or eloquently, or learnedly: But I esteem it a great virtue not to persist in an error, nor because I have said a thing once, therefore ever after to maintain it, for a false or vain credit's sake. If I have not given sufficient proof of this in this second Edition of my book, I do beg of every charitable Catholic Reader to suggest to me what they yet shall judge fit to be altered, and to give me convincing reasons for it, and I promise them a very cheerful readiness to content them, and not great resistance against being convinced. 5. Only this one thing I must profess to them, that it is not a convincing argument to me to hear any say, Other Controvertist's have enwrapped within their treatises many Thoologicall Doctrines beyond what Catholic Religion obliges them to, as concerning the Pope's Infallibility, etc. therefore you are obliged to follow their example. For I must needs tell them, that besides it is in itself unreasonable to spend time in disputing with Protestants upon Questions in which some Catholics will be of their side: I cannot but impute the unsuccessfulness in such disputes, and the paucity of Converts, to such a way of managing Controversies, when Catholics show what a number of Doctrines they are able to maintain more than is necessary, and more than concern Protestants to hear of. So that it is to be feared the design of such Catholic writers is not so much to seek the Conversion of Protestants, as to show their zealous adhesion to the particular Doctrines of their Order or Party. For mine own part, truly I am no tied to any peculiar Dogmes; that holy Congregation, to which by God's providence, I am inserted an unworthy Member, does not exercise that violence over spirits, subject to them, as to force a belief of any unnecessary distinctive Doctrines upon them, or a profession of doctrines, which they do not believe, or would not, if they lived any where else; Conscience and not faction or partiality is the director of our assent, and it is from the Church only, that we receive the Rule of that assent. Now enjoying this liberty, and having, I thank God, neither hopes nor fears from the world, I will not captivate my own understanding to any but God and his Church, nor my tongue or pen to any particular Schoolman or Controvertist. Now my meaning is, not hereby to imply that I condemn any of these Doctrines, but only that I desire leave, being to deal with Protestants, to be silent, and take no notice of such questions, wherein they are not concerned, but are (whilst troubled with those disputes) so much the longer detained from entering into Catholic Communion. 6. Having made this profession of my resolution to offend none, and yet withal of being subject to none, but the Church, to which only, and not any Faction in the Church, my desires and endeavours shall be to invite Protestants; and to which, if by God's blessing they adjoin themselves, they shall be equally welcome to me, to whatsoever party in it they shall range themselves: If hereafter any Catholic will not content himself with that satisfaction, which I have, and will, as far as reason and conscience will permit, give him: If he be unlearned, I must desire him to dispense with me for taking Rules from him how to manage Controversies: If he be learned, and especially if himself be employed in the Conversion of souls, than I desire him to give me leave with all respect and humility to ask him, is there any such privilege given to any Rank of English Missioners, as that souls may not be suffered to be converted, unless it be upon the grounds of Suarez, or Scotus, or Becanus, & c.? Is it lawful in France to propose the church's doctrine pure and unmixed with private opinions, and is that unlawful in England? Is the Council of Trent a suspected Rule, without such or such a Doctors interpretation? I have been informed that several persons, and I have known some that have reaped good by so despiseable a Treatise as this; God, whose power is made perfect in weakness, giving his blessing to so imperfect, but well meaning work: Can any charitable Catholic envy this, or be sorry that Protestants should be delivered by any from their errors and Schism, unless the instrument of their conversion devote himself to all your particular distinctive Tenets? Truly for my part, if, since my being a Catholic, I have entertained any particular Doctrines, though they should be never so contradictory to yours, yet since with all that difference, we remain both of us firmly united in the belief and profession of all Doctrines truly Catholic, I should willingly and cordially encourage any Protestant to believe you, and condemn me, upon condition that his esteem of you, and prejudice against me, might be an inducement to him the sooner to entertain a good opinion and liking of Catholic Religion itself. If in this Book there be mentioned any opinions in your opinion too large, yet doubtless you cannot but know, that they are publicly and uncontrollably asserted by unquestioned Catholic Authors: Or however the Quotations will now inform you so much, and direct you to their particular Treatises. And the principal of these Authors are Salmeron, Bacon, Molina, etc. learned Fathers of the Society; as likewise Salmanticensis, Monsieur Veron, Estius, etc. Out of such Authors as these I do quote many passages and opinions, accounted indeed generally of the largest allowance, but yet not condemned by any: On the contrary, their books have been in the highest manner approved. These opinions I quote, not as mine own, for I profess against espousing any in this Book; but as doctrines and interpretations, though not so generally embraced, yet universally uncondemned. Now shall these men pass untouched, who asserted, and published such opinions, and must I be traduced, as an unsound Catholic, for transcribeing them, and for only saying that they said so. 7. Experience of what is past, obliges me to prevent misconstructions for the future: for which purpose this little that hath been said, shall suffice. And now dear Catholic Reader, I once more address myself to thee, and to give thee assurance that thou mayst freely and without suspicion read this Book, the Authentical Approbations annexed to it will secure thee, and withal I protest unto thee, that in my heart I do find a great averseness from admitting any noveltyes in opinion, or any suspicious questionable dogmes: and to show myself a true son of the Catholic church. I do here with an humble clear confidence pronounce, that I do submit, not only myself, but all my writings and words, yea my very thoughts (as far as thoughts can be judged by a humane Tribunal) to the judgement of the holy Catholic Roman church, of his Holiness, the Head of the church, and of all whatsoever my Superiors therein; declaring, that if there be any thing in this or any other of my writings, which is contrary to piety, good manners, holy Scriptures, or Ecclesiastical Traditions, or to any verity whatsoever, I do heartily renounce and recall it: NON FACTUM, NON DICTUM, NON COGITATUM ESTO. CHAP. III. Misinterpretation of my book by Protestants, particularly by I. P. the Author of the Preface to my Lord falkland's Discourse of Infallibility. An answer to the Preface. Pro captu Lectoris ●abent sua fata libelli. 1. BOoks have their fates, not from the real qualities, which are, in themselves, but from the several dispositions, imaginations, and present tempers of the Readers; the eyes of some Readers do see in Books that which is invisible to others: yea what is directly contradictory to what others think they see: And from the same passages some receive a conviction of preconceived opinions, when as others become more hardened in such opinions. So certain it is, that all manner of effects and events are to be ascribed merely to the Providence of God, who if he leave us to ourselves, and do not so dispose of second causes after a supernatural manner, that his divine Truths be advantageously represented to us, even the Scripture itself, and all the divine infallible mysteries of Faith will appear error, and folly, and a scandal unto us, Light will darken us, Truth will seduce us, and happiness itself will be an occasion of our ruin. The experience that we see every day of this (me thinks) should make us even feel and acknowledge, that Faith is the pure gift of God, and by consequence that those, who rely upon the conduct of their own uncertain Reason, are almost certain to be misled by it. 2. When I wrote this Book, I did expect no other, but that it (proceeding from a very weak and imperfect judgement) should be obnoxious to contempt and censures of both Catholics and others, from whom it could not conceal many imperfections that were in it, so that I was not much surprised to hear it severely judged. But I had little suspicion, that Protestants could extract from it arguments to confirm them in their errors: yet even this has happened. And this (I confess) pierces me to the heart; charity and compassion to souls (so in love with their errors, that the confutation of them makes them more in love with, and better persuaded of them) swallows up all the anger and resentment, that nature would fain raise in me, to see my conceptions so unjustly perverted, and urges me, for the good of their souls, and not for mine own credit, to let such Chemical extractors of errors from truth see that their art has failed them. 3. I hear there have appeared several books written by Protestants, in which the Authors have taken advantage from some misunderstood passages in my EXOMOLOGESIS. Only one such book is come to my sight, or rather only a Preface to my L. falkland's discourse of Infallibility, written by a person unknown to me, but only by these two letters J. P. and an extract out of another book, which I have not seen. By answering of which Preface, as far as it touches me, I conceive grounds will be laid, upon which any other Objections made by Protestants may find and answer, if the Objectors will please to make application. 4. It will not be needful to transcribe the whole Preface at large here, but I shall set down very faithfully and candidly the substance of it in several particulars in order, and adjoin unto them as distinct and satisfactory an Answer, as I can at the present, considering the great disorders of Paris, where this is written, and my unprovidedness of Papers and Books. And that being done (if I be permitted) I will take that boldness, which my most dear Lord, the Author of the following Discourse of Infallibility, would (if he were living, I am sure) have given me, to show the invalidity of it against Catholic Doctrine. 5. As for the Preface of J. P. in which he reflects upon the most deserved praises of that noble Lord, excellently represented in the precedent Dedication. I acknowledge myself [I cannot say his convert: for many years before him I was a witness of the merits, that might challenge them, but] one that does entirely agree with him in that point; And if my most worthily loved and honoured Friend, M. Triplet, the Author of the Dedication, will only give me leave to except out of the several heads of his praises, this one, of having (as he thinks) efficaciously and meritoriously written against the Catholic Church (and woe is me for my dearest Lords sake, that this must needs be excepted) I would willingly subscribe my name under his: he knows I have enjoyed an equal happiness with him, to be a witness of all those his admirable qualities. He knows, that though with less deserts, yet with (perhaps) equal good fortune, I have had my share in that unparallelled friendship of his; the memory of which is the pleasing est image that the world has left in my mind, since I made a resolution to quit the world. Indeed it is an image too pleasant to be looked upon, considering my present condition and profession; were it not that it can never offer itself but accompanied with a most piercing compassion, that those stupendious excellencies and abilities were not crowned with Catholic Belief; yea, which is most miserable, were employed against it. In one thing I must needs yield to M. Triplet, which is, that I cannot pretend to the ability to erect so beautiful a monument to the memory of that honoured Lord, nor with so delicate a touch draw his picture, as he has done in his Dedication, for which expression both of his gratitude and skill, I think myself obliged to pay him my most humble thanks: And I will take the permission with him to recommend to the imitation of my Lord, his now only Son, all those admirable qualities of his deceased Father, only beseeching him, that he would not (and beseeching God, that, neither he nor any of his friends may) account among such qualities, the writing of such Discourses against Catholic truth, which occasioned the publishing of an Elegy of him equally very artificial and very natural. 6. Thus much of the Preface therefore being acknowledged to be unanswerable, the design of all that follows is. 1. To show that the doctrine of the church's Infallibility is of all others most general and comprehensive, and which, if it could be demonstrated, would immediately decide all other controversies. 2. That therefore none can seriously think Protestants so unreasonable, but that if they were persuaded of the truth of this, they would presently submit, and leave all disputing. 3. But yet since it seems evident to them, that some Decisions of the Church are contradictory to the Scriptures, which Catholics propound as infallibly true; Therefore it is necessary, that Infallibility ought to be demonstrated at least to a higher degree of evidence than they have of the contradiction of the Church's Decisions to the infallible Rule of God's Word. 4. That no such demonstration hath been made by Catholics, the great Defenders of the Church of England have very excellently and fully demonstrated. 5. And this with such success, that the very name of Infallibility begins to be burdensome even to the maintainers of it, in so much that one of their latest and ablest Proselytes, Hugh Paulin de Cressy, (as the author styles him) which is a title that the same Serenus Cressy, (for that is henceforth his name assumed in Religion) utterly renounces & is most certain the Author can never justify against such a world of much more able Proselytes) hath acknowledged the same word Infallibility to be an unfortunate word, and too advantageous to Protestants, and therefore fit to be forgotten, and laid by. Whereupon the Author gives scope to a fit of triumphing at the strength of reason and power of truth, that a Catholic is forced or renounce so fundamental a doctrine, which yet notwithstanding is not found in any Council, etc. 6. Now lest it should be thought to be only the word (Infallibility,) but not the notion of it intended by Catholics, and understood by Protestants, that is deserted by Mr. Cressy, the Author says, that Protestants never impugned it by Nominal Arguments, producing a passage out of Bellarmine to justify the acknowledged sense of that word. 7. Hereupon the Author imputes to Mr. Cressy unreasonableness in answering Arguments made against that which himself confesses cannot be maintained. 8. And yet greater unreasonableness in the manner of his answer, because deserting Infallibility, he answers only for the authority of the Church, and so makes this authority answer for that Infallibility. From this last he draws three consequent absurdities (which shall be set down when their place comes to be answered) 9 Hereupon he profesles that, having considered the inconsiderableness of M. Cressy's whole discourse, he changed his resolution to answer it, as judging it not to deserve an answer. 10. And lastly he concludes the invincibleness of my L. falkland's discourse of Infallibility 7. This is the mind and whole importance of the Preface, which, whether rational or no, shall be examined; but it is confessed to be orderly enough, and therefore shall be endeavoured to be answered according to its order, and the Paragraphs and divisions made by me, not himself. CHAP. IU. An Answer to the four first Paragraphs of the Preface. 1. THat which the Author of the Preface says in his first Paragraph (viz. That the Doctrine of the churhes Infallibility is of all other most general and comprehensive, and which, if it could be demonstrated, would immediately decide all other controversies) is so conformable to evident reason, that it cannot be denied. And that which reason requires of me to acknowledge in the first Paragraph, charity would invite me to grant universally in the second. [viz. That if Protestants were persuaded of the truth of this, they would presently submit, and leave all disputing.] Were it not that I. P. himself discourages me. I doubt not but both himself and many others, (if they were absolutely convinced of the church's Infallibility) would not wilfully detain the truth in unrighteousness, by continuing in an obstinate, and then an acknowledged disobedience to the church. But they behave themselves in the search of the truth, as if they were afraid to find it. They come with extreme prejudice and partiality to the examination of the controversy, and if they can find but any small advantage against any passage in Catholic writers, though the church's doctrine be not at all concerned in it, they presently give the cause decided according to their own minds and interests, which partiality of theirs seems much more intense, and withal heightened with f●● greater Passion, since the downfall of their Church then ever it was before for indignation to see the extreme weakness of their cause, imbitters them much more in their disputes against Catholics, and increases their obstinacy against the authority of God's church, as if they would be revenged against God for giving such an advantage to his Church. Proofs of this (given by too many others) will appear in the whole contexture of this Preface, as I shall demonstrate. 2. Thirdly, J. P. says, That since it seems evident to them, that some decisions of the Church are contradictory to the Word of God, which Catholics propound as infallibly true; Therefore it is necessary that Infallibility ought to be demonstrated at least to a higher degree of evidence, than they have of the contradiction of the Church's decision to the infallible Rule of the Scriptures. Truly this is not altogether unreasonable, therefore to give him satisfaction, I will fix a good while upon this point, though I shall be forced to say over somewhat said already. Therefore according to the grounds of the precedent Book, I will endeavour to clear the controversy of Infallibility, as it is there handled, from the mistakes of J. P. and to effect this more prosperously, I will peruse this supposition. 3. Let it be supposed, that the Church of England did pretend to an Infallibility, or if you will, to an authority of obliging all Christians under pain of Damnation to submit to her Decisions. This being supposed, and that I, desirous to inquire into the grounds of this pretention, should betake myself to a meeting of several learned Protestants, and say to them, since it is so necessary that all Christians should receive information in Christian Doctrine from you, Pray let me know where I shall find it. This request would presently raise a murmur amongst them, and there is only one answer in which they would all agree, which is this; That that only is to be accounted the doctrine of the Church of England, which has been determined by the authority of the English Bishops, ratified by the secular head of the Church, the King, yet with the advice of the Parliament, and embraced by all the children and Subjects of the English Church. But when they would descend more particularly to signify the special repositories of this Doctrine, there would be great variety of answers; For the most moderate of them would say confidently, it is all to be found comprised sufficiently in the little Catechism made for Infants, others would add the Common-Prayer book, others the book of Homilies, others would yet thrust in the book of Ordination, others the 39 Articles and Canons; others besides would have the four first General Counsels not to be forgotten; and lastly, some few of those, who are pure Protestants indeed, would say, the whole Canon Law, in as much as concerns doctrine especially, and as far as it is not revoked by Acts of Parliament: All this, with all that went before, is the entire Rule of English-Catholique Doctrine. And all those for their several answers would produce English Fathers and Doctors, whose books have been received and approved without contradiction in the Church of England. 4. To save the blushing of an English Protestant, I would not suffer Mr. Chillingworth, nor my Lord Falkland to put in their votes; for they would have renounced all these, and protested, that neither the Catechism, nor Common-prayer-Book, nor Homilies, etc. nor all these together, contain that doctrine of the Church of England, to which all are obliged to submit, but only the Bible, the Bible, and nothing but the Bible, and this not interpreted by any Bishop or Synod of Divines, but by every good man's reason, let him shift as he can: An answer, which it admitted, not only totally destroys the spiritual Jurisdiction of the English Clergy, but all authority whatsoever, even of the civil Magistrate, in matters of Religion; yet to show the great impartiality of English Protestants towards Catholic Faith, because they fancied, that by such a position Catholics might receive some damage, they not only admitted this position of M. Chillingworths, and saw it approved by their Doctor of the Chair, but triumphed in it, as the great Masterpiece of the wit of this Age; whereas if they had but half an eye open, they might have seen in it the inevitable ruin of their whole Fabric, So that J. P. did not well consider what poor service he has done, and what small refreshment he has given, or rather what a dishonourable Epitaph he has fixed upon the monument of his deceased Church, by giving his Testimony of applause to this Treatise of my Lo. falkland's, as one of the great Defenders of the Doctrine of the English Church, which is more ruinous to it, than all the spiteful writings and plots of Cartwright, Knox, Henderson, or all the rabble o● Geneva joined with them. But to return. 5. A Supposition being made of the foresaid answer, and it being granted, that all these answers have been published, or without contradiction or censure admitted in the church of England, should not that man be very negligent of his souls good; that being to examine the truth of its doctrine, should trouble himself any further than with the little Catechism of half a sheet of paper, as plainly and as simply written as is possible, as if the children that are to learn it, had composed it; since all say, it is at least part of the Rule of the English Faith, and some, without censure of others, say it is all; what a while must the poor man's soul be held in suspense, if he were to stay till he had searched into the Common-prayer-Book, Homilies, Canons, Acts of Parliament, Proclamations of the King, Ancient Counsels, Canon-Law, etc. his soul perhaps might be disposed by death, God knows where, before he had examined the hundredth part of what was necessary. 6. Now to apply this to the present subject, it is agreed by all Catholics, that the church is an infallible witness and guide; & Protestants profess, that if this could be made evidently appear, they would hold out in no controversy at all, for they would never dispute perpetually with them, whom only to hear, were to be satisfied; this therefore is to be made evident unto Protestants; yea, more evident than that any particular decisions of the Church do seem to them evidently contradictory to Scripture: This is the task of Catholics, especially Catholic Missionaries. Now, though when it is said, The Church is infallible, This be commonly understood of all the whole Church in general; yet, when we say, She is an infallible Guide; it is most ordinarily understood of the Church, speaking by some authorised person or persons, representing the whole body. 7. About this Representative there is diversity of opinions among Catholics: some say the Pope alone does sufficiently represent the Church, as a Guide infallible; Others, a General Council, though without the Pope; Others, a General Council convoked, presided in, and confirmed by the Pope; Annal. fidei, nu. 111. Systema fidei, ca 22. This was likewise the opinion of Gerson. And lastly others (as learned Fa: Bacon acknowledges) add further this condition, that the decision of such a Council be accepted and submitted to by the whole Church: All that hold any of these opinions, are universally esteemed good Catholics, and I would to God all Protestants had so much humility, as to subdue their own private Reason to the largest of them; and for Catholics, this I may confidently say, That they, who without betraying the Truth, make the way to the Church easiest and plainest, have most charity and Faith enough; the others may have more Faith, I would they had more Charity too. Truly, to my understanding there is some inhumanity in urging Protestants to more than Catholics will be obliged to: or to think that to Protestants prepossessed with passion and partiality, that can be made evident, which is so far from being evident to some Catholics, that they renounce it. Since all changes therefore proceed by degrees, in the name of God let it not be expected from Protestants, that they should with one leap mount to the utmost verge and extent of all Doctrines, held by Catholics? That they should at one gulp swallow both all Catholic Doctrines, and all Theological Dogmes. Be it granted therefore that it is true, that the Pope is infallible: I will believe it, as a Theological truth, but since neither the Church nor the Pope himself has told us so, I cannot, if I would, believe it, as a Catholic Doctrine: what therefore have I to do to dispute of it to Protestants, whom my duty is only to persuade to the belief of the Church's Doctrine? What pity is it that they must be delayed, and as it were kept out of the Church, till all objections that they can make, and be furnished even from Catholics themselves to make against this position, be answered, or all advantages that they can advise against any Bulls or Decretals be cleared to their satisfaction. 8. Therefore I being engaged to make good to I. P. That the Church (speaking by a Representative is an infallible Guide) would fain choose that Representative, which is qualified with all the conditions allowed by any uncensured Catholics, to make it most easy and most acceptable to Protestants, which is a general Council Confirmed, etc. by the Pope and accepted by the Church. But yet I will abstract from this last clause of being accepted by the Church, (though there is not any one point of controversy in debate between us and them, for which we have not all this authority) as being proved ex superabundanti in what I shall say hereafter. 9 That therefore which I undertake to make evident to I. P. is, That the Church speaking by a general Council, confirmed by the Pope, is an infallible Guide, (and that with greater evidence, than he can bring for any contradiction pretended betwixt any decision of such a Council, and the Scripture; yea, with more evidence than he can produce for the Scripture itself, which he owns for his Guide.) which truly to an impartial hearer is no difficult matter, even going upon his own grounds: For if I should ask I. P. Why do you acknowledge the Scripture to be an infallible Rule, as far as it is a Rule? He would answer me; Because it is delivered unto us, as such, by an infallible Catholic Tradition: for if he talks of any other proof, as a private spirit, or natural reason, it will be ridiculous; He may as well say he can judge and demonstrate it to be such by smelling with his nose. If I should further ask him, how it appears evident to him, that the Scriptures have been delivered by an infa●ible Catholic Tradition? He could not deny, but that many Heretics have denied many books of Scripture; yea, that there is not any one book in the Old or New Testament, but has been renounced by some Heretics and their followers: yet because some Counsels have decided, and Fathers witnessed, and the Catholic Church in all ages since have received them as such; therefore it is evident, that they have been delivered by the Church by Catholic Tradition. And this is most rational and convincing. Upon these grounds therefore I proceed; and ask any discreet indifferent man, Whether an authority that shall after this manner propose any doctrine, This we have received from Christ and his Apostles, that such and such a doctrine proposed, is a divine infallible truth; and we command all Christians whatsoever, under the pain of anathema and eternal damnation, to believe it for such: whether I say, such an authority does not assume to itself the office of a Guide, and of an infallible Guide? Certainly, he that should speak in this stile, and yet have a guilt, or be in a possibility of seducing, were the most impious abhorred tyrant in the world. What an attentat, an usurpation upon God's Sceptre and Throne would this be, if God had not derived this authority upon the Church represented in a Council? What a cruelty to souls? What a blaspheming of the Holy-Ghost? Now that this hath been the stile of all General Counsels is evident: and that Counsels speaking in that stile, have been submitted to by the Fathers and accepted by the Church with all veneration, as the Oracles of God, is equally apparent: nay, I do not know that ever any Heretic (before these days) did expressly contradict this in the Thesis; though in Hypothesi they have renounced such particular Counsels as themselves were Anathematised by. Therefore not only all Counsels, but every Decision of every Council to which an Anathema is annexed, decides this question, and proclaims to all the ends of the world this truth, That the Church speaking in General approved Counsels, is an infallible Guide to all Christians. Against this not a passage or word in any Father can be produced, but infinite passages for it: Hence it is that the Fathers unanimously profess; That out of the Church there is no possible salvation, because there is no Guide to Heaven but in the Church. If therefore it be a proof evident enough to I. P. of an universal infallible tradition of Scripture, that one or two not General Counsels, did with some variety set down the number and names of the books, and that generally speaking, the Fathers have amongst them given attestation to them, some to some books, and some to others, few to all; and that the Church in after ages hath universally accepted them, as such; How short comes that tradition of this, concerning the infallible Guidance of the Church, that is virtually decided in all Counsels, and every decision of all attested by all Fathers, not one in one passage contradicting or condemning that stile; but unanimously in all ages since Counsels were accepted by the Church, approved and submitted to: how opposite is this truth to the main design of his following discourse, which attempts to prove, that there is in the Church no infallible Guide at all? And how contradictory to that Article of his Church, concerning not only the fallibility, but actual erring of Counsels? And again, how conformable is this way of proceeding to the authority given upon Record, in Scripture by our blessed Saviour to his Church? I say to his Church; for the Fathers assembled in Council speak not thus in their own persons, nor as so many learned men, but in the person of the whole Church, which they represent, and do no more but subsume particulars under that General Anathema, pronounced by our blessed Saviour, when he said, If he refuse to here the Church, let him be unto thee, as a Heathen and a Publican. 11. I conjure therefore I. P. and all his and my friends, that he and they would produce, or at least set before their own eyes those Decisions of Counsels, which seem to them evidently false, because clearly contradictory to Scripture, and compare his evidence of a seeming contradiction, with this evidence, that it is impossible there should be such a contradiction; and if they do this with a serious mind, and desire to find the truth, that they may embrace it, and with hearts lifted up to God, to free them from all respects of the world, and to enlighten their souls with the love of his truth, then perhaps they may see that, which as yet it seems is invisible to them; it is most certain, there is not one express formal text of Scripture contradictory to any Catholic Doctrine; this they confess themselves. And indeed, even abstracting from the promises made by Christ to his Church, it is morally impossible, that so many wise and virtuous men, should with the one hand give the Scripture, as God's word, and with the other present Doctrines expressly and directly contradictory to it, and none be able to observe the contradiction, though their daily study was to meditate upon, and interpret the Scripture. Now whether any consequence from obscure texts can be more forcible, then that which I have named from the stile of General Counsels, I leave not to their wits, but consciences to judge. 12. Matters therefore being impartially weighed, that triumphing Epiphonema of his, in the fourth and fifth Sections vanishes; in which himself with admiration exposeth to the admiration of others, those great conquering defenders of the doctrine of the (late) Church of England, that with such excellent conduct and valour, and such admirable success have combated and defeated this our Darling, Infallibility: he did ill, and even enviously to their glory, that he did not name those worthies; for my part, besides the noble Author of the following Discourse, (whom certainly he means for one) and by consequence Mr. Chillingworth, I cannot remember that ever I heard any great Elogium in this respect given to any English writer: Yet it may be he might have an eye upon the last Archbishop of Canterbury, and his late enlarged Dialogue: which if he did, than I conjure I. P. that he would once more peruse the said Archbishop's Discourse, and single from it whatsoever is impertinent to the main essential controversy; that is, whatsoever touches particular debates of Catholics, about the Pope's infallibility, and the exceptions that may be found against certain Counsels, as likewise about the several qualities and conditions required to an acknowledged obliging Council (all which things are nothing to the purpose.) And lastly, that laying aside all these unnecessary velitations, he would apply the Archbishops most efficatious arguments to an Ecumenical confirmed Council (especially if he will add the condition too of being actually received by the Church) and my life for his, he will see reason to acknowledge, that all that discourse is of no force at all against the Church, yea, that the Archbishop himself never intended it should. However the Calvinists, or fantastical private Spiritists, or exalters of humane reason, might deal against the universal authority of God's Church: the Prelates of England were too wise to judge, that people would be so blind, as to think any obedience could be due out of conscience to a National Church, begun and continued upon secular and indeed unlawful interests, if that Church should build its authority upon a profession of renouncing all authority. And therefore, though they were very earnest in the controversy about Ecclesiastical Authority, when they were to write or proceed juridically against Presbyterians or Separatists, yet they loved not to talk of it against the Catholic Church: yea, it was from the Catholic Church only, that they borrowed their Arguments against their Schismatics; as may in a good measure appear in the printed Reasons of the University of Oxford against the Covenant, Negative Oath, and Ordinances concerning Discipline and Worship, approved by general consent in a full Convocation, June 1. 1647,) and it was under the shadow of their pretence to be still a member of the Catholic Church, and to have received their Authority and Succession from it, that they obliged good easy Protestants to continue their subjects. But this is but a guess that I. P. in this passage reflected upon the late Archbishop, or any other English Prelatical Writer. 13. Certain it is he must intend my Lord Falkland, as one of the great Defenders of the Doctrine of the Church of England, since he speaks this in his Preface to his Discourse of Infallibility, and with an evident design thereby to recommend both the Author and his work. This being so, I. P. will give me leave to use his own words. O the strength of Reason rightly managed! O the power of Truth clearly declared! Yea, O the force of a guilty conscience! For what else but the irresistible power of truth, and evidence of reason, and acknowledgement of guilt, could move him so publicly to condemn his own Church, and to confess its ●surpation impossible to be justified? Behold (O Protestant's) how your Church is defended! here is a discourse that undertakes to demonstrate, (and if you will believe, your brother I. P. has admirably, and unanswerably performed it) that upon earth there neither is, nor ever was any Guide, that could oblige any other to follow his direction; and that every man's conscience is to be guided by his own single natural Reason, choosing that Faith which is most agreeable to Nature, and holding it only so long as Nature likes it, and then changing it for another: In fine, a Discourse that gives you leave, yea, almost invites you, to return to the Religion of the old Philosophers, those Epoptes and Priests of Nature. If there be any force in this your Defenders discourse, what becomes of your Articles and Canons, your Synods and Convocations, your Infallible Acts of Parliament, and Proclamations? It is evident he might as well, yea more reasonably, have said, That the Council of Trent is a great defender of the Church of England, for that indeed justifies Ecclesiastical Authority; whereas this discourse directly and purposely, and universally destroys it: But the meaning, or that which should be the meaning of I. P. is this, That the Authority of the Church of England is impossible to be maintained: for if (as the Catholic Church avows) there be in the Church by Christ's appointment, any Authority Ecclesiastical, obliging in conscience; it is certain it is not inherent in the Church of England, that began but yesterday (and is not now at all) and when it began, it began by the renouncing of all visible authority. Again, if as this discourse pretends, there be no obliging authority (that is, no infallible one; for surely none can be obliged to an authority, that confesses itself questionable) then both the Catholic Church and the Church of England are mere names, and verbal sounds, that signify nothing. This is so evident, that it is pity to insist longer upon the persecuting of good I. P. that here publishes his conviction and confession, and must either tear out this Preface before such a discourse, or abjure his Church of England, if ever it appear again. 14. By what hath been said it is apparent, that the doctrine of the Infallibility of the Church, speaking by a lawful Ecumenical Council, is delivered by as full a Tradition, as it is possible for a doctrine to be delivered. And therefore Protestants are inexcusable and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 since, receiving such special Books of Scripture upon no other grounds, but Tradition, they yet renounce the Church's authority, which is more universally and authoritatively delivered and confirmed. The same Truth is unanswerably, grounded upon what hath formerly been proved in this Book, viz. That it is impossible, that that which any one àge agrees in, as Tradition, should not be so, because that would argue, that some former wh●le Age hath agreed to deceive their posterity. Ob. 15. But perhaps I. P. or his friends will say, That though what hath been asserted may be effectual to demonstrate the Infallible Authority of the universal Church, yet not so to demonstrate, that the Roman is that Infallible Catholic Church, since the Greeks may put in their plea, at least to be a very considerable part. That they are not unwilling to submit to the Universal Church, though she should condemn them: For though the importunate restless malice of some Calvinistical spirits among them hath procured some uncivil, and indeed unchristian Clauses to be put into the English Articles, derogating from the Authority of General Counsels; yet the true English Protestant hath always been ready to protest submission to the Universal Church. But they are not satisfied, that they owe that submission to the Roman; and if not to the Roman, they know not to what Church. Sol. 16. To say something for the clearing this difficulty, I shall desire them to consider, 1. That whilst the Eastern and Western Churches were joined in one External communion, it is apparent that that Body was the Catholic Church, to which the Promises of Christ were made, and to which Protestants themselves would not have refused submission. 2. That a breach happening between these Churches, is not mortal to the whole Body, but only to that Member that did unlawfully separate. 3. By consequence, that both the Title and real Authority of the Catholic Church remains in the innocent Part, that is, either in the Roman or Eastern Church. 4. That whethersoever of these two be the Catholic Church, English Protestant's are Schismatics, since they are divided from both, and the pretended grounds of their Divisions are Doctrines received by them both. 5. That in case English Protestant's would now take into debate, to whether of these two parties they should re-adjoyn themselves, by that means to become Catholics again, they must be forced to quit both a greater number of their Topical Doctrines, and more fundamental ones, to fit themselves to an union with the Eastern, then with the Roman Church. 6. That if they will needs out of Passion prefer the Eastern, their Passion will be evident, since that whensoever either remorse of conscience, or the approaches of death made them see their unsafe condition, thousands of them have fled to the Roman Church for shelter, but never any to the Grecian, or any other, but the Roman. 7. That as long as they are out of the Roman Church, they are in a headless trunk, divided from the successor of St. Pèter, whom St. Cyprian, St. Hierome, Optatus, etc. acknowledged to be the foundation of Unity, Order, etc. Ob. 17. Now if among Protestants, any out of a perverse condescendence shall grant that the grounds alleged for the separation of the Eastern & Western Churches, are not in themselves of such main importance, as to hinder them from being really one Catholic Church: And therefore that before the present controversies can be decided, a general Assembly of them all must be expected. Sol. 18. to this they must give me leave to say. 1. That they make the Promises of Christ to be casual, temporary and obnoxious to critical days and seasons, if they think, that the changes of Kingdoms, or that the humours of an earthly Tyrant can either evacuate or suspend the force of those promises by which our Lord hath obliged himself to provide, that the Gates of Hell, that is, heresies, shall not prevail against his Church; The effect of which promise, in the opinion of such Objectors must be delayed, till the Grand Signior will allow the Grecian Bishops to meet with the Western, to consult of, and procure the peace and union of Christendom. 2. In case they should be permitted to meet, Protestants may without the spirit of prophecy foretell their own most solemn condemnation: For since both the Eastern and Western Churches do already agree in most doctrines renounced by Protestants. [viz. Transubstantiation, Adoration of the blessed Sacrament, Prayer for the Dead, and by consequence a Purgatory (in which souls are capable of refreshment by such Prayers) Veneration of Images, Relics, etc. Invocation of Saints, Indulgences, Merit of good works, etc.] In which Doctrines they do agree as acknowledging them to be Traditionary: It is impossible they should ever be persuaded to revoke any of them, being met in an Assembly, unless they will renounce all order and manner of proceeding in former General Counsels; which is not according to the Method of Protestants. Viz. Endlessly to dispute every controverted Point by Texts of Scripture, but to judge of the Truth of Points, and the sense of Scripture by Traditien? In such Assemblies therefore Bishops will ask one another, Have your Fathers delivered to you, that Bread, after consecration, becomes the Body of Christ? That this body in the Sacrament is to be adored? That we ought to pray for Souls departed in the Faith of Christ, & c.? If so, Servetur quod traditum est. Now it being apparent, that at the present all agree, that such Doctrines both in the East and West have been delivered by Tradition; and that their meeting together in a Council will not help to make a contrary Tradition possible: It will follow, that whether divided or united, whether alone, or in Assembly, they are, and ever will be at least so far united, as to join in the condemnation of Protestants. CHAP. V. An Answer to the Remainder of the Preface. 1. THe rest of the Preface of I. P. touches myself only, and pretends to show what success the writings of those great Defenders of the Church of England have had against me in particular, forcing me to confess, That Infallibility is an unfortunate word: That Mr. Chillingworth hath combated it with too great success; so that I would wish the word were forgotten, or at least laid by, etc. Now since the Church is not at all concerned in this, but myself only, who am charged with writing an incongruous impertinent Book, a Book that deserves no answer, but answers itself, since it maintains that which its Adversary did not combat, etc. Truly, were it not for I. P. and his friend's sake more than mine own, I would not answer for myself: But since I perceive, that the word Infallibility is as unfortunate a word to them as it was to me, I will endeavour to take order that it shall be so no more. 2. First therefore I say with Mr. Veron, that the word Infallibility has been found out by the Schools, that love to find out as short ways to express their notions, as possibly can be. And the world finds very great convenience by it: Therefore with reference to the Church, Schoolmen, and from them Controvertists, (desirous to express the great veracity of the Church, considered as a Judge, or witness of Divine Truths, deposed by God with her, and withal the utmost obligation, that all Christians have to believe truths so determined and witnessed by her) found out this single word Infallibility, to express both these by: But yet the Church herself hath not as yet assumed or borrowed this word in any of her Decisions from the Schools: and therefore being none of the Church's word, we are not obliged to make her to speak it: and the truth is, though it comprehends all that they intent by it; yet it is no adequate measure of those conceptions, because Infallibility may comprehend a great deal more; for truth and our obligation to believe it, is yet in a higher degree in Scripture, then in the Decisions of the Church, as Bellarmine acknowledges; For the Scripture in all points, both of Doctrine and Story, and all circumstances is infallibly true: not so the Decisions of the Church, in which the simple conclusion decided, is only accounted infallibly true; not so the principles upon which it depends, or reasons by which it is proved, and much less are orders made by Counsels, which depend upon information; yet notwithstanding we cannot find a more energetical word to express the unquestionable, and unappealable authority of the Church, than Infallibility. We may proceed further, and say, that Divine truths, revealed internally after a supernatural manner to the Prophets, Apostles, etc. and by intellectual images, are yet more infallible, than the same truths revealed by words; because words being but the Images of Images, are further removed from that prime Exemplar of truth, which is God; and besides are in themselves unavoidably ambiguous, and so do not convey truth so infallibly, as Internal illustrations, yet what can we say more of these, then that they are Infallible? Lastly, there is no Image so perfect, but in as much as it is an Image, it comes short of the Exemplar, which is truth itself, that is God; and by consequence differs from it: yet the supremest title that we can give to God himself, in this regard, is Infallibility. But to instance more familiar examples of the several degrees of Infallibility, I am infallibly assured, that I cannot repeat all the words I have spoken this last year; and yet I am more infallibly assured, that I cannot say over again, all I have spoken in my whole life. I am infallibly assured, that if I threw a thousand dice, they will not be all six; and yet I am more infallibly assured, that the same cast upon so many dice cannot be a thousand times successively repeated: Of all these impossibilities I have several degrees of assurance, and every degree in a certain sense infallible, but in a severe acception of that word, the very highest is not rigorously infallible, because none of the cases alleged are absolutely impossible, if we speak of the highest degree of impossibility; for such imply a flat contradiction, as that a part should be equal to its whole, or any thing be and not be at once, a kind of certainty that is appliable even to very few Demonstrations: we are not so sure that the light of the Moon is borrowed from the Sun, or her Eclipse by the interposition of the Earth, yet these are reckoned amongst demonstrations in Astronomy, and no man in his wits ever doubted of either. Methinks, if God have furnished his divine and supernatural truth, with evidence equal to this, that the Sun will shine to morrow, or that there will be a spring and harvest next year, we are infinitely obliged to bless his providence, and justly condemned, if we refuse to believe the least of such truths, as showing less affection to save our souls, than the dull Plowmen to sow their corn, who certainly, have far less evidence for their harvest, than Catholics for their faith, they insist not peevishly upon every capricious objection, nor exact an infallible security of a plentiful reaping next Summer, but notwithstanding all difficulties and contingencies proceed cheerfully in their painful husbandry; and here I shall beg leave to ask the Reader this serious question, supposing (not granting) that the greatest assurance the Church can give, (abstracting from the promises of Christ) be of no higher infallibility, than the lowest degree we have mentioned: would you venture your soul, that a thousand dice, being thrown out of a box would come forth all six? Do you not see by this argument, that it is a thousand to one the Catholic is in the right, and consequently a thousand to one the Protestant is in the wrong, and this will necessarily follow; for in Religion we cannot stand by and look on, but we must absolutely engage on one side, and therefore it is a desperate shift of such Protestants, as think, that because they see not a clear demonstration of the Church's Infallibility in the severest importance of that word, they may therefore safely continue in their schism, unless they be hardy enough to venture their souls in a way, where it is at least a thousand to one they lose them. So that, though humane wit should by captious objections seem to trouble the clearness of the Infallibility of the Catholic Church (which is in itself really impossible to be endangered) yet are the motives of adherence to that Communion, so highly credible (even in a rational & natural consideration) that it were an absolute madness, to prefer any other separated Church or Congregation, which cannot pretend to the least credibility to support it. 3. These things being thus premised, since there are so many degrees of truth, or veracity and Infallibility, and yet the same word Infallibility applied to them all, it may be very reasonable, that great Caution should be used in the application of it, that is, that it should be expressed in what sense and degree the word is taken before it be urged or disputed upon So that if it be advanced to a more sublime degree than the matter requires, no wonder if there be misunderstanding between Disputants, and not only a prolonging of Disputations, but also an impossibility of ending them: Now whether it is the fault of Catholic Controvertists for want of explication and clearing of the sense of this word Infallibility, that hath given an advantage to Protestants, I examine not; but sure I am Protestants have taken advantage from the ambiguousness of this word Infallibility, to embroile the controversy of the Church's authority, and to spin it out endlessly: insomuch, as there is not one Author of them I ever met with, that (treating of this controversy) disputes to the point, or so much as aims to combat against the Church's Authority, but against an image of Infallibility, created only by their own fancies. 4. For proof of this, (to omit the ordinary Polemical writings of Protestants, who waste paper and time only in combating particular unnecessary points controverted by Catholics themselves) I shall desire any ingenuous Protestant to examine the proceedings of Mr. Chillingworth, and even my noble Lord too, in this little Treatise, and he will acknowledge what I say to be true; yet certainly no English writers ever professed to come closer to the point, than they. 5. First for Mr. Chillingworth, what a brand ● shing and flourishing doth he keep with his pen, and what a great proportion of his book is spent in Discourses, by which he would pretend to enervate the Church's Infallibility, which do not so much as approach towards it? For suppose a Pope were Simoniacally elected, or a Bishop unlawfully consecrated, or a Priest not baptised, or that any of these had a perverse intention in administering the Sacraments, would the Church for all this fail in being an Infallible Guide? or would all Christians be turned out of their way to salvation? Did not, or might not he easily have been informed, that excepting in Infants, even Baptism itself, and much less any other Sacrament unlawfully and invalidly administered, do not to such a degree prejudice the persons, but that the Votum Baptismi will suffice them? And Simony does not wipe out the Character, though the Church in detestation of that crime does in validate the Pope's acts, and destiny him, when the crime is proved, to a Deposition. And as for my Lord Falkland, upon what a mistaken notion of Infallibility he proceeds in this discourse, let the 27th. and 28th. Paragraphs of that Treatise (according to a more exact impression, 1646) witness, where enveighing against Catholics for putting Heretics to death; and preventing a Recrimination, for Calvin's burning of Servetus. And the Church of England executing Catholic Priests: He concludes that passage with these words. The Church of England, confessing she may err, is not so chargeable with any fault, as those which pretend they cannot, and so will be sure never to mend it: And besides, I will be bound to defend no more than I have undertaken; which is to give reason, why the Church of Rome is not Infallible. Whereby his Lordship shows clearly, that in his opinion, an argument from any, supposed, erroneous opinion, or faulty practice in the Church, was of force to disprove the Church's Infallibility, although such an error or ill practice was never authorised by any decision of a General Council, nor universally spread through the whole Church, as this example, mentioned by him, apparently never was. 6. It was from the like disapprehension that myself formerly had of the notion of Infallibility, and misapplication of it to points controverted by Catholics, in which the Church itself is entirely untouched, that I conceived Mr. Chillingworth's book unanswerable, and by consequence was so long kept at a distance, and disheartened from so much as taking into debate, whether the Catholic Church was to be considered by me, when I was in quest of a new one; had I not reason then to say, that the word Infallibility was (not as I. P. quotes me simply, an unfortunate word, but) to me an unfortunate word: not for any fault that was in the word itself, but for my misinformation and mistake of the true sense and inportance of the word? and was it a betraying of the cause or a confession of guilt, when I said, that Mr. Chillingworth had combated against that word with too great success? Success, I mean, not against the Church, but against his own soul, and the souls of his fellow-English-Protestants, (if I may lawfully call them his fellows) who conspiring with him in the mistake of the word, were, and are, God knows, with him frighted from the Church, which is placed out of the reach of all the shot and noise that he makes against it. It was therefore not without cause that I wished that the word might be forgotten, or at least laid by, that is, as long as Protestants do, and will persist in a wilful mistaking of its sense and notion. And that this was my meaning, and no thought of finding fault with the word Infallibility itself, which I acknowledged to be as fit a word to express the Authority of the Church by, as could be found in one single term, does evidently appear in many passages of my book: and therefore, notwithstanding that wish of mine, and seeming advice to others; yet I myself unawares in all this discourse till I came to this point, made use of the same word, but it was with a resolution to say, what I have now said, to prevent any more mistaking of it. I. P. therefore, if he well consider it, will find little ground to please himself with those other words of mine, That Protestants have indeed very much to say for themselves, when they are pressed unnecessarily with it; and therefore I desired that they might never be invited to combat the Church under that Notion. It was pure pity to them that I said thus, and not the least apprehension for Catholics. They have indeed much to say for themselves, when they are pressed unnecessarily with it, and the occasions of their mistaking it not taken away; for they will run into endless disputes, and such disputes, as Catholics will furnish them with arms to defend themselves; whereas, if they be urged to produce what they have to say for themselves, when the Authority of the Church, speaking in a lawful Ecumenical Council is objected to them, they are dumb and ashamed to name the new, and quickly decrepit Church of England, and its Authority, which vanishes at the very sight of the Authority of the Universal Church; yea, and as silent will they be, when they are invited to combat the Authority of the Church, under the notion of Infallibility, so that that notion be first cleared, and warning given them to abstain from misapplying it to questions, in which only particular Catholics, and not the Church itself is concerned: but indeed, I should not have said, They have much to say for themselves, for, alas, it is miserably against themselves, in the highest degree, when they either unfortunately, or wilfully shroud themselves under ambiguities of words, or when they change the state of that question, which should end all questions, either devising or catching at all advantages to keep them out of God's Church. 7. Upon these considerations, if I said, that Infallibility was (to me) an unfortunate word, had not I reason to say so, since it endangered my loss, and caused my delay of attaining to the fundamental happiness of this and the next world, which is to become a member of the Church of Christ? This might have been spoken without any prejudice or disparagement to the word itself: as it may be truly said, that Homoousion (the Churches own word) was an unfortunate word to the Arians, as likewise that Theotokos was an unfortunate word to the Nestorians, since they would not accept heaven, unless they might have it without being obliged to receive those words. Therefore I. P. must pardon me, and give me leave to say more, that is, that Infallibility was an unfortunate word, not to me only, but to Mr. Chillingworth likewise, and to my lord Falkland, and to I. P. himself, and indeed to all Protestants, since they will needs, to their own great disadvantage, make advantage of it, to embroil Controversies, to multiply objections, and to exclude themselves from the Church: and this they do, because they will neither use nor accept of any other word; And this word which is in itself, and confined to the present acception, very expressive and proper) they will needs understand in a far more sublime and comprehensive Notion, than Catholics intent, thinking, that if they could show that any particular personal opinions of Catholics, or any practice in the Church did swerve from that rectitude, which they imagine to be imported by that word that they had reason to renounce the Church's Infallibility and authority, though (by being in the Church) they would have no obligation to join in such opinions or practices. What Protestant would have the confidence to say, that it doth not belong to the Church to be the interpreter of Scripture, or that acknowledged lawful General Counsels are not obliging under the penalty of manifest Schism, that is, damnation? And again, on the otherside, what one Protestant is there, who will not protest against the Infallibility of the Church: and yet this Infallibility in the meaning of the Church, neither dose nor must comprehend more than is imported by the other expressions? Is it not apparent therefore, Since no such word as Infallibility is to be found in any Council, and since the Church did never enlarge her authority ●● so vast a wideness, as Protestants will needs hither to collect from the word Infallibility; but rather that she does deliver the victory into our hands, when we urge her Decisions, that any Catholic, that had any charity in disputing with Protestants, would either wholly abstain from the word itself, or since it is become so common, and with all so convenient (for no other single word can be imagined so proper) would, in using of it confine it to its necessary acception in the present matter, and so prevent Protestants, that they should not, if they would, make use of it to their most disadvantageous advantage; And this latter expedient I have in this review made use of, keeping the word Infallibility (in itself good and innocent;) yet withal using caution, that it should not be mistaken. 8. What is now become of your exclamations, my good unknown friend, I. P. how impertinent are they, and how harshly and inharmoniously do they sound? O the strength of reason rightly managed by the Great Defendors of the English Church! O the power of truth clearly declared! That it should force an eminent member of the Church of Rome (alas, eminent in nothing but in miserable imperfections) to retract so necessary, so fundamental a doctrine, to desert all their Schools, and contradict all their controvertists? For is it not apparent, even from the first impression of my Book, that it was so far from being true, that the strength of reason rightly managed by you, or the power of truth clearly declared by you, compelled me to use such expressions; that on the contrary, it was your manifest unreasonableness, and your wilful mistake of Truth, that forced me out of compassion and charity to you [not to retract any doctrine of the Church, nor to desert any community in it, but] to temper what the Church and the Schools, and Controvertists, likewise say, to your too much depraved palates. 9: Having been so large hitherto, I may the better dispense with myself to be brief in what follows. Therefore, whereas in the sixth Paragraph I. P. says, That it is not the name or word (Infallibility) that is deserted by Mr. Cressy, but the whole importance and sum of it; since he does not except against the word, but to receive it in the sense of Cardinal Bellarmine; that is, Infallibilis est qui nullo casu errare potest, etc. To this I must needs say, that truly I. P. is mistaken, for it is only the word Infallibility that is in controversy, and that protestants (I do now except Mr. Chillingworth, etc. who are far from being truly English Protestant's) do make mere nominal controversy of this great fundamental one: for no argument that ever I saw, is so much as intended by them to disprove this truth, That it belongs to the Church to be the interpreter of Scripture, and not to any private spirit, or natural reason, or this, That the Decisions of the Catholic Church in lawful approved General Counsels are not obliging under pain of Anathema, incurring of schism, and by consequence damnation: and it is this, I say principally this, that the Church understands by the notion of Infallibility: Therefore it is in your own sense only, and not Bellarmine's, that you will understand those words of his, Infallibilis est qui nullo casu erra●e potest: for Bellarmine himself, as I have showed in my book, acknowledges a General Council to be infallible, yet not Infallible, as the Scripture, that is, Quod in nullo casu errare potest, for the Scripture is Infallible, not only in Essential Doctrines, but even in all circumstantial, historical passages, phrases and and words: whereas Counsels are only Infallible in the substance of their Decisions, the which Decisions, as Salmanticensis saith, are likewise to be extended no further, than the latitude of the Heresies, which they intent to condemn: but as for other passages in Decrees or decisions, as the grounds, principles, and reasons, from which a Council deduces its conclusive Decisions, etc. In those it may be deceived, and much more in orders and reformations, which depend upon prudence or information. It is therefore a very great apparent mistake, when you say, that Mr. Cressy retracts (either the word Infallibility itself, which he often makes use of, or or much less) the full importance and sense of that word, unless you will mean, that he will not use it in your full importance and sense; for that he acknowledges he will not; he is too charitable to you, to justify or encourage you in your mistakes. As for Mr. Chillingworth, my lord Falkland, and if there be any other that proceed upon their grounds, whom you ought to have called, not the Great Defenders, but the great Destroyer's of the Church of England) though they do indeed mistake the word Infallibility, extending it to too comprehensive a sense, yet, that does not hinder them in their way, for by making every ones personal reason to be judge and interpreters of Scripture, they do thereby destroy all obliging authority, whether fallible or infallible. 10. In the seventh Paragraph the Author, I. P. very rationally, that is, very consequently to his most irrational mistaking me. First imputes unreasonableness to me, in making any answer to the arguments, made against that which he confesses himself cannot be maintained. Hereto, I answer, That 1. Since it was Mr. Chillingworth's book, and not any Prelatical Protestants argument against the Catholic Churches authority, that perplexed and entangled me. And 2. since I knew that Mr. Chillingworth believed his arguments unanswerable, not only by his Adversary, and such as proceeded upon his adversary's. special grounds, but by any Catholic upon what grounds soever; and that the only grounds upon which Catholic authority could be destroyed, were not such as my Lord of Canterbury, etc. proceeded on. viz. To set up a little authority, and seemingly to contradict an universal one; but only such as Mr. Chillingworth used, viz. To disoblige every Christian from all authority whatsoever, as obliging the conscience to the believing of any thing, and making private reason the judge: where was this unreasonableness of mine, when I attempted to show the world how I came to be undeceived, and upon what grounds I ceased to think, what before not I only, but very many Protestants besides myself, thought; namely, that Mr. Chillingworths' book did wholly destroy, not only his mistaken Infallibility, but the true real Infallibility or Authority of the Church. I am most assured, if the reasons given by me against M. Chillingworth be indeed concluding, and my answers to his objections satisfactory, that if Mr. Chillingworth had been alive to read my book, and had thought so too, he would not have made that poor shift that I. P. hath done, and have said that Mr. Cressy did unreasonably to impugn him. 11. In the next place forasmuch as concerns the manner of my Answer, which I. P. in the eighth Paragraph, says is yet more unreasonable, In that I, deserting the Infallibility, answer only to the authority of the Church, so making this authority answer for that Infallibility. I answer, that it was only a mistaken notion, that both I and Mr. Chillingworth, and all Protestants have of the word Infallibility, that I deserted, and desire I. P. likewise to desert with me, but as for the true Infallibility, which is in effect all one with the Authority of the Church, it could never enter into my thoughts to desert it, and it proving to be the very same thing with the Authority of the Church, obliging under damnation, it is very reasonable, that this Authority should answer for that Infallibility, and that Infallibility for this Authority. 12. As to the three Absurdities in the opinion of I. P. following from the unreasonableness of my answer; of which the 1. is, That after all I have said to Mr. Chillingworth's arguments, I must still acknowledge them unanswerable, as they were intended by him that made them. 2. That my Answer must be to no purpose, because I pretend to answer his arguments as against the Authority of the Church, simply considered, without Relation to such an Infallibility, which were never made against an Authority so qualified. And 3. That if I intent to refute all opposition made to the Infallibility of the Church, by an assertion of its bare authority, then must I assert that authority which is fallible, to be as great and as convincing, as that which is Infallible, etc. Here I answer, that there is no need of any further answer, for that which is already said, demonstrates all these consequences to be mere mistakes, grounded upon mistakes Yet, because for good I. P. sake, I am content to take the pains to say more than absolute necessity requires; therefore that which is already said, being presupposed; to the first pretended Absurdity, I answer. 1. That Mr. Chillingworth did esteem both the Rhetoric and Logic of his Book prevalent, not only against Dr. Potter's single Adversary and his grounds, but against the very foundations of all Catholic Authority; insomuch, as he challenges all Catholics whatsoever, protesting, that if they be able to answer, but a very few leaves of his Book, he will submit and go to Mass presently. And 2. The truth is, if his positive grounds of The Bible, and nothing but the Bible, interpreted casually by private reason, be the only Rule, not Infallibility only, but all Authority is destroyed: Therefore his intention was, that his arguments should have heir force, not only against that notion, which he thought his Adversary had of Infallibility, but against the thing itself, whether you will call it Authority or Infallibility. And by consequence, 3. I have no obligation to think still (for it never concerned me to think) his arguments to be unanswerable, as they were intended by himself. 13. To the second pretended Absurdity, I further answer, that it is true, Mr. Chillingworth very often mistakes, even his Adversary in his acception of the word Infallibility: And this I said in general in the Book, and much more that he mistakes in his application of this mistaken notion to the Church's Authority, or qualified Infallibility. But though I said this in general, you will find, that when I come to a particular answer of passages and grounds quoted out of him, they are such as concern the positive fundamental grounds of his whole book, and destroy not only all Infallibility, but all Authority, yea, the very being of a Church, whether Catholic or Schismatic. And where I answer particular objections against the Church, I have no recourse to his mistake of Infallibility; Therefore my answer is to some purpose, though many of his objections be to none, as to Catholics in general. 14. To the third supposed Absurdity, I answer, that I had rather think I. P. did read my Book negligently, then that he would censure it maliciously, and against his conscience, if he did read it with care. For it is evident through my whole book, that my own thoughts were, &c I have clearly signified those thoughts to have been, that Infallibility and Authority are in effect all one, as applied to the Church: For to say that the Church has authority in a General Council to propose Doctrines of Faith, and to oblige all Christians under penalty of damnation to receive and believe the said Doctrines, and withal to say that she is fallible, and may deceive and propose falsities for truths, and so propose them, as that there can be no appeal from her, would be the extremity of injustice, and the exalting of a Tyranny more grievous than Sicily ever felt, a Tyranny upon Souls. I wonder therefore what art it was that I. P. used, when he extracted out of my book, that because of the ill use that Mr. Chillingworth, etc. made of the Scholastical word Infallibility, exalting it to the supremest degree that the word could import, that is, to a degree not at all pretended to by the Church, no nor scarce by the Scripture itself, and therefore I declared my willingness, not to serve myself of that word, which was none of the Churches own, and desired others also, either to abstain from it, or at least to adjoin such necessary qualifications to it, as were allowed by the Church, to the end, that Protestants might see, what it is that they combat, and aught to submit to. viz. The just and lawful Authority of the Church, in interpreting of Scriptures Authoritatively, and proposing of Doctrines with absolute obligation of believing: I wonder, I say, by what new art he extracted this consequence, that I must assert, that that Authority is as great, and convincing, which is fallible, as that which is Infallible. Did I ever deny, or give the least ground of suspicion, that it was in my heart to deny, the Authority of the Church to be Infallible in Decisions propounded by her, as traditionary? Is it to say the Church is fallible, or a Guide that may lead a soul out of the way, or a Judge capable of mistaking, because there may be spread in some places of the Church some Opinions (no Decisions) or some practices, which Protestants may account unwarrantable? No, no, it is mere guilt in I. P. that made him draw such an inference; he is loath to see the truth appearing out of clouds. I may more truly call the word (Infallibility) the Darling of Protestants, then, as he does, of Catholics, a Darling to them, because they can (under the ambiguousness of it) shelter themselves from truth, obedience, and salvation. 15. Now, whereas I. P. in his ninth Paragraph professes, that, having considered the inconsiderableness of Mr. Cressy's answers, and indeed whole discourse; he changed his resolution to answer it, as judging it not to deserve an answer: I have nothing to say but this, that truly I neither did, nor can commend the Book to him, as a writing considerable, or that might deserve his labour to censure it; but yet if I thought there were no other imperfections to make it inconsiderable, besides those that he hath taken notice of in his Preface, I fear I should be tempted to think well of it. However, this I can say confidently, that notwithstanding any objections as yet made by him against it, he may, if he please, resume his resolution to answer it, without apprehending any guilt, but only the choosing so weak an Adversary. But yet instead of that, I would rather advise and beseech him to read such a Fundamental Controversy, as this, concerning the Church's Infallibility, with other eyes and heart than he has done mine; that is, with a mind disinteressed and willing to find the truth by whomsoever proposed. It is impossible but that education must needs have given a great Bi●s one way: therefore when he reads any thing, upon the truth or falsehood whereof his souls depends, he should rather strain himself to give a weight to objections made against any of his settled preconceived opinions, then catch at circumstantial advantages to elude them: if there be any reasons weakly urged by me, he ought to exercise his own wit to press them more efficatiously against himself: but above all things he ought to pray to God (as God willing, I shall not fail to do both for him, and all his, and my friends) that he would increase in his heart a diffidence of his own judgement, and an humble pliableness to submit to truth and authority. 16. Lastly, Where he concludes with his testimony of the invincibleness of my Lord Falkland's Discourses, especially the Reply: I have no more to say, than what I said in the beginning, excepting this, that for the Reply, he to whom is was made is concerned in it: and as for the Discouse of Infallibility, if the noble Author were alive, I would have presumed to have had his leave to have answered it. CHAP. VI The Fundamental ground of my Lord Falkland's Discourse Examined. 1. HAving said thus much to the preface of I. P. (if these additional papers had not been hastily called for to the Press) I had perhaps finished a begun Discourse in opposition to my most dear lord Falkland's Theses concerning Infallibility; to each of which I had determined to have adjoined an Antithesis. But (so much leisure not being permitted me) I will content myself at present to single out the eleaventh Paragraph, (according to a former Edition, An. D. 1646.) and to oppose a brief Answer; and by so doing, I shall give a virtual satisfaction to the whole Discourse; Because in that one Paragraph) and in scarce any one besides) is clearly contained the state of the main Controversy. viz. The ground upon which is demonstrated the necessity of an infallible authority in God's Church, and the only seeming rational and possible way to avoid and defeat that authority. 2. The words of the Paragraph are these, The chiefest reason, why Catholics disallow of the Scripture for a Judge, is, because when differences arise about the interpretation, there is no way to end them: And that it will not stand with the goodness of God to damn men, for not following his will: if he had assigned no infallible way how to find it. This is the Allegation of Catholics, in which mention likewise might have been made of the writing of the Fathers, and any thing but the testimony of the present Church, because reason and experience shows that differences will arise about the interpretation of them likewise, and no possible way to end them neither, but by a present infallible Authority. To this Allegation of Catholics, his lordship's answer follows in these words. I confess, this to be wonderful true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 [1. for I am not such a wretch as to speak otherwise then I think] and let them ●●cuse themselves that think otherwise. Yet this will be no argument against him, who believes, that to all, who follow their reason in the interpretation of the Scriptures, and search for Tradition, God will either give his Grace for assistance to find the Truth, or his pardon if they miss it: and then this supposed necessity of an infallibly Guide, with this supposed damnation for want of it, fall together to the ground. 3. The fundamental ground upon which Catholics build the necessity of an infallible Authority, is that Article of the Creed, Credo un●m Sanctam, Catholicam, & Apostolicam Ecclesiam, 1. I believe one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. I believe the Church to be one, one Body consisting of many members, subordinately joined, and united under one Head: which Unity is, especially, in regard of one faith professed by all, and one Charity chaining all hearts together: Now one Church there cannot be, without one Faith; and one Faith cannot be, where differences are impossible to be reconciled; and no possible way to reconcile differences, but by Authority; and no Authority sufficiently efficacious to this end, but an infallible one. 4. I confess this to be wonderful true, (says his lordship) for I am not such a wretch. etc. what is it that his lordship confesses? That the Church is one Body, professing one faith? No, alas! That was no Article in his Creed. What then did he so ingenionsly confess? That it was necessary that differences and controversies should be decided? No nor that neither. The thing that he confesseth with an unexampled ingenuity, is, That, if it be necessary that differences should be decided and ended, and that errors should be abolished; God is obliged by his infinite goodness to make his truth known some infallible way, by some infallible Guide. So that by his lordship's acknowledgement, and by the evidence of reason, if the Church must have one faith, it must have one infallible Guide. It is therefore this Unity of the Church, that his lordship denies to be necessary; yet he would not have denied the necessity of such an Unity, if he could have found an infallible Guide; without which he knew there could be no unity; but missing of that, and despising to think of such a blind, and lame Guide as a Church of England or Geneva, etc. [none of which could ever end one controversy] He concludes that there is no necessity that controversies should be concluded, Nor damnation for not following the will of God, since he left no infallible Guide to lead us to the knowledge of it. A doctrine so horrid, that it is much more derogatory to the honour of Christ, than Arianism itself, which though it robs him of his divinity, yet places him above all other creatures. But this denies him even that degree of common sens, which men of mean capacity enjoy: for it makes him establish a law with his own blood, which is neither necessary to be kept, nor indeed possible to be known; then which, what can be more absurd & ridiculous? The perspicacity of my honoured lords judgement was so employed in opposition of Infallibility, that I am confident, he never reflected upon these sad inevitable consequences. 5. But surely no salvation is to be had without this unity in divine truth, (as I have shown at large in my Exomologesis) and only Christians have the Depositum of Divine Truth entrusted to them: Where then shall they find it? In his lordships forementioned Answer it is implied, That it is only to be found in Scripture, and Traditionary writings. But all such writings are obnoxious to variety of senses, and interpretations: What must be done in that case to find out the true Interpretation? for that every body (says his lordship) must shift as well as he can; he is to do his best, following the dictamen of his own private Reason, to find out the true sense of Scripture. And for his comfort he is to believe, that if his private Reason should chance to misled him, [as ten thousand to one it will] yet there is no danger at all, let but private Reason do its best, and he may assure himself all will be Well: God's infinite goodness would fail, if a Soul, proceeding so reasonably, should miscarry. But how is this confidence of security in following private Reason grounded? That does not at all appear, neither in Scripture nor Tradition, neither did his lordship seem to employ the admirable sharpness of his own private Reason to search grounds for that, upon which the Eternal disposal of his soul depended. 6. That which drove his lordship upon the rock of private Reason, was merely a mistake, us may appear to any one that shall carefully read this small Treatise of his. If he could have found an infallible Authority [for one less than infallible, was to his reason a ridiculons thing] he would have abhorred the though of relying on private Reason interpreting Scripture. He sought after this infallible Authority, but he sought only there, where either it was not, or at least it would require very sharp eyes, and a very unprepossessed mind to discover it; Therefore he strains his Reason to prove, that this infallibility is not to be found in the Pope, nor in a Council, at least, not so evident to him, as to countervail the seeming evidence of the force of some objections, that he had against some decisions of Counsels, and such an evidence he must needs have or none; To demonstrate this, he makes use of all the imaginable difficulties and mullities that could be found against the legitimation of a Pope and Council, and of any erroneous opinions, or unlawful, or questionable practices in the Church, though never decided, nor warranted by the Church itself. But there is not one word in all his Discourse against the Infallibility of the Universal Church itself, or of a general Council approved of, and received by the Church. It seems in his Disputes, it had been his misfortune, chiefly to treat with those that would urge the Dogme of the Pope's Infallibility, not only as a Catholic Truth, but also, as a necessary fundamental established point of Catholic Faith, and not being fully cleared in the evidence of their pretensions [a thing not very strange, since many learned Catholics would furnish him with doubts, and Objections to increase the mist and obscurity] he concluded, that no Infallibility could any where be made appear. 7. Being thus unfortunately persuaded, that there was no evidence of an Infallible Universal Authority, plain evident Reason taught him, that there could nor possibly be any other Guide, but private Reason following its own light; for this private Reason would never lead him to submit his Reason to a Church of England, or Geneva, or Racovia, etc. For why to any one of these, rather than to another? And if to all of them indifferently, then to contradictions, because in many things they contradict each other. 8. In this case and circumstances therefore, his lordship argued as reasonably as it was possible for one to do, that had mistaken the first principle; and with the clear ingenuity of a truly noble spirit [not imitated hitherto by any Protestant] he acknowledged that upon any other grounds but his, the Plea of Catholics was unanswerable & unavoidable, that is, unless private Reason (following its own light in the Interpretation of Scriptures) were to be every one's Guide; and this being apparently a most fallible Guide (unless it were certain, that God would give his grace, that is, good fortune, to assist private Reason in finding the Truth, or his pardon in case it miss of finding it) the pretensions of Catholics are unanswerable. 9 Now instead of searching reason to combat this usurpation of private Reason, I shall beg of all reasonable ingenious Persons, to consider with me, what deplorable case this was; that he who saw evidently, that if the Catholic Churches Authority and Infallibility were opposed, all other Churches must expire; The Authority of the English Church would be an airy fantosm; the Tyranny of Geneva, an abomination; Amsterdam a mere Bedlam; Racovia an execration, etc. Should notwithstanding think, that any one could be safe in no Church at all, and thereupon (renouncing all authority, both name and thing) should betake himself to the casual conduct of blind, humane, natural Reason; but J●●cia Domini abyssus multa. 10. Well; but this conduct of Reason, and this indifferency, as to the point of danger, Whether Reason be a true are false Guide, must be disproved by some infallible way (says his lordship in the beginning of the twelfth Paragraph) otherwise none can be condemned, if they follow it. 11. For God's sake, what more infallble proof can be imagined against it, than this, That such a Guide, such an arbitrary, incertain, incapable, blind Guide and interpreter was never heard of in Christ's Church till this age, that it appeared out of the mists of Polonia. 'tis true, it has been actually, really followed by all sorts of Heretics, and Schismatics, though they were ashamed to call it by his own name of private Reason, for they pretended it was the Church, the Primative Apostolic Church that they followed: but never till this later Age private Reason (as private Reason) showed itself in the Chair of Judicature. A Guide, that will lead them (that follow) through Rivers and Fens, through Woods and Deserts, through Mountains and Precipices, to the right hand and to the left, backwards and forwards, and in a Circle: A Guide, that must never repose, but be continually travelling, which way it matters not, being as secure in Falsehood, as in Truth: A Guide, that can never be confident, much less secure of the right way, yea, obliged to be doubtful, that he is wrong: A Guide, that the Scripture never mentioned, and the Church never heard of, but supposed, (by being called a Church) that it never should be harkened to: so that whether Scripture, or Tradition, or Church or all of them be followed, such a Guide ought to be deserted and renounced: A Guide, that two persons cannot possibly follow together, because no two persons (that ever followed any other Guide, beside Authority) did, or could think all things to be reasonable; that any other thought so: And lastly, by consequence such a Guide, that, as long as he continues in the office, there cannot possibly be any Church any where. And is not this an infallible Eviction, that this is an imaginary seducing Guide, since it is impossible, that that should be a Guide appointed for any Christian, which neither Christ, nor his Apostles, nor any of their followers ever mentioned, yea, which does formally destroy one of our twelve Articles of the Apostles Creed, Credo Sanctam Ecclesiam Catholicam. 12. And yet when all this is said, even this is a less unreasonable, and less unsafe Guide, than any divided particular Church can be: For this hoodwinked Guide (enquiring into Scripture, and searching after Tradition) may possibly stumble upon the way to Unity and Truth, that is, the true Catholic Church; for private Reason, professes the exclusion of partiality, and will not refuse to take into consideration, whether itself ought not to be renounced, and Authority submitted to: and if it chance to find Reason for Authority, it will resign its Office, and cease to be a Guide any longer, or private Reason any longer; whereas particular Church's [being founded upon the renouncing of Universal Authority in practice, and yet usurping that Authority, which they renounce) do not only misled their followers, but (having seized on them) do chain and fasten them in that Dung. on. CHAP. VII. A concluding Exhortation; wherein all are invited to Catholic UNITY. 1. FOR a farewell to I. P. and all his Brethren, and to all my dear misled Countrymen, of what Religion, Sect, or Faction soever, but principally the Protestants, Presbyterians, and Independents. I beseech them all to suffer a word of Exhortation, made by Saint Paul to the Philippians, Phil. 2. Si quae ergo consolatio in Christo, si quod solatium, etc. If there be any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of Charity, if any society of the spirit, if any b●●els of Compassion; fulfil the joy of St Paul, and all Saints, that you be of the same Judgement, having the same charity; being of one mind, thinking the same thing. That is, Think Catholic Unity a desirable thing, and pursue the ways to attain it. 2. Now the Sun shines not clearer at Noon then this Truth, That there is no possible Unity without Authority, nor no Christian Unity without an Infallible Authority, all other Authority is mere Faction and Rebellion, an Authority that reaches to the outward appearance, or that binds only the purse; If there were any true Spiritual Authority lately in England, or now at Geneva, etc. it would engage the consciences of those that are under it; and that not as English men, or French, but as Christians; And by consequence all Christians should be obliged to submit to it, a thing that themselves do not so much as pretend to. Therefore by all those passionate exhortations of St. Paul, I conjure you be no longer averse from Catholic Unity and Catholic Authority: for be assured without such Unity and Authority submitted to, you will find no consolation, no not in Christ himself, no comfort in the charity of the Father, nor society with the ●● Spirit, etc. 3. Do not (according to your mistaken custom) account us uncharitable, in professing, that salvation cannot belong to any that are estranged from our Catholic Communion; we could not be Catholics, if we said not so: Thereby we approve ourselves to be the lawful children of the Ancient Saints, Martyrs, Confessors, etc. all which, out of their burning charity [not pride, or malice] protested damnation to all out of their Communion; For how could they, or we be the true Church, unless we excluded false Churches. St. Augustin was the benignest, humblest, charitablest soul in his Age, yet who thunders so loudly and so terribly against Schismatics, as he? And his enemies, the Donatists, (pretending to be the Catholic Church, to the end to justify seemingly their false plea) were forced to denounce damnation to all, from whom they were divided, otherwise they would not have had so much as the show of Catholics. 4. More particularly addressing myself to my most dear friends the English Protestants, (of whose communion I once was a seduced Member) consider, I beseech you, that that which at the first composing of this Book, I only suspected might possibly happen, is now abundantly effected: God has in part visited on you the persecution and injustice you laid upon us: Now do you not see, that your Church was the mere creature of State-Policy? If it had had the power of Religion; the decay of your Ecclestical estates, or imprisonment of your Bishops would not have destroyed Authority among you: The censures of a captive Pope, or Excommunication of a Synod meeting in a Grot were as terrible to irregular, disobedient Catholics, as if they had thundered from the Capitol, or the Imperial Palace in Constantinople: Where are the proofs now of your Spiritual Power? Why do not you thunder out your Excommunications against the Subverters of your Religion, or against your own daily revolting subjects? Alas, who would be frighted with such anathemas? Or what subjects have you now, after the loss of your temporal Lordships? And which way shall those Lordships be regained, that you may become a Church again? Those that were once content you should enjoy them, will not adventure their own estates to recover them for you; the Lutherans are too far off, and the Calvinists too near; you may comfort yourselves with your Liturgy, and perhaps your Surplices worn in private Conventicles; But as for a succession of Priests or Bishops, that is not to be hoped, much less a restauration of your Religion, which is now quite out of date. 5. To what Church will you now apply yourselves? To the Scotish Kirk, or your own Presbyterians (the first incendiaries of all these troubles, the Idumaeans, that cried Exinanite, Exinanite usque ad fundamentum in ea?) Or to their successors of a thousand names and shapes, and all of them frighrful? What is it that holds you from returning to Catholic Communion? What other injuries have we done you, except that we have forced you to blush, to see how patiently we suffered your injustices, oppressions and persecutions? But the Truth is, you were not so much our Persecutors as that poisonous generation of Calvinists among you; they were those who instilled fury into our Kings and Parliaments, and poison into the laws against us; Which very laws are still kept in force against Catholics, and the present Governors (who profess Independency & an absolute freedom of Conscience) are yet (by a secret transition of some dregs of Calvinistical pollution) become severe Executioners of their cruelty against us; By that means destroying the foundation of their own Religion, and rendering themselves obnoxions to be censured by neighbouring Princes and States, as persons of no faith or constancy even to their own Principles. But however it is to be hoped that care will be taken, that the Presbyterian banner shall never be displayed amongst you, lest their little fingers prove hereafter more heavy to all their opposors, than the Prelatical loins were formerly. And I cannot but congratulate unto Scotland their late procured liberty from this more then Scilician Tyranny of Kirkism. 6. If those now exauctorated, now dispossessed Presbiterian Spirits would hearken to the advice of one that truly wishes so well to their souls, that he would willingly sacrifice his life for their good, I would desire them to consider how palpably beyond all other Sects their condition is most miserable, and evidently accursed both by God and man. For their Dominion and Tyranny never lasts longer, then during the times of sedi●ions, and secret rebellious practices. Then indeed secular ambitious spirits (having great use and need of them to whisper treasons, sow discontents, inflame revenge, and (under a show of zeal) root all charity, obedience, and peacefulness out of the consciences of the people) do suffer them to rage; Whilst these plots are agirating, so long they have leave given them to domineer over the souls of men, and to set up their abhorred Tribunals: But when once their secular lords see themselves settled by their practices; then nothing is so contemptible, as a Calvinistical Minister, witness Geneva, where they have no influence upon the State; and witness Holland, where the whole Body of their wretched Ministry are not allowed one single voice in their Government, nor the meanest Artisan scarce willing to cast away a daughter upon them. 7. Filii hominum usquequo gravi cord, ut quid diligitis vanitatem, & quaeritis mendatium? O my beloved Countrymen, How long will you remain of such stupefied, insensible, blind hearts? Do not you perceive that it is mere emptiness that you grasp, and a palpable lie that you so busily seek; whilst (renouncing Christ's Authority) you follow the conduct of your own Reason and Spirit? Are you not now become like the men of Sodom struck with blindness, yet persuaded that you are the only Seers? You cross and justle one another in the way, knocking at all doors, but the right? How impossible is it that this blindness, this eternal wand'ring should be cured, but by the Opobalsamum of Catholic Faith and Obedience to the only spouse of Christ, the Church? Your eyes are not the only Organs, but your ears must be used for the learning of the true way; Faith comes by hearing, not studying or disputing, and the persons to be heard are those that are sent, that have a Mission sealed by Christ, and delivered successively from his Apostles and by their Successors. If you would hear, you would believe; And if you would believe, you could not be divided. But you will read, and study, and dispute, and the fruit thereof is not faith, but science falsely so called, which puffs you up with a vain opinion of knowledge, and tempts you to study and dispute without end. Now if you really believed the Scriptures which you read, you would hear the Church, that is the only safe Interpreter of them. He that hears you, hears me, says our Saviour to, and concerning his Apostles and their Successors: Christians must be hearers of their Teachers to the end of the world: What infinite numbers of misled souls have continually deceived themselves into eternal perdition, and all of them with the Bible in their hands, and perhaps in their heads and memories? And this not for want of reading, or disputing, but of hearing and believing. 8. This is the true and proper Difference indeed between a Catholic and a Misbeleever: The Bible is a Rule to them both: but the sense of the Bible is conveyed several ways to them: Heretics receive it by the eyes, they deliver it themselves to themselves, by which means every one being a Teacher independent of another, Christ has no Scholars among them: so that every Reader creating a sense proper to his own taste, and disposition, they all agree only in possessing the outward bark, but the true sense escapes them; Whereas a Catholic receives both the Bible, and the sense of the Bible from the Church, and Teachers appointed in Her; So that he has the same assurance of the sense●●● of the Bible itself, than which a greater certainty cannot be given, even Protestants themselves being Judges. By this means it comes to pass, that as it is impossible, that Heretics should agree any other way, then in faction; So it is impossible, that Catholics should differ in points of belief; & as it is impossible, that Protestants should be humble, who trust none, n●r rely on any but their own wit and judgement, (they being their own only Authority) So it is impossible that Catholics should in this regard be proud, whose wit and judgement is to renounce their own judgement, and to depose their own wit, and to captivate both to the obedience of Faith, which comes by hearing Christ speak to them by his Church: Lastly, as it is impossible that Heretics, who follow private Reason (which of all others by a general acknowledgement is the blindest Guide) should not with their blind Guide fall into the Pit; so it is impossible, that Catholics (if their works be answerable to their faith) should not with the Church that teaches them, attain the glory, which Christ has purchased for his Elect. 9 Do not (I beseech you, my dear friends) look upon this Characteristical difference between Catholics and Heretics, as a new device of our own brain, but as an Ensign set up by the Fathers of the Church, yea, by the Holy Ghost himself, speaking by his Choicest Organ St. John the Evangelist. (Ep. 1 Chap. 4.) Ipsi de mundo sunt ideo de mundo loquuntur, etc. They are of the World, therefore they speak of the World, and the World hears them, we are of God: He that hath known God, heareth us: Hereby know we the Spirit of Truth, and the Spirit of Error. The Apostle (in the beginning of the Chapter) had warned the Brethren of the multitude of Antichrists, that is, Heretics that were shortly to infest the Church, and to preserve themselves from their poison, he advises them to try the Spirits, that they might discern the true from the false. Now to enable them for this Trial, he gives this mark of distinction: They, saith he, that is, the false Spirits are of the world, and they speak of the world, and the world heareth them: Their great Master, and Arch-Apostle is the world, that is, worldly lust, which (as he said before) were, The lusts of the flesh, ●he lusts of the eye, and the pride of life, these were the great Masters that taught them their new Doctrine, and made them renounce the old. The weariness of an unmarried, or of a chaste life, ambition after great estates, and scorn to submit themselves to obedience, these taught new lessons to the Arch-Heriticks: and these lessons they preach to others, and those that are of the world, and love such censual conveniences, hear them. Thus is Heresy begun and continued in the world. 10. On the contrary, (saith he) We are of God, who have conquered the world, and by that means ●rample on these things; we have a far more noble ambition: For the reward that we pretend to, is no less than God himself; And all that know God, and know how to set a value on him, hear, and obey us. Hence he concludes, Hereby know we the Spirit of Truth, and the Spirit of Error. But it may be replied, That as there are many true Believers much immersed in the lusts of the world, so there may be some Heretics, that in appearance at least, are in a good measure free from the same lusts. 'Tis true: yet those Heretics do not hear the Ministers of Christ; They receive their writings, they study them, and dispute out of them, but do not hear the true Pastor's interpreting them: Hereby indeed is known the Spirit of Truth and the Spirit of Error. For if they without mission would not pretend to be Apostles, nor deliver their own doctrines out of the Apostles writings, but have humility to hear the Apostles and their Successors, and Faith to believe them, they would never be obnoxious to this Spirit of Error. 11. To conclude, (my dearly beloved Friends) instead of examining those several marks of true and false Churches, and Teachers extant in Books of controversies, content yourselves with this Catholic mark given by the Apostle in his Catholic Epistle to all Christians to the world's end; Would you know where the Spirit of Truth is? It is not among them that accept, and read, and study the Scriptures; for then what would be Heresy? Do they not in all their wander and mazes carry the Bible with them? And the Bible itself (as they use it) leads them to destruction; For Lust, Ambition, Curiosity, Covetousness, or Pride, (either blinding them or staining their eyes) makes them think they see in Scripture that which foments, and increases those Passions; Whereas if (having their eyes open to read the Bible) they would keep their ears open likewise to hear the Church interpreting it, it is not possible they should err, or be at variance about the mysteries of Faith. God Almighty, of his infinite goodness, clear your eyes, and open your ears, that you may see and hear, and live for ever. Amen. FINIS. AD LECTOREM. En tibi, (Candide Lector!) illas Eximii Doctoris ad Quaesita mea pridem missas Responsiones, in priori quidem hujus Libri Impressione promissas, sed ex oblivione omissas. Quod ad speciales autem Doctrinas pertinet vel hìc vel superiùs in Libro contentas, me tanquàm Historici solùm non Dogmatistae partes agentem. respicias. Et vale. Quaesita Generalia. QUaeritur primò. Utrùm haec Thesis sit in Romana Ecclesia irrepraehensibilis, videlicet. Nihil est creditu necessarium in Religione Christiana tanquam de fide, nisi quod revelatum fuit Ecclesiae per Christum & Apostolos ejus? Respondetur. Quod haec thesis, ut jacet, est omninò irrepraehensibilis, immò nihil est proprie de side (cujus actus necessariò & i●mediatè innititur divinae revelationi) ●nisi quod revelatum fuerit á Deo Ecclesiae per Christum & Apostolos. Ab eorum enim tempore nihil de novo Ecclesiae revelatum agnoscimus. Qu. ●. Utrùm omnes articuli de Religione in Concilio Tridentino determinati, & propositi, sin● veritates divinae, & tales quae ab Apostolis fuerint Ecclesiae revelatae? Resp. Omnes articuli purè doctrinales, nec aliam inclu●entes materiam facti quam quod divinitùs institutum agnov mus, determinati a Concilio Tridentino tales sunt quoad substantiam. Qui verò vel disciplinales, vel ex toto, vel ex parte ad materiam facti non divinitùs instituti spectant, canonicam habent certitudinem, ac proinde quicunque illorum aliqu●m pertinacitur condemnaverit, tanquam Ethnicus & publicanus habendus est. Qu. 3. Si non; (U● v. g● articuli de libris canonicis, de vulgata translatione, de communione sub una spe●ie, de veneratione imaginum) utrùm liceat Catholico inquirere & probabiliter determinare quinam speciales articuli sint tales veritates revelatae, & quinam non? Resp. Ad quaestionem principalem (sepositis hypothesi & perenthesi) quod omninò licet. Ad hypothesim supra responsum est. Ad parenthesim autem respondetur. Quod esse librum canonicum importat duo. 1. Quod vel doctrinam revelatam contineat, vel cerre nihil dissonum à veritate divina & Catholica. 2. Quod liber ipse semper habebatur à multis. Ecclesiae Doctoribus divini fuisse alicujus authoris, Cui scilicet istius libri doctrina ad Religionem spectans, aut immediatè à Spiritu sancto revelata fuerit, aut in illa tradenda divinum adfuerit speciale auxilium. De prima parte potest Concilium verè oecumenicum certissimè decernere, de secundâ, cum majori vel minori cer●itundine juxta varias re●um circumstantias, ita tamen ut canonicam semper habebit certitudinem hujusmodi Concilii etiam in hac parte decretum. Quod idem dicendum est de vulgatae editionis decreto, licèt purè materiam facti designet: De communione sub una tantùm specie, Concil ● Decretum est negativum, videlicet. Ecclesiam non teneri nec institution● seu prae●epto divino, nec quacunque aliâ● de causa, Sácramentum E●charistiae fidelibus omnibus sub utrâque specie administra●●. Et hoc certistimum habet Ecclesia ex traditione & praxi. An verò justis de causis unam tantùm speciem communiter administrari decreverit, prudentiae non doctrinae quaestio est. De veneratione imaginum quamvis res facti sit, hoc tamen ab ipsis Apostolorum temporibus traditum habemus. Qu. 4 An non haec sit pobabilis ratio distinguendi inter tales articulos scilicet, ponendi istos articulos esse revelationes divinas in quibus Concilium explicitè significat Ecclesiam traditionaliter recipisse talem doctrinam à primis usque Christianismi temporibus? Resp. Hanc rationem seu viam distenguendi inter tales articulos, probabilem ac sanam esse, non verò solam & unicam. Oportet enim ut articuli qui sint revelationis divinae, sint doctrinales, & qui nunquam ab omnibus Ecclesiae Doctoribus habebantur incerti, & tunc etiamsi Concilium declararet hujusmodi articulos ad novatoris alicujus obtundendam audaciam, absque eo quod agnoscat expressè illos traditionaliter receptos esse, attamen hoc necessariò subintelligiretur. Novum enim aliquod nequit Concilium oecumenicum Ecclesiae proponere ut revelatum, nec si proponeret ab Ecclesia recip●retur. Qu. 5. Utrùm omnes articuli à legitimo Concilio propositi sint recipiendi & amplectendi, vel Christianâ fide (scilicet qnòd ad articulos divinitùs revelatos) vel sal●em obedientiâ canonicâ (quod ad reliquos) Quae ●bedientia scilicet obligat omnes ad non contradicendum, ita ut merito damnentur omnes qui se ab Ecclesiae communione separant, ut schismatis non necessarii rei? Resp. Affirmatiuè ad totam quaestionem, supposito quod Goncilium sit oecumenicum & legitimum, & omnia conciliariter agat. Qu. 6. Utrùm assistentia Spiritus sancti Ecclesiae promissa necessariò credenda sit simpliciter in omnem veritatem eam ducturum, au solùm in necessariam? Resp. Necessum est credere Spiritum sanctum, non dico inducturum sed conservaturum Ecclesiam, Catholicam in om●i doctrina seu veritate revelata; immò ita recturum eam, ut nunquàm in errorem aliquam notabilem, id est, qui vergat in gravissimum animarum detrimentum, universaliter induci permitrat; licet in errorem facti, & forsitan do●●●●● non immediatè & expressè revelatae, incidere poterit pars major Ecclesiae. Qu. 3. Utrùm Concilium, (secundùm quod Stapletonus affirmat) possit erroneè proponere doctrinas quasdam (scilicet quae adfundamenium Religionis non appropinquant) non veras? Resp. Primò notandum esse, quod aliud est Concilium oecumenicum Ecclesiae doctrinas proponere, aliud Ecclesiam illis adhaerere. Deinde aliud est Ecclesiam doctrinis à Concilio propositis adhaerere tanquam revelatis, aliud illis assentiri tanquam decretis ac definitis à supremo in Ecclesia tribunali. Quicquid sit, non denegamus Concilium oecumenicum, posse in quibusda● circumstantiis Ecclesiae proponere doctrinas quae nec immediatè continentur in revelatis, nec sunt de rebus magni momenti, sed vel facti vel disciplinae, quodammodò falsas, aut non omninò veras. Qu. 8. Utrùm unquam definitum fuerit ab aliquo Concilio oecumenico Ecclesiam vel concilium esse infallibilem? Et si sic, Ubi? Resp. Nunquam, quod meminerim, (evidentissimis sepo●itis scripturae locis) expressè definitum legi. Supponitur enim ad omnem definitionem infallibilis haec decernendi potestas: Quippe si cuilibet licuerit Supremi Tribunalis, sive Ecclesiastici, sive saecularis, authoritatem ac jurisdictionem in dubium revocare, ruunt certè omnis Regiminis & gubernationis fundamenta? Si veró tali decernentis authoritati credendum ac cedeudum necesse sit, perinde est, quantum ad debitam subditorum obedientiam, an fuerit talis authoritas secundùm se infallibilis, an non. Qu. 9 Utrum quando vulgò dicitur Ecclesia Catholica est infallibilis, istum verbum infallibilis importer divinam quandam assistentiam & inerrabilitatem? An solum moralem (at in summo gradu) certitudinem? Cui scilicet inniti possent homines sine aliquo periculo, immò omnin●●ebeant? Resp. Quod hujus questionis solutio maximè pendet de propria vocabulorum significatione, nimirùm quaenam infallibilitas vel certitudo quam di●i●nus divinam? Quaenam naturalis, id est naruralis evidentiae, & quaenam moralis. Quae omnia ex Logicae principiis desumenda & dissolvenda sunt, Quod non est hujas loci. In praesentiarum sufficit quod talis sit Ecclesiae infallibilitas seu inerrabilitas, quaeque ex divino proveniat instituto & auxilio, ut in errorem Christianae doctrinae ac Religioni oppositum nunquàm induce●ur, nec portae inferi praevalebunt adversus eam. Ut tibi verò (qui difficultatum medullas soles penetrare) pleniùs faciam satis in re tanti momenti, ex quâ nimirùm caeterarum omnium inter Christianos controversiarum petenda est solutio, superaddam hic breviter quod nondum à me nec verbis, nec scriptis accepisti. Ecclesiam esse infallibilem, tùm ex promissis Christi Domini in sacra scriptura frequenter habitis, tùm ex natura ipsius traditionis universalis Ecclesiae, quam etiam in genere sumptam infallibilem esse, alibi satis, si rectè memineris, tibi evidentissimè demonstravimus. Ecclesiam autem esse infallibilem, nihil aliud est, quam Ecclesiam non posse falli, id est; Universalem Ecclesiam unitam sub unâ in ejusdem fidei & Sacramentorum communione, non posse errare in traditione Christianae ac revelatae doctrinae, quae scilicet à Christo & ab Apostolis ejus per universum orbem edocta ac disseminata fuerit. Doctrina haec Christiana, in cujus traditione nequit Ecclesia à veritate aberrare, non solùm continet dogma●a, quae veluri merè speculativa videntur; Trinitatem nempe Incarnationem, etc. (Quae licet ad Christianae vitae perfectionem parùm aut nihil conducere existiment novatores, attamen re verâ totius Christianae praxeos bases sunt & fundamenta) sed etiam Christianorum operum & Christianae vitae institutiones & actus, ut in Sacramentorum administratione & receptione, & in multiplici materia facti, quae ad vitam aeternam consequendam Christianorum u●iversirati necessariò requiruntur. Infallibilita● haec est duplicis generis. Prima, quae perfecta & absoluta est, spectar ad traditionem articulorum fidei, id est, articulorum revelatorum, quaeque divinam revelationem tanquam objectum formale essentialiter vendicant. Secunda est Canonica, id est, articulorum ab Ecclesia definitor●m quorum nulla habetur revelationis divinae universalis traditio. Quae tamen talis est conditionis & naturae, ut omnes Ecclesiae subditi & membra hisce teneantur subcribere & obedire definitionibus. Prima infallibilitas in sola Ecclesia universali residet, neque in Papa, neque in Concilio nisi in quantum Ecclesiae unversali consentire & cohaerere creduntur, in alterutro tamen Ecclesia universali consentiente. Attamen Concilio verè oecumenico & perfectè generali hoc proprium inest, quod in illius revelatorum fidei articulorum definitionibus involvatur necessariò universalis Ecclesiae consensus. Quae verò sint conditiones & qualitates Concilii verè oecumenici constitutivae, non est hujus loci statuere. Prima igitur infallibilitas ad traditionis universalitatem divinâ suffultam speciali providentiâ reducitur. Secunda tum in Papa, tum in Goncilio residet juxta varios Reip. Christianae status & conditiones. Potest enim Summus Pontifex, ubi urget aliqua necessitas, nec poterit Consilium generale opport●●è congregari, quicquid necessum fuerit ad tollendum schisma vel scandalum canonica infallibilitate decernere. Cui tota Ecclesia, saltem usque ●um Concilium generale haberi poterit, cedere teneretur. Veritates autem seu propositiones quae ab Ecclesia universali infallibiliter determinari possunt, duplicis sunt generis. Vel enim sunt ipsae veritares immediatè et in ipsismet terminis revelatae, vel sunt consequentes seu illationes ex illis. Prioris generis veritates posse ab Ecclesia universali infallibiliter definiri, seu potius designari. aliás ●ibi manifestissimè oftendimus; sicut & illas explicare, & terminls magis perspicuis exprimere. Non etenim per nudas verborum cortices & literulas materiales, sed per ipsorum sensu● & significationem, suam novit & tradit Ecclesia doctrinam. Ac proinde panis conversionem in Coepus Christi rectè explicuit Ecclesia, exòrtâ occasione, nomine Transubstantiationis. Posterioris autem generis propositiones bifariàm dividimus. Vel enim evidentiss●mè & primo intui●● constabunt cuicunque sanae mentis proponantur, suppositâ premissaram veritate. Ut, verbi gratia, quod Christus duas habuerit voluntates, ex hypothesi duplicis naturae, divinae scilicet & humanae, in Christo, manifestissimum elucet. Vel quae studium aliquod & scientiam requirunt ad hujusmodi sequelae seu consequentiae evidentiam percipiendam. Quae quidem evidentia majoris vel minoris certitudinis apparebit, tùm juxta subjecti perspicuitatem vel obscuritatem, tùm etiam juxta ratiocinantis doctrinae & ingenii gradum. Prioris generis veritates, priorem obtinent infallibilitatem in definitionibus seu declarationibus Universalis Ecclesiae ad fidem spectantibus. Posterioris verò generis propositiones juxta prius divisionis membrum acceptae, similem habent certitudinem, licèt gradus quasi inferioris. At verò propositiones de posteriori divisionis membro, nequaquam habent supremam illam & universalem infallibilitatem, sed canonicam tantùm respectu totius Ecclesiae. Quibus seilicet, sicut & quibuscunque aliis universalis Ecclesiae decretis firmiter standum est nec ullatenus reluctandum. De rebus autem facti, five disciplinae, sive regiminis sint, quae jure divino nullam habent institutionem, hoc tantùm nota, quod eorum praecepta seu instituta, dicuntur Ecclesiastica, quae juxta varias rei Christianae conditiones ac dispositiones, vel omitti, vel immutari possunt à constitutis in authoritate secundùm quod expedire visum fuerit, nec aliam in se continent universalem infallibilitatem, quam quae filios Ecclesiae, receptâ & perseverante sanctione, illis subjacere & obedire certissimè constringit. Qu. 10. Utrùm quando dicitur Ecclesia Catholicae Romana, sensus fit, universalis Ecclesia sub uno capite collecta, quod caput olim fuit, & nunc est, & probabiliter semper erit Romanu● Pontifex. Ita tamen ul st ista sedes in posterùm vel dissolata fuerit, vel ab insidelibus possessa, quem●umque alium praesulem Ecclesia sibi praefecerit iste pro visibili capite Ecclesiae & successore D. Petri habendus sit? Resp. Quod Ecclesia Catholica dicitur Romanae, posteris hisce temporibus (antiquitùs enim cum loquebantur Patres de Ecclesia Romanâ, particularem seu Dioecesanam Ecclesiam Romae ut plurimùm designarunt) ad distinguendam illam ab aliis omnibus haereticorum ac schismaticorum conventiculis, (quorum recentiores aliqui titulum Catholicae, nescio quâ dementiâ, audent sibi vendicare) per denominationem à capite desumptam. Quod verò Sedi Romanae annexa sit ex instituto Petri totius Ecclesiae capitis aliqualis authoritas certissimâ traditione constat. Non equidem de necessitate absolutâ, cum fuerit prius Antiochiae; sed ita ex hypothesi rei factae ut ubicunque resideret electus praesul in totius Ecclesiae caput, seu Petri successorem, Romanae Sedis Episcopus denominaretur. QUAESITA SPECIALIA. QUaeritur 1. Utrùm tenendum sit ut de fide omnes libros qui nunc in Canonem recipiuntur pari jure esse divinos & infallibiles? An solùm posse omnes cum fructis legi in Ecclesia, eos nihil in doctrin● aut moribus falsi in secontinere, & proptered authoritatem eorum non temerè rejiciendam? Ratio dubitanda est, tùm quia plurimae praefationes S. Hieronymi aliquos libros è Canone antiquo Judaeorum eliminant, immò idem libros Machabaeorum notat, & 3. & 4. Esdrae somnia vocat: ●ùm Six. Senensis etiam post Concilium Tridentinum abdicat aditamenta ad Hesterem: Et Melchior Canus etiam de Baruchi libro putat sine culpa haerese●s posse dubitari, l●c. com. 1. 2. c. 9 Unde Cardinalis Bellarminus agnoseit tales libros posites esse in gradu inferiori. Resp. Juxta supradicta ad tertium quaesitum generale, scilicet, omnes libros receptos in canonem aeque infallibilem continere veritatem quoad doctrinam revelatam, id est, quòd fidei sen doctrinae revelatae nihil oppositum aut dissonum contineant. Verùm quoad librorum authores, quibus etiam an omnia in eis contenta immediatè à spiritu sancto dictabantur, longè impar est eorum certitudo. Qu. 2. Utrùm Concilium Tridentinum (ubi de imaginibus praecipiens ad Concilium Nicaenum 2. nòs remittit) c●nsendum sit interpretari sensum istius, ubi loco adorare dicit venerari, aut debitum honorem conferre? Resp. Concilium Tridentinum nequaquam interpretari sensum Concili●●● Nicaeni, sed idem aliis verbis asseverare. Si enim, (quod tibi saepius dixi) prototypon non imago propriè veneretur, parùm refert quo utatur vocabùlo, nisi fiat quaestio de nominum etymologia Qu. 3. Utrùm articulue de Transubstantiatione in Con●il. Trident. Non sufficienter credaetur secundùm mentem Sy●odi, ab eo qui ●●cat, & profiteatur. Ego credo quod post con consecratione●●, panis des●●it esse in Sacramento, & loco ejus est praesens corpus Christi verè, realiter, & substantialiter (scilicet ut loquitur synodus sacramentali●er, seu modo quodam inestabili & incomprehensibili) quod fidelibus communicatur ad vitam, & indi●nis cedit ad condemnationem. Quanquam in ● ered talis homo profiteatur se nolle immiscere seipsum Scholasticis & Philosophisis de islo mysterio disputationibus. Ut quid factum sit de substantia panis? In quo subjecto subjectentur accidentia ejus? etc. modò recipiat in se nu●quam se interpretaturum modum istius mysterii contra consensum Sholasticorum. Ratio dubitandi est, quia h●e doctrina á S: Patribus proponi●ur non sub notione miraculi, sed mysterii inexplicabilis, unde apud eos nullae tantae Philosoph●cae controversiae, & subti itates reperiantur, & prop●●rid ●a●e● sub●isitates non p●ssunt ●liciesse ●● antiqua traditi●●● Ecclesiastica. Praeterià Cardinalis Peronius asserit Concilium Triden inum n●min●●m cegere ad usurpandam vocem transubstantiationis. Resp. Sufficienter credi sub his terminis. Ubi verò subjungis, Quod fidelibus, etc. mens est ni fallor, Quod dignis, etc. subest enim aequivocatio, nam etiam indigni possunt esse fideles, verùm hoc dico ad majorem cautelam. De reliquo nemo tenetúr jurare in verba Scholasticorum, sufficit te contra communem Patrum & Ecclesiae consensum nunquàm modum istum velle interpretari, nec determinate. Cavendum tamen est, ne sub terminis tuis oppositum aliquid transubstantiationi inhaereat animo. Qu. 4. Utrùm ille dici possit admittere Canonem 2. siss. 21. Concil. Trident. de communione sub una specie, qui quamvis ipse nullas videat sufficientes rationes negandi communione● utriusque speciei, tamen profitetur se piè credere fuisse aliquas quae proculdubio Concilio videbantur justae & sufficientes, & canonicè submittit se iste alterationi? Resp. Affirmativè. Inquirat tamen hic Christianus, si doctus sir, corde recto motiva Concilii in h●c parte, & justi●sima statim inveniet. Qu. 5. An fit de fide licitum esse coërcere & punire vel trade●e puniendos morte, exilio, vel aliis civilibus poenis haereticos convictos? Resp. Subjectum quaestionis non esse materiam fidei, ac proinde nihil esse de fide in illâ materia. Veruntamen ce●●●ssimum esse rebelles à side & ab Ecclesia coërceri & pun●●i posse; poenis nimirùm spiritualibus (id est censuris Ecclesiasticis) à superioribus suis Ecclesiasticis; Et poenis temporalibus, (id est incarceratione, exilio, & similibus) à superioribus suis temporalibus. Morte verò puniri posse haereticos etiam convictos, immò relapso●, vel obstinatissimos (modò à seditionis & rebellionis in Remp. defuerit omne periculum) nunquam fuir totius Ecclesiae dogma Catholicum. Quicquid autem sit de praxi Inquisitionis jam receptā, Catholici plurimi, immò & doctissimi, praecipuè in Gallia nostra hoc semper improbarunt, sed haec quaestio facti est, seu prudentiae, non doctrinae. Qu. 6. Utrùm & quatenùs liceat Catholico optare & suadere concessionem utriusque speciei, Reformationem abusuum in Reliquiis, Imaginibus, Indulgentiis, etc. Liturgiam & Preces in linguâ notâ & intellectâ, etc. Sciticet tanquam media admodùm efficacia ad reünionem Eo●lesiarum? Resp. cum subditorum non sit, superiorum suor●m leges ad libitum interpretari, immò nec, sub reformationis specie, quamcunque praxim authoritato stabilitam corrigere (h●ec enim propria seditionis ratio est) nemini Catholicorum licet publicè repraehendere nec verbo, nec scripto, Ecclesiae diseiplinam canonicè erectam, Labefactatam verò restaurare, dummodò prudenter fiat, poterit unusquisque suo modo conari. Cum autem Episcoporum ac pastorum sit (quos posuit Spiritus sanctus regere Ecclesiam Dei) imposturas omnes authoritate publicâ prohibere ac tollere, his omnium est sobriè indicare quos manifestè perceperint Religionis abusus, tùm in Clero, tùm in populo. Verùm nec licet, nec convenit privato cuicunque suadere mutationem praxis cujuscunque, quam vel ab Ecclesia sancitam, vel in. Ecclesia consuetudin● generali & antiquâ usurpatam novimus. De communione sub utraque specie, ac liturgiâ seu precibus Ecclesiasticis in linguâ vulgari habendis, si qua spes esset illud obtinendi, apud haereticos parùm vale●et. De reliquiis, Indulgentiis, Imaginibus, etc. multa forsàn, modò caurè fieret, & monenda & suadenda forent. Quicquid sit; Ecclesiarum, (ut vocas) reünionem sperare nequaquàm fas est, nisi prius rebelles in sponsam Christi, submissis cervicibus, potestati à Deo ordinât● cordatum jurent obsequium. Vale. A Table of the Contents of the several Chapters. Sect. 1. Cap. 1. THe occasion of the Authors departing out of England. Bloody commotions of Calvinists there. The horribleness and strangeness of them. p. 1. Sect. 1. Cap. 2. Sacrilege and Perjury acknowledged even by Heathens to be principal causes of public calamities. p. 4. Sect. 1. Cap. 3. England prodigiously guilty of sacrilege since the schism. Visible judgements have continually pursued this crime there. p. 7. Sect. 1. Cap. 4. Perjury how frequently and how heinously committed in England since the Schism. p. 12. Sect. 1. Cap. 5. The sanguinary Laws, and cruel execution of them upon Catholic Priests in England. p. 16. Sect. 1. Cap. 6. The Author's sadness for the sins and miseries of his Country. What remedies and lenitives he found for this sorrow. p. 18. Sect. 1. Cap. 7. A scruple suggested to my mind, viz. To the Communion of what Church I should adhere upon supposition that the Church of England should fail. p. 20. Sect. 1. Cap. 8. A Reflection upon several Sects. And first upon the Socinians. p. 22. Sect. 1. Cap. 9 A Reflection upon the Calvinists and Lutheran Churches. Their first disadvantage, in comparison with the English Church. p. 27. Sect. 1. Cap. 10. Apparent want, yea renouncing of a lawful succession of Ecclesiastical Governors among Lutherans and Calvinists. p. 29. Sect. 1. Cap. 11. Consent of Fathers against Lutherans and Calvinists. p. 34. Sect. 1. Cap. 12. Seditious doctrines universally taught by Calvinists. etc. p. 37. Sect. 1. Cap. 13. Protestants recriminating Catholics for Rebellion, answered. p. 44. Sect. 1. Cap. 14. A fourth scandal among Calvinists, viz. their aversion from unity. p. 47. Sect. 1. Cap. 15. The scandalous personal qualities of Luther and Calvin. p 51. Sect. 1. Cap. 16. The Author's unquietness not being able to communicate with Calvinists, etc. Reflection upon the several Eastern Churches. p. 57 Sect. 1. Cap. 17. Necessity of the Authors examining the grounds of the Roman Church. Several advantages acknowledged to be in that Church. p. 59 Sect. 1. Cap. 18. Preparations to the examining of the grounds of the Roman Churches Authority. p. 66. Sect. 1. Cap. 19 What prejudice the Author received by receiving the doctrine of the Roman Churches authority expressed in School language. p. 70. Sect. 2. Cap. 1. The first conclusion concerning the Rule of Faith. Testimonies of Fathers acknowledging Doctrines Traditionary as well as Scripture to be a Rule of Faith. p. 77. Sect. 2. Cap. 2. The Roman Church agreeing with Fathers in the same rule of Faith. All Sects of Protestants disagree with the Fathers. p. 82. Sect. 2. Cap. 3. English Protestants unwilling to justify this Position: and why. Mr. Chillingworth's late book against the Catholic Church: and the Character given of it.p. 85. Sect. 2. Cap. 4. Inconveniences following Protestant's Position of only Scripture. Father's refuse to dispute with Heretics from only Scriptures. p. 90. Sect. 2. Cap. 5. Weakness of Protestants proofs for only Scripture. Texts of Scripture alleged by Catholics vainly eluded by Protestants. p. 97. Sect. 2. Cap. 6. Two principal Texts of Scripture alleged by Protestants to prove its sufficiency, and against Traditions; answered. p. 101 Sect. 2. Cap. 7. Reasons and Texts produced by Mr. Chillingworth to prove only Scripture to be the rule of Faith. p. 109. Sect. 2. Cap. 8. Preparatory grounds for the answering of these reasons and Quotations. That Christian Religion was settled in the Church by Tradition especially. The advantage of that way beyond writing. p. 112. Sect. 2. Cap. 9 A further demonstration of the firmness of Tradition. Certain objections answered. p. 123. Sect. 2. Cap. 10. The second preparatory ground: viz. Occasion of writing the Gospels, & c.p. 130. Sect. 2. Cap. 11. The third preparatory ground. viz. The clearing of the ambiguity of these words, (necessary to salvation.) p. 136. Sect. 2. Cap. 12. After what manner I judged it necessary for my purpose to examine Mr. Chillingworth's reasonings and arguments. p. 139. Sect. 2. Cap. 13. An answer to Mr. Chillingworth's discourse premised before his proofs out of Scripture. p. 146. Sect. 2. Cap. 14. An Answer to the Texts produced by Mr. Chillingworth out of the Gospels of S. John and S. Luke, & c.p. 152. Sect. 2. Cap. 15. An answer to twelve Questions of Mr. Chillingworth in pursuance of the former Quotations. p. 154. Sect. 2. Cap. 16. The second Conclusion out of the Fathers, concerning a Judge of Controversies. The Author's confession of his willingness that his opinion against the Church's Infallibility might appear to have been groundless. p. 160. Sect. 2. Cap. 17. Calvinists presumptuous renouncing of the Church's Authority even in proposing of Scripture: And pretensions to immediate Revelation. p. 163. Sect. 2. Cap. 18. Importance of the controversy concerning the Church's Authority. Means for satisfaction in it abundantly sufficient in Antiquity. This Controversy beyond all others ought to be diligently studied by Protestants. 167 Sect. 2. Ca 19 Passages out of the Father's concerning the Church's authority,170 Sect. 2. Ca 20. Quotations out of Antiquity for the authority of Counsels. A contrary Character of ancient Heretics, & c. 181 Sect. 2. Ca 21. The doctrine of the Roman Church concerning the Church's authority. The great and apparent reasonableness of it,185 Sect. 2. Ca 22. The method whereby the Author arrived to an entire satisfaction concerning the Church's authority. 236 Sect. 2. Ca 23. Grounds laid to prove the certainty of I●radition. Several degrees of it. 238 Sect. 2. Cham 24. Divine Revelations proved beyond any certain humane story,246 Sect. 2. Ca 25. The reason of considering a double capacity in the Church. Certainty of Belief compared with certainty of knowledge,254 Sect. 2. Ca 26. Grounds pre-required to the demonstrating of the Church's authority. Sect. 2. Ca 27. Proofs out of Scripture, etc. for the Church's authority. Sect. 2. Ca 28. The validity of such Texts, & c. 241 Sect. 2. Ca 29. The objection from the overflowing of Arianism in the Church, answered,246 Sect. 2. Cham 30. The general ground of the Church's authority, viz. Christ's Promises. The several subjects and acts thereof,250 Sect. 2. Ca 31. Authority of the Christian Church compared with that of the Jewish,258 Sect. 2. Ca 32. Enquiry concerning the extent of the Church's authority. How Stapleton states this point,261 Sect. 2. Ca 33. Upon what grounds Stapleton may be conceived to have stated this question with more than ordinary latitude,266 Sect. 2. Ca 34. Unsatisfactory grounds of the English Church concerning Ecclesiastical authority. Calvinists doctrine concerning the Spirit being Judge of Controversies, exploded,277. Sect. 2. Ca 35. Mr. Chillingworth's newfound Judge of Controversies, viz. Private reason. His grounds for asserting such a Judge,283 Sect. 2. Ca 36. An answer to the three first grounds of Mr. Chillingworth,287 Sect. 2. Ca 37. An answer to Mr. Chillingworth's fourth and fifth grounds. Several Novelties introduced by him292 Sect. 2. Ca 38. An answer to Mr. Chillingworth's sixth ground. Of the use of Reason in Faith. 303 Sect. 2. Ca 39 An answer to Mr. Chillingworth's seventh and eighth grounds,316 Sect. 2. Ca 40. An answer to Mr. Chillingworth's objection concerning difference among Catholics about the Judge of Controversies. 320 Sect. 2. Ca 41. His reasons proving no Church of one denomination to be infallible, answered,323 Sect. 2. Ca 42. An answer to Mr. Chillingworth's objection of Circles and absurdities to the Resolution of Faith of Catholics. 332 Sect. 2. Ca 43. An answer to Mr. Chillingworths' allegations of pretended uncertainties and casualties in the grounds of the faith and salvation of Catholics. 342 Sect. 2. Ca 44. Dangerous consequences of Protestants Doctrine against the authority of the Church. 350 Sect. 2. Ca 45. The third Conclusion, concerning Schism. The point of Schism slightly considered by Protestants; which notwithstanding aught above all others to be chiefly studied. 357 Sect. 2. Ca 46. Quotations out of Fathers to show the sinfulness & danger of Schism,36 Sect. 2. Ca 47. The nature and marks of Schism according to the ancient Fathers. 366 Sect. 2. Ca 48. An application of the former marks of Schism to the present Controversy: And a demonstration that they do not suit to the Roman, but only Protestant Churches. 375 Sect. 2. Ca 49. A continuation of the same demonstration with proofs, etc. Sect. 2. Ca 50. A further continuation of the same arguments,380 Catholics not uncharitable, for saying, That Protestancy unrepented is damnable,387 Sect. 2. Ca 51. The fourth Conclusion, concerning the perpetual visibility of the church, Proofs of it out of Fathers,398 Sect. 2. Ca 52. Application of these proofs to the advantage of the Roman Catholic Church, and against Protestants, & c. 401 Sect. 3. Ca 1. The Question of the Church being decided, decides all other Controverversies, How it is almost impossible that errors should creped into the public doctrine of the Church. Of what force objections out of Scripture or Fathers are against the Church,413 Sect. 3. Ca 2. Of the Real Presence and Transubstantiation. Of the Adoration of Christ in the Sacrament. And of Communion under one species. 420 Sect. 3. Ca 3. Of Invocation of Saints. Of Veneration of Images. Of Prayers and Offerings for the Dead, and Purgatory. Of Indulgences. And of public service in the Latin tongue. With what charity and modesty the doctrines of the Church are to be examined,431 Sect. 3. Ca 4. The Holiness taught and practised by the Catholic Church a great motive to embrace the doctrines. The Author's former exceptions against certain practices ascribed to the Church, with their answers Of the Carthusians. Of mystical Theology. 453 Sect. 3. Ca 5. The Conclusion, wherein the imputation of inconstancy charged upon the Author, is answered; as likewise of forsaking a Religion, because it was persecuted. The Appendix. Cham 1. A Brief Recapitulation of the Design and Contents of the whole Book. pag 476 Cham 2. Grounds upon which certain passages in this Book h●ve been misunderstood by some Catholics, and those mistake cleared, 483 Cham 3. Misinterpretation of my book by Protestants, particularly by J. P. the Author of the Preface to my Lord falkland's Discourse of Infallibility. An answer to that Preface, 490 Cham 4. An answer to the four first Paragraphs of the Preface, 496 Cham 5. An answer to the Remainder of the Preface. 516 Cham 6. The Fundamental ground of my Lord Falkland's discourse examined. 538 Cham 7. A concluding exhortation, wherein all are invited to Catholic Unity, 547 Latin Questions and Answers, etc. 558 FINIS. Errata. PAge 7. line 25. read observing. p. 16. l. last deal as. p. 19 l 4. r. therefore ought, and. l. 2●● r: toward which tranquillity. p. 21. l. 22. r Recall. p. 22. l. 19 r. through his. p. 26. l. 25. r. Petitions to Q p. 29. l. 3. r. desire not to. p. 32. l. 31. r. customary. p. 33 l. 3. r. Offices & candidati. & l. 11. r. Presbyter●. p. 35. l. 18. r. in Schism. p. 36. l. 17. r. as these. p. 39 l. 3. r. may disturb ● & deal the last line. p. 40. l. 26. r. them to Luther's. p, 43. l. ul●. r. to justify. p. 44. l. 6. r. some few. p. 45. l. 12. r. declaration of. p. 47. l● 14. r. could not. & l. 19 to themselves. p. 54. l. 21. r. exorcised. p. 55. l. 22. r. many. p. 65. l. 12. r. in a greater. & l. 14. deal that. p. 69. l. 14. r. reading. p. 70. l. 1. r. dic, & l. 3. Petrus. p. 72. l. 16. r. were as indulgent. p. 83. l. 23. r. condemn them, p. 86. l. 24. r. Rites. p. 91. l. 10. r. wrote. p. 92. l. 2. r. Texts of. p. 119. l. 17. r. veritati. & l. 28. r. seemingly. p. 122. l. 18. r. in gratitude. p. 123. l● 1. r. willbe. p. 127. l. 11. r. Franc. à Sancta Clara. & l. 33. r. in the p. 129. l● 10. r. divulged. p. 130. l. 7, 8. instead of And therefore, r. Now when. p. 146. l. 13. r. Cham 7. p. 162. l. 13. r. visibly. p. 271. l. 8. r. ca 40. p. 172. l. 25. r. Origen (Praefat. in libr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & l. last Tract in Matth. 29. Cham 27. p. 173. l● 32. r. Catech. 18. p. 174. l. 11. r. Witness S. Augustin in Psal. 57 p. 175. l. 7. r. (it ib. ca 10.) p. 176. l. r. deal it. & l. 9 r, (cont. Ep. Fund. ca 4.) p. 184. l. 26. r. Chap. 26. p. 190. l. 8. deal and. p. 217. of L. l. ●. r. rall, when it shall be proved against them, and when. p. 220. l. 32. r. it can. p. 234. l. 11. r. rescuing. p. 241. l. 6. deal upon. p. 248. l. 16. deal ●. p. 275. l. i r. Traditions. p. 262. l. 25. r. proceed chiefly from. p. 276. l. 5. r. are of. p. 361. l. 9 r. Be ye. p. 362. l. 2. r. martyrdoms. p. 365. l. 7. r. blame me. p. 379. l. 21. r. and in. p. 385. l. 14. r. then they. & l. 18. r. in Scripp. 429. l. 5. r. vain and unprofitable Phi-& l. 11. r. thousand needless objections. p. 432. l. 20. r. especial. p. 439. l. 6. r. respect. p. 442. l. 18. for Arrius r. A●rius. p. 446. l. 11. r. imprudence. p. 456. l. 27. r. admitted. p. 455. l. 17. r. cautelously. p. 492. l. 24. r. an Answer. p. 498. l. 5. r. will premise this●● p. 485. l. 31. r. such a lie. p. 500 l. 13. r. and without. p. 522. r. Servetus, and p. 518. l. 16. r. implies. p. 544. l. last r. or false. FINIS.