Imprimatur,  
Tho. Tomkyns RRmo more. in Christo Patri ac Domino Domino Gilbert. divina providentia Archiepiscopo Cantuariensi á sacris domesticis. Ex Aed. Lambethanis Oct. 31.   

THE UNREASONABLENESS OF THE ROMANISTS, Requiring our COMMUNION With the present Romish Church: Or, a DISCOURSE  
Drawn from the perplexity and uncertainty of the Principles, and from the Contradictions betwixt the Prayers and Doctrine of the present Romish church; to prove that 'tis unreasonable to require us to join in Communion with it.  
LONDON, Printed by T. R. for Richard Royston, Bookseller to his most Excellent Majesty, 1670.   

THE PREFACE.  
AFter the Ascension of our Saviour, the Apostles separated themselves for the Publishing of the Gospel through all the World; and where they saw any likelihood of a plentiful Harvest, they bestowed there the greatest Pains in the Planting of the Christian Religion. Their first care was for the converting of the Cities, for the greater would draw after it the lesser; and Religion settled in the Cities, would sooner diffuse itself through the adjacent Villages: By the same reason their Care was the Conversion of the Metropolis of the Roman World, that from that head Religion might more opportunely be conveyed into all the members of that vast Empire; And by its Authority and Example, other Countries, subject to that City, might be moved to embrace the Faith, Et cito pervios haberet populos praedicatio generalis, quos unius teneret Regimen civitatis 
* Leo Serm. de Nat. Petri ● Pauli. . In the Conversion of this place both the Doctor of the Gentiles, and the Apostle of the Circumcision, and (Tertullian de praescriptionibus mentions also) S. John bestowed their time and Labour: Here they Preached, here they Suffered; quibus Romanis Evangelium Petrus & Paulus sanguine quoque suo signatum reliquerunt; and both founded this Church, a gloriosissimis duobus Apostolis, Petro & Paulo Romae fundatur, & constituitur Ecclesia 
* Tert. adv. Marco●, li. 4. . Both exercised here their Apostolical authority, and by Epiphanius Heres. 27. are both called Bishops of Rome 
† Irenae. lib. 3. cap. 3. ; Both of them appointed Linus to that Bishopric, Fundantes & instruentes Ecclesiam Lino Episcopatum tradiderunt 
* Irenae. ibi. . The Faith of this Roman Church was famous throughout the World, their Sufferings were great, for they usually endured the first heat of the Roman fury: Their Bishops for the first 300 years were most of them Crowned with Martyrdom; Polydore Virgil 
* De invent. rerum Li. 9 cap. 1.  saith, that seven only of 32 escaped; the Church thus founded in the Imperial City was most observed, and Eyed both by the Heathen, and by the Christian: By the Heathen it was so eyed that usually it became the mark of their fury, and their Edicts of Persecutions were first executed in the City before they were transmitted into the remoter Provinces: The Martyrs here were so numerous that it became the business of 7 Notaries to record their sufferings, as Platina reports. This Church was much eyed by the Christians, being placed in the chief City; The Faith of this Church like a Candle on a Hill was more conspicuous, and its suffering was more observed than in Remoter places: The Bishops of Rome were commonly the most Eminent, like the choicest Soldiers, placed in the Front of the Battle: The Clergy here were very numerous, according to the largeness of the City; for in Pontians' time (which was about the year 231.) there were 236 Cardinal Priests, as Polydor Virgil 
* D: Invent. rerum. ●. 4. cap. 9  reports from Guido Archidiaconus and Franciscus Zabarella, and these he explains to be such who had chief cure of Souls. This Church being thus advanced by the dignity of the City, the eminency of its founders, and the worth of its members, was accounted the chief Church, the Chair of Peter, the Apostolic See, and Valentinian in an Epistle to Theodosius saith, Antiquity hath given the Bishop of the Roman City a Principality of Priesthood above all. After that the World came into the Church, and the Ensign of Christianity became the Banner of the Empire, the Roman Church increased in Dignity, Revenue, and Credit; for the Christian Emperors out of their respect to Religion, honouring the Bishops, enlarging their Revenue, and increasing their Dignity, did show more particular kindness to the Church of Rome, where was the Seat of their Empire, and which had gained such esteem for the merit of its Founders. In short time the Riches of the Roman Bishopric or'e-topped the neighbouring places, the Pomp of their Bishops was suitable to the magnificence of the City: Now Communion with the Roman Bishop was made the Test and Mark of orthodoxness in Religion: Now it was decreed by the Emperors, that it should not be Lawful for the Bishops of Gallia or other Provinces to attempt any thing without the Authority of the venerable Pope of the Eternal City 
* Apud Baron. an. 445. n. 9 ; and in all things they hastened to increase the Authority and Honour of that See, per omnia properamus honorem & Authoritatem vestrae Sedis crescere, saith Justinian 
* L. Seder. C. de. Sum. trin. . But now the Roman Church, which by the favour of Emperors, and affection of Prelates, in reverence of S. Peter, and respect to the Imperial Seat, had gained this dignity and honour, began to swell with higher aims, and to Aspire to greater Privileges. If the Council of Chalcedon would advance Constantinople to the second Patriarchship, upon the same reason as the Fathers bade dignified Rome; Propter imperium civitatis illius; and would now give equal Privileges to new Rome, judging it reasonable that the City adorned with the Empire and Senate, should enjoy equal Privileges with the elder Rome 
* Conc. Calced. Act. 16. . then Leo epist 58. to the Empress Pulcheria durst pronounce, Consensiones Episcoporum sanctorum Canonum apud Nicaeam Conditorum Regulis repugnantes in irritum mittimus, & per authoritatem Beati Petri Apostoli generali prorsus definitione cassamus, we do make the agreement of the Bishop's repugnant to the Canons of the Council of Nice (for so he conceived the advancement of Constantinople to be) null, and by the authority of the blessed Apostle Peter do make them void. If the Council of Sardis 
* Conc. Sardic. Can. 3. n. 8.  (to honour the memory of S. Peter) appoints in the case of a Bishop or Priest, that if he think he hath good reason why the cause should be examined over again, those who heard the cause should write to Julius the Roman Bishop, and if he think fit it should be reexamined, that it may be so, and he may appoint Judges; and if he does not think it fit to be reexamined, than what he doth determine shall be confirmed. Or in case of a Bishop deposed, if he appeal to the Roman Bishop, that Bishop if he thinks fit may write to the Neighbouring Bishops that they determine the cause; and in case the deposed Bishop desire the Roman Bishop to send one of his Presbyters; it shall be in his power; and if he will send some with his Authority to judge the cause with the other Bishops, he may do it: This privilege shall be extended higher; that inferior Priests may appeal to the Roman See out of any Provinces, that the causes of Bishops may be called to Rome and heard by him alone, and this profitable Authority of receiving Appeals was pretended by Zosimus 
* Cod. Con. Ecl. Affr. in Conc. Carth. 419.  from the Canons of the Nicene Council, though no such thing could be found in any of the Copies of that Council in the Eastern Church, as Cyril of Jerusalem and Atticus of Constantinople testified; afterwards this privilege was so heightened that all causes almost were drawn to Rome 
* Vrsperg. in Phill. lmp. , all jurisdiction hindered, and causes were determined more according to men's gifts than th●ir rights. If the Ancients did show any respect to the Roman See, allowing it the privilege to be the first Seat, and that Bishop to be first of all Priests, so Justinian 
* Nou. 131. Cap. 2.  determines according to the ancient Cannons, that he be the chiefest of Bishops and the first Patriarch, and have the first place in Counsels before the other Patriarches; and i'll add another privilege, which Pope Julius mentions 
* Socrat. li. 2. Cap. 13.  as an Ecclesiastical Law, that without the Roman Bishop no decrees should be made in Counsels: Now these privileges shall be extended higher, that all other Patriarches shall be his Subjects 
* Dist. 22. Ca de Constant. , that by divine right the Bishop of Rome is head of the Church, Caput & Cardo à Domino, & non ab alio Apostolica Sedes constituta est, & sicut cardine ostium, sic hujus Apostolicae Sedis authoritate omnes Ecclesiae reguntur 
* Dist. 22. c. Sa●r. Ecl. Rom. . That it is of necessity to Salvation for every Humane Creature to be under the Roman Bishop, saith Boniface (who lived 1294.) in the extravagant 
* una. de major. & Obed. . If the Ancient Church allowed him the privilege to see the Canons of the Church put in Execution, and as the first Seat to see that the Laws made by general Consent be Observed: This Law shall be extended higher, that he may dispense with the Laws made by general Counsels, unless it be in Articles of faith 
† Caus. 25. Qu. 1. ; That no Council can put Bounds to his power, as Paschal the Second (who was Pope 1099.) Bragged, that if the Council should add any Clausa irritans virt. Should declare all dispensations to be Null, and Invallid which are contrary to their Canons; yet the Pope hath power to dispense in those cases, as Victoria 
* R●lact. 4. de pot. Papae N. 4. prop. 4.  saith. Again if the Ancients did account the Union with the Roman Church to be the Test of orthodoxness in Religion, as Hierom tells Damasus, I following no Chief but Christ, am joined in Communion to thy Blessedness, that is to the Chair of Peter, and he that gathereth not with thee scattereth, that is, who is not Christ's is Antichrist's, because the Roman Church at that time was free from those Heresies under which the Eastern Church had groaned, and therefore if they joined with the Roman, it was a sign that they Renounced the Errors which afflicted the Eastern; and so it was Required by the Emperors 
* L. cunctos C. de Sum. trin. , that all should profess the Religion which it appeared that Damasus, and Peter Bishop of Alexandria follow, (i. e.) that according to the Discipline of the Apostles and the Doctrine of the Gospel, we believe one Deity of the Father, Son, and Holy-Ghost. Now what they spoke of the present time, the Roman Bishops pretend to be constant privileges of that See; for they lost no time to inhanse their own greatness: Leo was hammering at it, Hactenus fides Petri non defecit, hitherto it hath not failed; and he adds, Nec defectura Creditur in Throno suo 
* Leo. Epist. 9 ad Pat. Antioch.  that the Roman Church neither hath Erred, nor shall Err 
† Greg. 7. li. 2. post. Ep. 55. : and in dissension about matters of faith, be that shall take that side to which the Bishop of Rome adheres, shall be secure, for Christ hath prayed that Peter's faith fail not. The first ground of the privilege, was because that the Tradition of the Christian Doctrine concerning that point, was preserved sincere in the Roman Church: For the Emperors say they would have all the people to profess that Religion which S. Peter delivered to the Romans, and which it appears Pope Damasus followed; This afterwards the Pope's claim, as the fruits of Christ's Prayer for S. Peter, and the privilege of their See. By these Steps the Roman Bishop ascended to that height of Power he enjoyed, what was either by consent or Custom, either in honour of S. Peter or Respect to the Imperial Seat, either for the greatness of the City, the Eminency of many Bishops, or the orthodoxness in Religion (while the World groaned under Arianisme) ascribed to the Roman Bishop, was afterwards challenged to be due by Divine right. Then the Sister challenged to be the Mother, the fellow-Servant to be the Mistress of all Churches, and the Roman Bishop who was so often called by Cyprian his Brother and Colleague, to be in effect the Lord and Master: The Canons were trodden under foot, the Authority of Bishops depressed, and all things brought into confusion, his flatterers, and those that thrived by his greatness labouring still to advance his Power; they cried him up to have Omnia jura in scrinio pectoris, all Laws contained in his Breast 
* Const. provinc. de ●emp. ord. gloss. in C. 2. express. Lanc. init. jur. Canon. L. 1. tit. 3. de Eccl. Const. , that he was above all Laws, and his bare will a sufficient Reason, and his decretal Epistles were equal not only to the Canons of general Councils, but they were also Reckoned among the Canonical Scriptures, and yet this Blasphemous saying fathered on S. Augustin lib. 2. de Doctrina Christiana 
* Distinct 19 in Canonicis. , is not expunged either by Thomas Manriques when he set forth the censures on the glosses by command of Pius Quintus or by Sixtus Faber Mr. of the Apostolic Palace, in his Censures published by command of Greg. 13 th' 1580.. nor did he only challenge a primacy in Spirituals, but even in Temporals as Bonif. 8. in the extravagant 
† Extrar. V●●a. de. major. & obedient.  saith, that in the Church's Power are two Swords, the Spiritual and the Temporal, and so Pope Nicolas tells the Milanois, that God gave to Peter the Key-keeper of Eternal life, Terreni simul & coelestis Imperij curam, That he shall take the charge of the Earthly and Heavenly Empire, and from hence the gloss 
* Gloss. in Coelest. dist. 22. omnis.  Argues, that the Pope hath both the Spiritual and Temporal Sword. Or if this Power seem to be too extravagant, yet to this day he challengeth a Power indirecte & in ordine ad Spiritualia, over Temporal things, although he do not pretend to a direct dominion; as if all the Princes of the Earth were only his Vassals, and held their Dominion in Fee of him; for Princes are grown Wiser than to have their Crowns so easily spurned off their heads, yet he hath as full a power over all things by this pretence of indirecte & ordine ad Spiritualia; and therefore Victoria 
* Relact. 1. de. pot. 1 ecles. N. 12.  calls it Amplissimam potestatem: for he can both when, and how much he thinks it necessary in order to Spiritual things, make and unmake Princes, divide Empires, and do many other things of the like sort, as Victoria adds: And that he hath the supreme Power in temporal things, all grant him says Bellarmine 
† Risposta del Card. Bellar. all 3a prop. di. Giou. Marselio.  except the Heretics, tutti lo Concedono, eccetto g'l Heretici: and the only difference in these Author's Opinions is in the manner how he hath this Power; Some think he hath it as Temporal Princes have it: Others think that the Power of the Pope is properly and in itself Spiritual, but in order to spiritual affairs may m●dle with temporal things with most full Authority, con pienissima Autorita; and if it be profitable for Christianity, may dispose of the kingdoms and Empires of Christians as they have done very oft; thus he concludes the answer to the third Proposition. When the Bishops of Rome were come to this greatness Kings must hold their stirrups, the Emperor must bring the Water when the Pope washeth, he must pour it out, he must bring the first dish, if Princes will be ordered by their Mr. of Ceremonies 
* Sacr. Coerem. l. 1. tit. 3. : then the Bishops began to use the Imperial Robes, than they beware a triple Crown, in sign of his Empire he wears an Imperial Crown, in sign that he is Pope he useth a Mitre 
* Durand. Ration. div. offic. l. 3. c. 17. , and in all great processions the same Honour is showed to him which was wont to be used to the Roman Emperors 
† Dur. ibi in fine. ; at the mention of his Name in their Prayers for the Pope, the Priests must bow their Heads 
* Miss. Reform. in ritub. celeb. miss. c. 5. de Oratione. n. 2. , His feet must be kissed both by Princes and Prelates, solius Papae pedes omnes deosculentur is Gregory the 7th' s. dictate 
† L. 2. post. Ep. 55. . Much more of their Pride and Vanity might be reckoned up, even while they pretended the Humility to be the servants of servants; and what care of Religion can be expected in them, who every day studied to advance their own greatness, and to raise themselves above the Height of the greatest Monarches? How can we imagine that Tares should not be sown, when those who pretended to be the Watchmen slept? How can we judge the purity of Religion to have been preserved, when the piety and Learning of the Clergy decreased, and Pride, Covetousness, and Ambition increased? The weeds were grown up though few observed when they first peeped out of the ground, after-ages saw Tares had almost covered the Corn, but the World was too busy in Contentions about greatness and honour to mind the first sprouting of them: It was the frequent complaint of Pious men, that abuses were crept into the Church, and that there needed a Reformation in Capite & membris, they complained of the multitude of Canons, and abundance of Ceremonies: Multae Constitutiones Praesulum, de quibus non sine causa est publica Orbis quaerela, etc. There are many Constitutions of Prelates, which are justly complained of by the World, there are in many Churches superstuous, needless, and superstitious Ceremonies says Erasmus 
* Declar. ad Cens. Paris n. 58. . Many complained of the vain and superstitious use of Relics and Images: Manifestius est quam ut multis explicari verbis debeat, imaginum cultum & simulachrorum nimium invaluisse, etc. It is too plain, that the worship of Images had too much increased, and the affection, or rather superstition of the People was too much indulged; so that our men did seem to omit nothing of that high adoration given by the Pagans to their Statues, or of the extreme vanity which they allowed in making, and worshipping of their Images, as Cassander acknowledgeth 
* Consultatio. tit. de imaginibns. ; great were the abuses which were crept into the Church in the Prayers to Saints, in the immoderate Prayers of the Blessed Virgin, in the choosing os particular Patron-Saints, in their processions, Pilgrimages, over-valuing of monastical habits, in their Fasts, in their Prayers, in their Legends of Saints lives, in their forging of miracles, Revelations, and Stories which might serve to increase the Priest's profits. Great were the Abuses in the Pope's Exorbitant power, in his provisions, reservations, dispensations, exemptions, exactions, indulgencies, etc. 'tis needless at present to reckon up all the abuses both in Doctrine and discipline, some complaining of one thing, some of another, most concluding there was a necessity of a Reformation: But how should it be effected when the great disease lay as it were in the head? Little could be expected from general Councils, when they neither could now be called without the Pope's consent, nor accounted Valid without his Confirmation; when the Bishops styled themselves, Dei & Apostolicae Sedis gratia Episcopi: When they had not only sworn Canonical obedience to him, which is always understood, in Licitis & honestis, in things which were honest, and allowed by the Canons; But an Oath of fealty as their Ceremoniale Episcoporum 
* Cerem. Epis. tit. de pallio.  calls it, that they would defend Regalia sancti Petri, the Royalties of S. Peter, under which he comprehended many of his usurpations: Little could be expected from the Bishops in their several Dioceses, since all were now dependants on the Pope, and if they opposed the encroachments on their rights, or the innovations stealing into the Church, the Pope presently threatened, concutere candelabrum eorum, to shake their Candlestick, as Adrian the 4 th'. 
* William Thorn Chron. in Sylvist. Allat. anno. 1153.  Writ to Theobald Archbishop of Canterbury: Then they must answer for it at Rome, where the usual confutation was by fire and faggot. At length the wise providence of God opened a way to a Reformation in many Countries; if in some places the proceed were somewhat tumultuous, I justify not the faults of any, but only acknowledge the blessing which God hath bestowed, who can bring good out of evil. At home the Reformation was begun by consent of the King, the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, the Approbation of the Universities, the determination of the Convocation: Thus it was carried on in the reign of his successor Edward 6 th'. When it was reestablished under Queen Elizabeth, it was in a regular way, by a legal abrogation of those Statutes made in Queen mary's time, and the Revival of the Laws made by King Edward, with Synodical consent: All which things are fully and Satisfactorily handled by Sir. Roger Twisden, and Dr. Heylin; after the Re. establishment of the Reformation by Queen Elizabeth, there were few or no Recusants known in England for many years, as is constantly avouched by our Writers, who lived near those times, few of the Romish persuasion (if at any time they went to Mass) refused to be present at our service 
* Lord Coke ●barge as Norwich. 1606. ; and when afterwards Pius Quintus by his Bull, had forbid those whom he called Catholics to resort to our Prayers, there appeared only few who adhered to the Romish Religion; the Popes laboured hard to keep up their party here, by founding Seminaries for the instructing of the English youth abroad, and by frequent Missions of Priests hither, to propagate and Defend the Romish Doctrine; yet during the reign of Queen Elizabeth, King James and King Charles the first, Popery decayed; till the troubles of our late wars gave the Romish emissaries opportunity to pervert many unstable persons, who either discontented with their sufferings at home, or pinched with necessity, or offended with the many Sects which the licentiousness of War had begot, or cozened with pretences of the Antiquity, unity, glory, and splendour of the Romish Church, or perhaps alured with the pleasing Doctrine and Opinions, whereby many Romish Casuists gratify Sinners, revolted from us; and whether the restauration of Peace and Order may reclaim those, whose Sufferings, and troubles alienated from us, God only knows; There is great talk still of the increase of Popery, (the Papists striving to credit their cause by these reports of numerous Proselytes) though I hope it is not so, as I see no reasonable ground that it should be so; yet the reports of Enemies should at least alarm us to be as Active in maintaining our ground, as they are in striving to gain it, and unless we are weary of our Religion, to show as much zeal in defending, as they do earnestness in assaulting; This hath Occasioned the ensuing Discourse, in which my design is from the doubtfulness and perp'exity of the Romish Doctrine, the Superstitious vanity of many allowed prastises in their Church, the absurdities in their public Offices, and the contradictions betwixt their Prayers and Doctrines to dissuade the fond Admirers of the Romish Religion, and to endeavour to reclaim them who are ready to embrace their Errors for Catholic truth.   

●●SSIVS MOLNA S. IGNATIUS LOYOLA SOCIETATIS IESV FUNDATOR. VASQUEZ ESCOBAR  
Optabilir est Fur qua'm Mendax assiduus; utrique veró Perditionis hareditatem consequentur. Eccles. 20 vers. 25.  
Pa●●   

CHAP. I.  
The first Consideration I propose, shall be from the doubtfulness, and Uncertainty of many Doctrines in the Church of Rome.  
IT is not Reasonable to Adhere to that Church, which Commands us to believe (under pain of damnation) Doctrines which are uncertianes and dubious: But the Church of Rome doth Require such things; pro. In the Creed of Pius 4th 
* Bulla Pij 4th Super form. Juram Profess: fid.  There are several things Required as Conditions of Communion with that Church, and which their Clergy are bound to swear that they truly Believe, and will constantly defend, and that they will take Care that they be taught to, and Believed by those who are under their Charge, and this also they Acknowledge to be the Catholic faith, without which there is no Salvation: But now many of these things (which they are Bound to hold according to the Letter of the Decree (are Uncertain and Doubtful, and from their own Principles and Confessions will appear so.  
1. I instance in the Article that they acknowledge the holy Catholic Apostolic Roman Church to be the Mother and Mistress of all Churches: But there is no Certainty of the truth of this Article, for it is either meant of the Churches united under the Obedience of the Roman Bishop, or else of the Particular Diocese of Rome: It cannot be meant of the Universal Church which obeys the Universal Vicar of Christ, as Suarez phraseth it: for all Churches are supposed by them members of that Universal Church, and the Universal Church to be the Collection of all Churches: Now it is improper to call the Universal Church A Mother of all Churches, for all Churches are the same with the Universal Church, and nothing can be called a Mother to itself; Again, it cannot be a Mistress of all Churches, for it is only a Society of all Churches United together; and Suppose all those Churches throughout the world, of which this Universal Church is made, I ask what is the Mistress to all these Churches? either 'tis the Roman particular Church which I shall show to be otherwise, or else they must say that all these Churches United are a Mistress to all Churches, when yet they suppose no other can be a Church but what is United with these, which is absurd. If they mean the particular Roman Church, than first, that cannot be a Mother of all Churches, which in order of time was founded after some Churches, unless we could say the Mother might be born after the Daughter, but the Roman Church was founded after the Church of Jerusalem, and therefore St. Hierome 
* Com. in Iss. 2.  says, the Church founded in Jerusalem, begat the Churches of the whole world, Ecclesia in Jerusalem fundata totius orbis Ecclesias seminavit, and the Synodical Letter 
* Theodoret. Eccl. Hist. l. 5. 6. 9  from the Council of Constantinople to Damasus and the Western Bishops calls Cyril, the Bishop of Jerusalem, the Mother of all Churches: Again, the Roman Church was founded after the Church of Antioch, where the Disciples were first called Christians. 
Acts II. 26.  Quae prima omnium ausa est proferre Christianum nomen, atque Nascentis Evangelij gloriam praedicare, saith Polidor Virgil 
* De Invent. rerum l. 4. c. 2.  I may add, after the Church of Britain, for Suarez 
* Defence. Fidei Cathol. l. 1. c. 1.  confesseth, it was from the first Rising of the Gospel, and Baronius from some manuscripts in the Vatican affixeth it to the 35th year of our Lord, which was near nine years before the founding of the Roman Church; If then the Roman Church was founded after some other Churches, it is then uncertain and doubtful how we can acknowledge it to be the Mother of all Churches, and profess this as an Article of Faith without which there is no Salvation.  
Secondly, If it be not de fide that the Roman particular Church shall never err in matters of Faith, than it is absurd to make this profession always, that she is the Mother and Mistress of all Churches, for that cannot always be the Mother and Mistress of all Churches, which may cease to be a member of the Catholic Church: But even by their own confessions, it is not the fide that the Roman particular Church shall always remain, or always adhere to the true faith: for that Rome shall be the Seat of Antichrist is the opinion of many Romanists; and if it be 
Ribera & Viega in Apoc. 17.  the Seat of Antichrist, it is uncertain how it can remain the Mistress of all Churches; again, that it shall not fail, it is only pia & probabilissima opinio 
* Bellar. l. 4. de Rom. pont. c. 4.  But not so certain that the contrary can be called Heretical, or manifestly erroneous; yea, there is no promise (if we look on that Church precisely) that it shall never revolt from the Catholic faith, says Suarez 
* Desensfid. Cathol. l. 1. 5. 5.  Now if it be not de fide that the Roman particular Church shall never err in matters of faith, and that there is no promise to support it from failing, then 'tis absurd to profess always this Article as necessary to Salvation, That she is the Mother and Mistress of all Churches.  
Thirdly, If the Romanists shall say that the particular Church, taken abstractly from its Bishop may err, but considered as united with its head the Universal Bishop than it can never err, or fall away, propter Cathedram Petri praesidentem, says Suarez 
† Defence. fid. Cathol. etc. l. 1. c. 5. n. 6, 7. ; for the Roman Bishop is the Vicar of Christ, and Head of the whole Church, the Father and Teacher of all Christians, to whom in St. Peter was delivered the full power of feeding, and governing the universal Church, as the Florentine Council determines: so that whatsoever Church is in Union with him, by virtue of the privilege derived to him by St. Peter cannot fall into any error, hoc habet quaelibet alia Ecclesia sub eadem ratione & Vnione spectata, says Suarez 
* Defence. fid. etc. ibi. n. 6. : But now if the foundation of this Article be doubtful and uncertain, it will follow that this Article itself is doubtful and uncertain also. First then, (setting aside the question about St. Peter's universal Pastor-ship which contains many perplexities) it is uncertain, whether there be by Divine right a successor to that universal Pastor-ship, for there is no mention in Scripture of a successor, no Command to appoint one, and no evident consequence that any such was appointed; and if there can be no certain command produced to appoint a successor, nor evident consequence that by divine Command any such was appointed, than it is uncertain whether there be by divine right a successor to that universal Pastor-ship. Secondly, It is uncertain whether those privileges which our Saviour obtained by his Prayer for St. Peter, are to be extended to his Successor, for either all must be allowed to a Successor, or only some privileges: if all privileges, than the Successor of St. Peter can neither err in his own judgement, nor teach any error to others: But this is more than themselves require, for the former privilege fortasse non descendit ad postelos, perhaps it hath not descended to his successors, saith Bellarmine, 
* l. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 3.  and Canus 
† Loc. Com. lib. 6. c. 8.  gives the account of Pighius defending the Popes (by virtue of this Prayer) being free from personal error: Quamvis in multis locis dicit satis probabiliter de summi Pontificis autoritate, tamen non id spectandum quid dicit, sed quid consentaneum sit ei dicere, though he speaks probably enough in many places of the Pope's authority, yet that is not so much to be regarded what he says, as what is fit for him to say, etc. for he adds in another place, it cannot be denied but the Pope may be an Heretic: If only some privileges were here given to his successor, as infallibility in Doctrine, that he should never teach error, tanquam Pontifex, whereas our Saviour obtained for St. Peter the privilege of persevering in saving faith, and also infallibility in Doctrine: I demand then, where hath our Saviour distinguished betwixt the privileges here given to St. Peter and to his Successors? Where is it said what he hath obtained for the one, and what he hath obtained for the other? Where are those words about Teaching, or Teaching others? or that a Successor should teach no errors, any more than St. Peter could? to sum up this Argument, there can be no pretence that the privileges procured for St. Peter belonged to his Successors without our Saviour's grant, but 'tis uncertain whether there be such a grant; for either all privileges must be allowed to his Successors, which is more than they would have: or there must be some distinction betwixt those privileges which he procured for St. Peter, and which he obtained for his successors; but if there be none to be found there, as I have shown, than it follows that it is uncertain whether the privileges which our Saviour obtained for St. Peter are to be extended to his Successors. Thirdly, granting there be a successor, yet still this Article that the Bishop of Rome is the successor of St. Peter (I mean in that large sense the Papists take it) is uncertain and doubtful; for there is no Command extant that S. Peter should fix his Seat at Rome, and no Divine Testimony that the Bishop of Rome was appointed his successor; and if there be neither Command that he should be appointed his successor, nor Divine Testimony that he was so appointed, it follows then that this Article, The Bishop of Rome is St. Peter's successor, is uncertain and doubtful; if there were a Command, then either it was given before St. Peter would have departed from Rome, or after his return thither again: if before St. Peter's going out of Rome he received the command to fix his Seat there then it is not likely that he would have offered to remove thence which (as the stories quoted by Bellarmin 
* l. 1. de Rom. pon●. c. 23.  say) was a little before his Death: if after his return to Rome he received this Command, how does it appear, yea that he received such Command either before his offering to departed, or after his return? what Record? what Testimony? what assurance of any such thing? if there were a Testimony that the Bishop of Rome was appointed to be St. Peter's successor, then either that Testimony is Divine, or Humane; if it be a Divine Testimony let it be produced; if it be only a Humane Testimony, than it makes only a Humane faith, and therefore it can be no Article necessary to be believed on pain of Damnation, that the Bishop of Rome is St. Peter's successor. Again that which is not yet agreed on by the Romish Doctors, whether it be by Divine, or Humane right, cannot be made by them a Fundamental Article of faith: But by what ground the Bishop of Rome succeeds to St. Peter, is not yet agreed on by them positively. Some say it is only by Humane right, so Soto Armacanus, and Paludanus, as Suarez 
* de trip. Vir●. disp. 10. ss. 3. n. 9  tells us; Some say it is not by Divine right, Sed ex facto & morte Petri says Azorius 
* Inst. moral. part. 2. l. 4. c. 11. : Bellarmine speaks very perplexedly, it is not ex prima institutione quae legitur in Evangelio 
† Bell. l. 2. de Rom. pont. c. 12. § at. vero § at. quoniam Sobs. ●. 1. 4. c. 4. ss. at setundum §. respondeo ss. accedit. : not from the first institution which is in the Gospel, but then we would find the second institution, It is not (says he) improbable that the Lord plainly Commanded Peter, etc. Again peradventure it is not by Divine right, although it pertain to the Catholic faith: Again it is not altogether the fide that the Apostolic Seat cannot be separated from the Roman Church: Again Christ did not plainly Command it, but is said to Command it, because Peter did translate his Seat thither by God's inspiration: Again it does not appear how Christ Commanded Peter that he should place his Seat, pos. it is not the fide that the See of Rome was established by a Divine and immutable Command: Thus they are perplexed where to found this right of succession, and pos. this proposition the Bishop of Rome is Saint Peter's successor must be even in their apprehension doubtful and uncertain: Lastly, those who pretend a Divine right, confess that it is not expressed in Scripture, but only virtually contained in the principles revealed in it, for (says Suarez 
* Defence. fid. Cathol. etc. l. ●. c 13. n. 5. ) There was a primacy given to Peter, and that primacy was to last in the Church, and this must be a Succession of Persons in the same dignity, now the application of this Institution and dignity to this particular Bishopric, is sufficiently evidented by plain Tradition, and evident use. But this is wholly uncertain; for first, where shall we find this Tradition that St. Peter appointed the Roman Bishop his successor. Secondly, where shall we find that the Bishop of Rome must be his successor because he died Bishop of Rome? for there is no certainty that St. Peter disposed his Universal Bishopric to that See where he died, nor any certainty from the Nature of the thing, that it must fall to that place where he died; nor any certainty that the See which he last held hath any more privilege on this account, than the See of Antioch where hefirst sat: nor any certainty that the power of naming a successor did not fall to the Apostles who survived him, or to the Universal Church: till these things be certainly determined, it remains still uncertain that the Bishop of Rome is St. Peter's successor.  
Fourthly, It is uncertain whether this or that particular Bishop of Rome be the true Bishop of Rome, and pro. uncertain whether he be St. Peter's successor; and pro. higher still, it is uncertain whether he hath the privileges obtained by our Saviour for St. Peter and his successors; and highest of all, whether the Roman Church, or any other is secured from Error by being subject to him: It is necessary de fide (says Suarez 
* Di trip. Virtute dis. 10. sect. 5. n. 2. ) that this man who is received by the common consent of the Church, as head of it, to which it is bound to obey, is the true Pope and successor of St. Peter: The reason he gives is this, For it will be impossible, otherwise to believe certainly what he defines; the same thing Salmero 
* In Epistalas Pauli in genero part. 3. disp. 2. p. 133.  speaks that with same faith with which we believe Jesus Christ, we also believe Paulus fourth to be the Pope: Non tantum humana fide cui possit subesse falsum: But now if this be uncertain than it cannot be the fide, and that it is uncertain appears thus. First, there may be Schisms in the Papacy, as hath been often (since the Roman Bishopric became rather a Dignity than an Office; one Schism lasted 50 years 
* Onuph. in Vita Urban. 6. ; sometimes three Popes together as Bened. 13. Greg. 12. John 23. all of them pretended themselves to be the true Vicars of Christ, all of them as true Popes created Cardinals 
* Platina in Vita Allex. 5. , and were allowed for Cardinals by the Council of Constance 
* Onuph. in Vita Greg. 12. , and electors of the succeeding Popes, the Cardinals of Greg. 12. and Benedict. 13, created Alexander the fifth in the Councils of Pisa; the Cardinals of these Schismatical Popes (of which some had been made Cardinals after the deposition of these Popes at Pisa) were electors of Martin the fifth; either than they were all true Popes, or none of them, 
Onuph. ibi.  or only one of them: they were not all true Popes, according to the Romanists, who tell us, there is but one Legitimate successor, the rest are Rebels and Tyrants: if only one was true Pope, than those Cardinals which the Antipopes created, could not be lawful Cardinals, nor lawful Electors of the succeeding Popes; nay, nor according to an Ancient constitution could be Popes themselves: and yet Eugenius the 4th was created Cardinal by Greg. 12th whom they confess was a Schismatical Pope: if none of these were true Popes, then for fifty years it was not necessary de fide to believe this or that man to be true Bishop of Rome; nor was it certain that the Church of Rome was the Mistress of all Churches, because of its conjunction with the successor of St. Peter, since all that time it was uncertain who was the true successor. Secondly, it is uncertain whether there be no secret impediments, which hinder him from being true Pope, as whether the essentials required in the election and consecration of the Pope be rightly performed, and pro. it cannot be the fide that this particular person is the true Bishop of Rome. First we cannot be certain, absolutely that the things required to the Election be performed: I'll instance in two things. First, if the person be Elected by those who have no power to Elect, than the Election is Null, for if they had no power to Elect than they could confer no power nor privilege on the person whom they do Elect, but 'tis uncertain whether the Election be performed by those who have power to elect; for the right they have is either by divine or humane Law; but it is uncertain that they have a wright, either by divine or humane Law, pro. First, it is uncertain that there is any right by divine Law, for let any man produce any divine Command or allowance; let them produce any proof that the authority of Electing the universal Bishop who shall be endowed with the privileges given to St. Peter, was bestowed on the Cardinals. Secondly, the Election of the Pope was performed anciently by the suffrages of Clergy, and people, so Cornelius was chosen electione Cleri & plebis, says Cyprian 
* Epist. l. 4. Epis. 2. 1.  and Gratian 
* Distinct. 79. c. ejectionem.  quotes a saying of Anacletus, that God committed the Election bonis Sacerdotibus, & Spiritualibus populis, to good Priests and Spiritual people. The like we have from Onuphrius* that the Election 
† Annot. in Plat. vita Pelag. 2.  of the Roman Bishop, more majorum was a Clero: S. P. Q. R. by the Clergy Senate, and people of Rome. Now than if the Election by the Cardinals was Jure divino than the former way of election was Null, and there was no true Pope till Celestin the second, qui primus sine ullo populi interventu Papa creatus est 
* Onuph. annot. in Plat. vita innocent. 2.  who was the first that was created Pope without the people's meddling in the Election. Secondly, it is uncertain that there is any right by humane Law, for than it must pear that a right was conferred on them by the consent of the Universal Church, that they were appointed Proctors for the Universal Church, to choose on their behalf the Universal Pastor; but if none of this appears, nay, nor certainly that they are the rightful Electors of the Bishop of Rome barely quà Bishop of Rome, than it is not certain that the Pope is truly Elected, and therefore it cannot be the fide that this Clement the 9th is the successor of St. Peter. Secondly, if the Pope be elected for fear or profit, viz. if either the electors are compelled by Violence, or by bribes induced to elect one, if they be either over-awd with power or corrupted with gifts, than the election is null: Pope Nicholas 
* Distinct. 79. c. siquis pecnnia, etc.  determines, he shall be accounted Apostaticus non apostaticus; and the Counsels of Lateran under julius second declares that election to be null, and that by that election no power either in things temporal or spiritual shall be allowed to the person elected; but now if he look into the stories of former elections, and the Mysteries of the Conclave at this day, he'll see, that it is uncertain to us whether the Pope be rightly elected: you may read the election of Formosus the first Largitione Potius quam Virtute Assumitur ad Pontificatum 
* Platina in vita foremost.  for his gifts rather than Virtue of Steph, the sixth of Sergius the third of john the eleventh raised by the Authority and endeavours of his Mother Marocia, says Onuphorius 
* Annot. in Plat. in vita John. 11th. ; john thirteenth seized on the Popedom by the power of his father Albericus 
* Plat. in John 13 th'. : john the eighteenth got the Popedom by the power of Crescentius whom it was supposed he had bribed 
* Plat. in John 18th : Silvester the second obtained Symonically first the Archbishopric of Rheims then of Ravenna, lastly the Popedom, Majore Conatu diabolo adjuvante: 
* Plat. in Sylvest. 2. : Clement the second by the Emperor's Compulsion, Damasus the second by plain force without any Consent of the clergy or people enters on the Popedom yea it even became a Custom, that every Ambitious person might seize on Saint Peter's Chair, as Platina Complains 
* in: vita Clem. 2. & Damas'. 2. . What shall I say of Boniface the seventeenth who came in like a fox, and left nothing untried by bribing and cheating that he might obtain the Popedom? or of Alexander the sixth who was reported to have Attained that dignity by the Ambition, and covetousness of some corrupt Prelates 
* Onuph. TWO in vita Allex. 6. ? and how can we be absolutely certain that this is a true pope, when we find the Essentials of a true Election may be wanting? oft times the Elections were not free, either the Electors were overawed, or their votes bought: and can we believe it is yet better? It is Platina's wish (when he saw how men were preferred to the Papacy, not for their piety, but for their gifts) Quem morem utinam aliquando non retinuissent nostra tempora; but he rather fears unless God prevented, that the elections would be worse, sed hoc parum est pejora (ni deus caveat) aliquando visuri sumus: although the doors of the Conclave are kept shut, yet enough flies abroad to show the factions sidings, and Policies within, how the Cardinals are divided by their Interests, and dependencies on Princes; how some are frighted, others corrupted; some out of fear, others out of hatred etc. giving their Votes this way, or that way, and what certainty can we have this is a true Bishop of Rome, lawful successor to Saint Peter when we see so much ground to suspect that the Essentials of a true election are oft times wanting but if any reply, that God's providence will not permit any to pass for Pope, who is not Pope; and that if the Church do submit to him as Pope, it is certain that he is Pope, and pro. we may still believe that it is de fide that this Pope is lawful elected Pope. But this is saying without proving, much confidence with little reason: I therefore add, that there have been those who passed for Bishops of Rome and have been owned not only by their own parties, as in a Schism, but generally have passed for the true Pope, when yet their Elections were null; I say, have been generally owned, their names reckoned in the catalogue, their decrees allowed, and yet the Essentials requisite to a right election are acknowledged by their own Historians to be wanting. Instance in Vigilius the first who suborned witnesses against Silverius, that he would betray the City to the Goths, and having got him deposed, was during the life of Silverius put into the Bishopric, and did (as Onuphrius confesseth) 
* Annot. in Plat. in Vita vigil. 1.  Occupare per vim pontificatum Romanum; and yet this man is owned for Pope, without the least appearance of any new election after the death of Sylverius, or any approbation and allowance from the clergy, and people by which he might lawfully enjoy that title. Again I instance in Benedict the fifth created Pope in a sedition by the friends and dependants of john the thirteenth against Leo the eighth and yet he is both reckoned in the catalogue of Popes, 
* Onuph. Annot. in vita Bened. 5.  and the succeeding Popes who assumed that name in reckoning of themselves did allow him to be Pope; so in john eighteenth though he came not in by the door, but during the life of Gregory the fifth seized on the Popedom, yet he is reckoned in the Catalogue of Popes which Platina admires 
* Plat. in vita John 18. . When we thus see some owned for Popes who have never been duly elected, and do know how much tirannical compulsion may force an outward compliance, we cannot judge the submission and silence of the Church (as Suarez holds) Can be any certain ground that the election was lawful. The sum of this argument is this, if it be uncertain whether the essentials of a just and true election be performed, than it is uncertain whether this be a true Pope and ex consequenti it cannot be the fide that this Pope is the true sucessor of Saint Peter. secondly we cannot be certain absolutely that the things essentially required in the consecration of the Pope are duly performed; I do not mean of such things in the consecration which are only required by the cannon; but I speak of those things which they account essential, that there can be no consecration without them. first I instance in the qualification, of the person to be consecrated: without baptism there is no ordination and pro. who have not been baptised cannot be ordained, nor consecrated, and are jure divino uncapable of orders, but we cannot be absolutely certain that this person hath been baptised pro. we cannot be absolutely certain that some thing essential to his consecration is not wanting. Secondly In the intention of the consecrators, for that is essentially necessary in conferring of orders by the Counsels of Florence 
* Decret. de Sacram.  and the council of Trent 
* Sess. de Sacram. Can. 2.  requires an intention of doing, that which the Church doth, but it may fall out, that the consecrators have no intention of doing any such things either through negligence, or malice either they may intent to do nothing or not to do that which the church doth (i e.) to consecrate: or they may intent to do this outward act in sport or merriment, or if then they cannot be certain that there is either an actual or virtual intention in the consecrators, than they cannot be certain absolutely that the essentials of consecration are duly performed. Thirdly. Without intention in the person to be consecrated, there is no true consecration; so Innocent the third determines 
* C. majore: Extra. de Baptisms. ; and Suarez calls it the common opinion of Divines that to the value of a sacrament is required intentio suscipientis; but no man can be absolutely certain, that the Pope either in any moment foregoing or during the act of consecration, did any way intent to receive it; for ti's not the bare outward performing or doing, or receving which are required: but the intending in the mind to do, or receive, and of that inward intention in the mind we cannot be certain. Many more things might be added concerning the consecrators whether they were baptised? whether they were Priests? whether there is no defect in any thing essentially required to their baptism, or ordination? whether the intention in the consecration was directed to that present person? for that Filliucius 
* Cas. Consc. tract. 1. c. 5. n. 79.  requires now in these things since ti's Possible some essential may be wanting, it follows no man can be certain absolutely that this is the true Pope, and if he cannot be so absolutely certain that this is the true Pope: because ti's possible some essential has been wanting, than he cannot own it to be so de fide, nor swear that the Church of Rome is the Mother and Mistress of all Churches because of its Union with him.  
Secondly, I instance in the Article of Trausubstantiation according to the Creed of Pius 4th, they swear that in the most holy Sacrament of the Eucharist there is truly, really, and substantially the body, and blood, with the Soul, and Deity, of our Lord Jesus Christ, and there is a conversion of the whole substance of bread into the body, and of the whole substance of wine into the blood, which Conversion the Catholic Church calls Transubstantiation; and in the Council of Trent there is an Anathema pronounced against those who shall deny that wonderful, and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the blood, the Species of bread, and wine only remaining, which Conversion the Catholic Church most fitly calls Transubstantiation: now though according to the Letter the Decree seems plain, and they will all cry up this wonderful miracle, this August mystery, yet in the explication of it and of the grounds whereupon they believe it they are perplexed; For,  
First, although they pretend to derive this Doctrine from Scripture, yet it is not certain that there is any place of Scripture which necessarily infers this doctrine: so Scotus 
* In 4. lib. sent. didst 11. q. 3.  says, and how the body of Christ is there, whether by Conversion of something into it, or without Conversion the substance, and accidents of bread remaining, non invenitur in Canone Bibliae says Gabriel Biel 
† In Canone miss. lect. 40. , and notwithstanding that they usually insist on the 6th of St. John and the words of Institution, this is my body, yet others of great note among them, conclude that it is not expressed in Scripture, so Canus 
* Loc. Com. l. 3. c. 3. fund. 2.  holds, and Cajetane maintains † the 6th of St. John no way pertains to a Sacramental 
* In 3. part. q. 80. art. vet.  eating; the same is held by Jansenius Tapperus and others, cited by Suarez and first some of them confess, they should not have believed it, unless the Church had declared it to be de fide, for the Church by the spirit of truth did explain those things which were obscure in Scripture 
* Canus Loc. Com. l. 3. c. 3. fundam. 2. ; but than it would be still in vain to endeavour to prove this conversion from Scripture, because there is no argument from thence which can sufficiently convince: and to argue with us from those Texts, which they think are not sufficiently cogent without their Church's explanation, is altogether impertinent, for we are as uncertain of the infallibility of their Church in explaining those Texts, as we are whether those Doctrines be contained there, 'tis first as to us uncertain whether this Doctrine be delivered in Scripture. Secondly, though they affirm that by the words of institution the bread is turned into the body, and the wine into the blood, yet they are perplexed about the meaning of them. First, As whether there be any figure in the words or no? For if they be construed figuratively, than they cannot certainly infer any transubstantiation; and first sometimes they tell us there is no figure, or trope: yea, there ought to be none in the words of Institution; but then how can the Cup be the New Testament? there the Cup must be put for Wine in the Cup. Again, How can the Cup be the New Testament properly? For a Testament is the Testators disposition of his Estate; but the Wine in the Cup, or the thing contained under the species cannot be so in any proper sense. Again, 'tis uncertain how the blood in the Cup can properly be called the New Testament in his blood? for the blood is a physical, a Testament is a moral thing: yea 'tis uncertain whether Bellarmin's * Explanation of the 
L. 1. de Eucharist. c. 11.  words be sense; This blood under the species, is the New Testament under his blood: so that 'tis doubtful when they have done all they can, whether they can explain these words without a figure. Secondly, They are perplexed about the meaning of these words, as what is meant by hoc est corpus meum; for if they cannot resolve what is meant by this Pronoun hoc, than they cannot determine what is the full meaning of this Proposition; indeed Bellarmin 
* L. 1. de Euchar. c. 10.  tells us, Vera est Catholicorum sententia, qui volunt illud [Hoc] non demonstrare panem, sed rem contentam sub speciebus panis, etc. That the opinion of Catholics was true, who say, this Pronoun Hoc doth demonstrate not the Bread, but a thing contained under it; which although it was Bread before, yet it is now the Body of Christ: But he that consults the Romish Writers, will find that Bellarmin only hides their quarrels, and obtrudes his own opinion for a general Doctrine. Johannes de Rhada 
* Controu. 5. de Sacr. Euchar. Art. 4.  acknowledges the perplexity of their Doctors; some say the Pronoun Hoc demonstrates the species of bread, because the Pronoun must signify a sensible thing, which exists when the designation is made, and remains when the signification of the word is finished, but there is nothing in the Sacrament which is sensible when the words began to be pronounced, and when they are ended besides the accidents, first it must signify the Accidents. Some say that this Pronoun demonstrates the body of Christ as it is in itself, or intending the body of Christ in Heaven, which when the words are spoken begin to be in the Host 
* Occam quod lib. vet. q. 2. ; and so the words signify, this body is my body. Some say, it designs the substance of bread under those accidents, and so the sense is, The bread passes into the body of Christ; hoc est 
* Bonavent. q. 1. Art 1. in 2. part. didst 8. lib. 4. , ad hujus verbi prolationem hoc totum transire in corpus. Some say, it designs something common to the substance of bread, and the Body of Christ under this reason of being contained under the species, and so the sense should be hoc quod sub his acccidentibus continetur est corpus meum, that which is contained under these accidents is my body, and this he pretends both Thomas, and Scotus holds. But still the perplexity remains, what that is which is contained under these accidents, when they first say Hoc▪ for 'tis not the body till the words are ended. If it were the bread, than the Proposition is true, this bread is my body; and that they will not g●ant. Again, the subject of the Proposition must have a distinct sense; when first our Saviour took the bread into his hand, and said this is, there must be some meaning of that part of the Proposition, that Demonstrative pronoun [Hoc] must refer to some thing present 
* Bellar. l. 1. de Sacr. Euchar. c. 11. § h. ●c expl. , and that which is evident to the senses, and not barely apprehended by the imagination; what can that be but only bread? which they confess was existing during the speaking of the words? Thirdly, they are perplexed, whether this Transubstantiation be wrought by the Prayer of Consecration, or the words of Institution: that it was wrought by the Prayer, as well as the words was the opinion of some; that the Consecration was the same with the blessing, and giving of thanks was the opinion of Thomas Durand, Hugo Cardinalis, etc. yet still how this can be is wholly intricate and perplexed; for if our Saviour Consecrated by blessing, and giving of thanks, than he consecrated by Prayer: but that they will not say, for they now conclude he Consecrated by those words, hoc est corpus meum, as it is determined by the Council of Florence 
* Conc. Flor. in Instruct. Armen. , that our Saviour's words by which he made the Sacrament are the form of it, and that by the virtue of those words the Consecration is wrought, and so it is explained in the Roman Catechism: We are taught (says the Catechism) by the Evangelist's Matthew, and Luke, and by the Apostle this is the form of the Sacrament of the Eucharist; hoc est corpus meum: well, but still they are perplexed in what sense the Priest uses these words; for some think they are only repeated Historically 
* Salmero tract. 13. tom. 9 Soto Art 5. q. 1. didst 11. ; but they cannot work this change, for so they only show what was done by our Saviour in the first celebration of the Sacrament; others say, that they are spoken significatively, (i. e.) that the Priest speaking in the person of Christ signifies the turning of that bread into the body, so says the Florentine Council, Sacerdos loquens in persona Christi hoc conficit Sacramentum; but this will not agree with the Canon of the Mass, where they are repeated Historically, for after the Prayer that God would make that offering to be to us the body, and blood of his Son Jesus Christ, 'tis immediately added in imitation of the Apostles recital of the Story, who, the day before he suffered taken bread into his holy and venerable hands, and lifting up his eyes unto Heaven to thee his Father, God Almighty, gave thanks, he blessed, broke, and gave to his Disciples▪ saying, take, eat, all of this, for this is my body: now what connexion can there be betwixt these latter words, and the former? unless they be. joined as part of the History: or what sense in the former words he broke and gave to his Disciples, saying, take eat all of this? if they break off abruptly the repeating of the Story, and do not add these words, hoc est corpus meum. Thus they are perplexed on either hand, and first to avoid this intricacy they have divised a new way, that these words should both be taken recitatiuè, and significatiuè: both as part of the Story, and as the Priests words in the person of Christ by virtue of them turning the bread; but still how can this be, that the same words should be both a repetition of a former Story, and the production of the like effect? how is this intelligible that the same word without any variation should be used for these different purposes? both to relate what was done, and to work the same thing over again: and further in the Consecration of the blood 'tis added qui pro vohis & pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum 
* Canon miss. in missali Rom. Paris. 1631. , which shall be shed for you, and for many for the remission of sins, now if these words be understood significatively, than they are utterly false, as Durand argued, because the body of Christ must suffer no more, nor the blood be shed: thus whether these words shall be taken narratively, or significatively, or jointly their Doctors cannot agree; and are wholly perplexed to solve the difficulties, and yet maintain their Ground. Fourthly, they are perplexed whether this conversion be productive or adductive or Conservative; and so Bellarmine acknowledges, that though they agree there is a transubstantiation (i. e.) conversion of the bread into the body, and of the wine into the blood for the authority of the Councils and Church; yet in the manner of explaining it they differ, for they find so many difficulties in stating the manner of this conversion, that though they maintain the decree in the terms of it yet they are perplexed to find the sense, (i. e.) they profess to believe transubstantiation but when they come to tell us what they mean by it, they then confess they believe they know not what. For first, If this conversion be productive than the body of Christ should be made by these words, hoc est eorpus meum, but that which already hath its being, cannot by that action receive its being, for it is supposed to have its being before that action. Again, Every new real action must have a new real term but there can be here no new real term, because the term was praeexisting as Io. de Rhada 
* In 4. lib. sent. Con. 7. Art. 2. Concl. 3.  argues; again Albertinus 
* Coral. tom. 2. Cor. 3. dub. 3. concls. vins. § 13.  urges this argument, if the word doth produce the body, than the body of Christ did concur as an instrument to the production of itself: but that is a contradiction, that the body should be made substantially by itself, for than it should be both before and after itself; before itself, for it is presupposed to that Action by which it should be produced after itself as it is made by that Action, and by this means the same thing would be both effect and cause in the same kind, (i. e.) the body of Christ would be the cause of the Action by which it was produced, and that Action is the causality or manner by which the body is produced. This way of Conversion productive they now dislike, though it most agree with the Letter of the Canons, for they say, the bread is substantially turned into the body of Christ 
* Conc. Rom. sub Nicol. 2. & Greg. 7. : they compare this to the turning of water into Wine, but the Wine was produced in that miracle: they have been used to say, the Priest in the Sacrament creates his Creator; yea Pope urban in the Roman Council makes this his pretence against doing Homage to the Laity for Ecclesiastical honours, because it was nimis execrabile, manus quae in tantam eminentiam excreverint ut Deum cuncta creantem suo ministerio creent, etc. because it was abominable, that those hands which are advanced to that honour to create God who created all things should be the Servants of those hands which are daily defiled with obscene infection: this way of production though it was not defined, yet was thus publicly pleaded by a Pope in Council but is now rejected. Secondly, If this Conversion be conservative, than it will be wholly unintelligible, for conservation is the continuance of creation, or a continuance of that which already hath its being: either first they meant, that by the words of Consecration was wrought a Conservation of the body of Christ which was in heaven, or a conservation of it under the Sacramental species: it cannot be meant that there is wrought a conservation of it under the species unless there had been first an action creandi, for it cannot be thought that a thing is conserved there where it is not supposed first to exist; but according to them, before these words the body did not exist there, so it could not be conserved there: nor can it be meant of a conservation of the body in Heaven, for conservation is the continuance of an Action, but here is a new Action, and a new dependence wrought by the force of the words of consecration, as Albertinus argues 
* Tom. 2. Corol. 3. dub. 3. n. 7. . This pretence of conservation hath few maintainers, first let us consider the third way which Bellarmine calls communiorem & tutiorem viam, the more common, and safe way of Thomas, and other grave Divines, I mean adductive conversion, (i. e.) by the words the body of Christ is not made to exist simply, but to exist under those species; that the bread ceases to be under those accidents, and the body gins to be under them: that the body succeeds to exist under those accidents not by having a new substance, but only a new presence: but here they are all together perplexed; for if it succeed here, where the bread was, it must either change place, or be produced, as Thomas instances in fire, if it begin to be in the House, where it was not before, either it must be brought in hither, or be generated here, that it doth not change places is plain, for than it should leave Heaven, when it was adduced under the species of bread on Earth: if they say it must be produced here, how can that be? how can it be produced and not have its being produced? or how can it be said that the substance of bread is turned into the substance of the body, when no new substance is made, but only the substance exists in a different ubi? or that one substance passes into another, when the one only succeeds the other? or how should it be the most perfect manner of Conversion as Bellarmine says, when there is no change in the Nature of the body but only it is vailed under other accidents? when there is no new substance but only a new presence? yea Rhada says out of Scotus 
* Part. 4. Cont. 6. Art. 1. Concl. 3. , there is no proper change at all? or how can it be most fitly called Transubstantiation, yea properly, and conveniently (as the Council of Trent says) when this conversion of the whole substance of bread into the whole substance of the body is no more than that the one existed where the other did? and the term [ad quem] of this conversion is not any substance but an accidentalis modus, a presence where it was not before? There are some other inventions, wherewith they labour to solve these perplexities, but what one thinks that he builds, another soon pulls down, and there be so many contrary opinions in stating this conversion, that 'tis easy to see, they could not satisfy others, who are so wholly unsatisfied themselves: Thirdly, there are so many intricacies about the species themselves, where they are subjected; what Union betwixt the body of Christ and those accidents, whether this body be an Organical body or no? when it ceases to be under the species, if there be no substance of bread what then is broken? what chewed? what digested? what is it which nourishes? what is it which breeds worms, & c? there are so many intricacies, that those who stiffly maintain this Doctrine of Transubstantiation, know not how to wind themselves out: I instance in some few things. First, what is it that is broken? either the body or the species: it cannot be the body, for the body cannot be divided into parts; and first, to say that the body is broken, and chewed by the teeth, unless they be understood in a sound sense, in majorem incides haeresin quam ipse habuit Berengarius, says the Gloss 
* Gloss. in Can. Bereng. de Consecr. dist. 2. , and yet in these words Berengarius was forced to recant, panem & vinum non solum esse Sacramentum, sed verum corpus, etc. & in veritate manibus Sacerdotum frangi, fidelium dentibus atteri 
† Can. ego Bereng● ibi. , that the body was in truth held in the Priest hands, broken, and chewed with the teeth: which words says Serenus Cressy, are far from being justifiable, unless they be understood Sacramentally (i. e.) for the outward species, which yet he sees cannot be, for it's said not only is a Sacrament, but the body, etc. and is in truth held in the Priest's hand, broken and chewed, and if it be so, then Pope Nicholas and the Council erred which prescribed this recantation, and how will he swallow that? it cannot be the species, for no man can break or chew colour, or savour, or figure, etc. but only some substance. Secondly, what is it that nourishes? it is either the body or the species. First, it cannot be the body; for the body of Christ cannot be turned into our bodies, otherwise Christ's body could not be whole, for thousands of men must have part of his body; It is nourishment to us (says Cressy) but not after a Carnal manner; ●ut how can this be? for if it be not nourishment after a Carnal manner, than it must be after a Spiritual, and how can our bodies be nourished Spiritually? If there be nourishment, there must be something digested, but Christ's body is not turned into our bodies by digestion, says he: If there be nourishment, than something must be added to our bodies but Christ's body is not added to our bodies: Let him first either show how bodies can be nourished Spiritually, or confess that he speaks, what he doth not understand. Some first among them say, The body ceases to be under the species when it comes into the belly, others say, while it is in the mouth; others, that while the species remains the body remains; and first while the species are in the belly, the body of Christ is there 
* Lindwood in Con●. prov. de sum. trin. c. altiss. p. glutiant. , but the Gloss on the Canon non iste de consecrat. distinct. 2. says, the body doth not come down into the belly, quousque verò pergulam procedat nescio; how far it goeth into the Throat I know not; yet he concludeth, 'tis not digested as other meats are, nor passes into the nourishment of the body, for it is the food of the Soul, and not of the body: Well, can it be the species? Secondly, that also is uncertain for nourishing is the reparation of a substance, not of accidents, and first must be by a substance, and not barely by accidents: in nourishing the food must be transmuted into the body, and how can accidents be so? to salve all this, God must afford some matter, either restore the former matter of bread, or produce some new matter, or which is most miraculous to me, all this must be done without a miracle says Bellarmine 
* L. 3. de Euchar. c. 24. resp. ad arg. 6. ; for the Natural Order of things require it, (i. e.) when the dispositions requisite for introducing the form are made, after the previous alteration of the species, than the order of things requiring it, God must substitute matter: but what assurance hath Bellarmine that all these things shall be as he fancies? that the accidents shall be disposed without matter, in which they should be subjected? that when these material dispositions are perfected God will substitute matter: many such things there are which will trouble him to resolve. All this shows that this is a most perplexed Doctrine, for if the substance of bread be gone, what can nourish? it must either be the body or the species; and yet neither of these can they certainly fix on. Thirdly, what is it that is corrupted? as when worms are generated of the Host, it cannot be the body, for God will not suffer his holy one to see Corruption. If they say the species, neither can that be, for Corruption is properly of substance, neither can the worms be generated of bare accidents, as of colour, figure, or the like, there must be then some new matter created into which the form of worms must be introduced, and how strange must this be? that men to free themselves from these perplexities are forced to shelter themselves under pretence of multitude of miracles of which not one can be perceived by our senses. Durand mentions eleven miracles in Transubstantiation 
* Rationale div. offic. l. 4. c. 12. , and yet there is not the least appearance to our senses that there is one; yea to clear themselves from the perplexities which attend this Doctrine they are forced to fly to more, Thomas Aquinas 
† Part. 3. q. 75. art. 8. arg. 3. , says there are plura difficiliora, etc. more difficulties than in the creation. And Scotus 
* In 4. lib. sentent. didst 11. q. 3.  objects to himself, that this one opinion is the occasion of turning all Philosophers, and those that follow Natural reason from the faith, for they would think, that there are greater inconveniencies (supposing there be no substance of bread remaining) than in the article of the Incarnation, & propter haec fidem patere contemptui omnium sequentium rationem; this exposes Religion to the contempt of all that follow reason: for to believe that which seems so much both against sense and reason, and so little appearance of revelation to defend it, is strange to wise, and rational men, who know not how to digest such uncertain, doubtful, and absurd opinions, unless they can bring their faith to believe what they judge impossible. The sum of this second argument to prove the perplexities of the Romish Church in the Doctrines she hath defined is taken from the uncertainties, intricacies, and perplexities in the Doctrine of Transubstantiation.  
Thirdly, I instance in the Doctrine of Invocation of Saints, the Council of Trent 
* Sess. 25. the Invocatione, etc.  commands all who have any cure to teach this, That the Saints reigning with Christ offer up their Prayers for men to God: that it is good and profitable, humbly to invoke them, and for the benefits to be obtained of God by his Son, who is our only Redeemer, and Saviour, to fly to their Prayers, help, and aid, and it declares, that all those think impiously, who deny that the Saints enjoying Eternal happiness are to be invoked; or who assert that they do not pray for men; or that it is foolish to supplicate to them, either with the voice, or the mind: Now this Doctrine is so dubious, that it is unreasonable to make it an article of faith. for first though the Saints should pray for us, yet 'tis no necessary inference, first we must pray to them: no more than if a friend at an hundred mile's distance should every day pray for us, first we must every day say at that distance, ora pro nobis. Secondly, it is no way certain that it is good, and profitable to fly to their Prayers, help, and aid, for if it be not certain that they know our Prayers, it is not certain that it is profitable to fly to their prayers; now if they know them it must be either that they hear these themselves, or are revealed to them by God, or discovered to them by the holy Angels. But first, it is not certain that they themselves can hear them; for though according to Sco●us separate souls may intuitively see every vocal oration which they might have known if they were joined to the body, and also mental orations, and may behold the essence, and internal operation of our souls, yet all this must be understood nisi immoderata distantia impediat, 
* Io. de Rhada. Cont. 16. Art. 4. Concl. 1.  unless there be an immoderate distance, for no Agent can act but upon a patiented duly approximated to it, and an immoderate distance hinders the approximation: first unless the Separate Soul be in its due distance, it cannot understand these Prayers: and so Biel 
† In Canon Missa Lect. 31.  Says that they cannot know, that way, either mental or vocal Prayers by reason of the immoderate distance: supposing (I say) with Scotus, that separate Souls may hear those Prayers, which they might have known, when they were joined to the body: yet this is not certain how far this distance reaches; and what is the Sphere of their activity; and 'tis far less certain, whether the Saints in Heaven can at that distance hear the many suppliants in several parts of the Earth; and see those secret desires which never discovered themselves in words. Secondly, it is no way certain that the Prayers of men are discovered by the Angels to the Saints, for it is not certain, that the Angels can know the thoughts 
* Bellar. lib. 1. de Sanct. Beatit. c. 20. ; or if they do, 'tis not certain that they do discover these things to them. 'Tis not certain they do know them, yea its most certain that God only knoweth them 
† 2 Chro. 6. 30. , and if they do know them, yet 'tis not certain that they are either bound by Charity, or Office to represent these things to the Saints. Thirdly, the usual way they pitch on is either God's revelation to the Saints as he revealed things which were future to the Prophets: or else that the Saints see all things in God from the beginning of their happiness, which any way pertain to them: and this way Bellarmine calls the more profitable opinion, but neither of these ways is certain. For first, 'tis no way certain that God doth reveal these Prayers to the Saints, which are made to them. And if he should as Bellarmine argues, the Church could not so confidently say to the Saints, Pray for us, as rather, Pray to God that he would reveal these Prayers to them; no man can say, that God is any way bound to reveal these things, or de facto that he doth so, and how then can we be certain that God will reveal these Prayers to them. Secondly, 'tis not certain that they see these things in the word, as in a Corporeal Glass men may see clearly and distinctly what appears, according to Becanus 
* Ma●●. Contr. l. 1. c. 8. §. 4.  his explication. For first, 'tis no way necessary to the Saints happiness, that they should see these things in God, neither from the nature of happiness, because as Scotus and his followers argue, the proper nature of Happiness consists in seeing God, and his Attributes, but the Prayers of Saints are distinct from God, and his Attributes, first 'tis not necessary they should see these, ex ratione beatitudinis 
* Rhada Cont. 16. Art. 4. Concl. 3. ; nor is it a consequent flowing from their happiness, that because they may see in his Essence those things which flow from his Essence, first they may see the Prayers made by the Creatures: though they may see his works about the Creature, I mean the Idea of his works which is himself, yet it doth not follow, they should see what ever the Creature himself doth: and so Biel tells us that it is no part of their Essential beatitude, nor is it certain that it pertains to their accidental beatitude 
† Biel in Canon Missa Lect. 31. . Secondly, as it is not necessary they should, so it is not certain, that they do see all things in the Glass of the Divine Essence: for either than they see all things simply in that Glass, or only such things as God is pleased to permit them to see; if all things simply, than they must needs know all future contingencies, they must know the day, and hour when the Son shall come to judge the world, and yet our Saviour saith, of that hour knoweth no man, no not the Angels, though they always see the face of their Father who is in Heaven 
* Ma●. 18. 10. : If they see such things only as God is pleased to discover to them, than we cannot be certain that they know our prayers, unless we are first certain that God will discover them to them: If this Glass they talk of discovers all things tanquam per naturalem communicationem, than they must see all future contingencies, if the Glass discovers things only tanquam per voluntariam communicationem, than they know no more than he is pleased to communicate, and without his revelation we cannot be certain what that is, which he doth communicate: and if we cannot be certain they know our Prayers, we cannot be certain that it is profitable to fly to their Prayers. Thirdly, it is no way certain that they Pray for us, I confess it is not incredible that they Pray for their fellow members; none will deny that their Charity is more ardent in Heaven, than it was on Earth, and the greater their Charity is it will appear in more eminent effects (so far as their conditiou permits) to their Brethren. Thus far we do not question whether they pray for us, I mean in genere 
* Field of the Church l. 3. c. 3. ; yea, what if I should add that it is not incredible, but that they pray for their friends and acquaintance? and in general desire the removal of Evils, and the granting those things which are necessary for their Salvation? yea, if I should add further that it is not incredible, but that they pray for them whose Conditions on Earth they remember, even this also some eminent Protestants have thought 
† Andrews Opusc. Posth. Resp. ad c. 20. l. 5. Repl. Card. Perron Montac. adv. Buleng. pag. 21. : yet still 'tis no way certain, not certain (I say) that they do pray in particular for their fellow members, or remember in their Prayers all the particular necessities of the faithful on earth: for if we say we are certain that they do thus particularly pray, the question will return which way? or by what ground are we certainly assured? and it will appear there is no certain ground but only some guesses, and supposed probabilities, and ꝑo. this Doctrine must be doubtful, and uncertain.  
Fourthly, I instance in the Doctrine of Indulgences, the Council of Trent declares, That since there was a power of bestowing Indulgences granted by Christ to the Church, and the Church from the most ancient times hath used it: The Synod doth teach, that the use of them being very wholesome to Christian people and approved by authority of Councils to be retained in the Church: and Anathematizes them who either say they are unprofitable, or deny the Church's power to bestow them. The same also is sworn by their Clergy in the profession of faith made by Pius 4. Indulgentiarum Potestatem à Christo in Ecclesia relictam esse, illarúmque usum Christiano Populo maxime salutarem esse affirmo. No more was said of this Article by the Council of Trent, whether for haste of ending the Council: or rather for multiplicity of abstruse questions, which must have been determined as the History of the Council says, I cannot judge. The meaning of the article must be gathered from the practice of their Church and opinion of their Doctors: 'tis certain in the practice of their Church that there are indulgences granted by the Pope in which he doth absolve à culpa et poena both from fault, and punishment. That for visiting such a Church frequenting such a Station, Saying over at such an Altar so many times Ave Maria or pater noster, they shall have plenam remissionem peccatorum, so it is in the Bull of indulgence for celebrating the year of Jubilee; in the first institution of Jubilees by Boniface the 8th. 
* Platina in vit 〈◊〉 Bonifac. 8.  he gave to those who visited the thresholds of the Apostles plenam omnium peccatorum remissionem a full remission of all sins. Leo the 10th gave to those who devoutly repeated this Prayer after the divine Office, (to the holy, and undivided Trinity, the humanity of Christ Crucified, the fruitful integrity of the most blessed Virgin be eternal praise, glory, and honour) Indulgence of all the defects, and faults which in the performance of the office were contracted by humane frailty. 
* Gavant Thes. Sacr. Rit. in. Fine Libri.  Nothing is more common in the Bulls for the Crusadoes than pardon for half sins, or for all sins, so in the Crusado, which urban the 6th published against the adherents of Clement there were given to Henry Spenser Bishop of Norwich mirabiles indulgentiae, * by 
† Hen. Knighton Cron. l. 5 inter script. Hist. Anglic. Pag. 2671.  the authority of which he did absolve as well the dead as the living, for whom there was a sufficient contribution from all the fault and punishment: and some of his Commissaries affirmed, that at their command the Angels descended from Heaven, and took the souls which were in Purgatory, out of their punishment, and instantly carried them to Heaven. In the Crusadoes against the Albigenses, Innocent promised to all, who either died in the way or in battle, on God's part and by the authority of St. Peter and St. Paul absolution from all the sins contracted in their lives, which they had confessed, and for which they had not done penance 
* Rigord. 1 is't. An. 1208 Pag. 207. . Sometimes the indulgence runs for penance enjoined; so for repeating the new office of the Blessed Virgin if they be not obliged to do it, Tius 5 remits 50 days de poenitentiis injunctis, as oft as they do it: for repeating the office of the dead, for repeating the 7 penitential psalms, or the Graduals 40 days, and so the Indulgence runs which Martin the 50 anno 1429 gave for the Celebration of Corpus Christi day to all that were present at the Matins and Evensong of the feast 200 day's indulgence, to all that were present at the Prime, the third, the sixth, the ninth, or the Completory of that feast 80 days, to the Priests who said Mass for every Mass 100 days, to those who follow the procession in which the Host is carried 100 days, etc. to endure every year for ever, 
* Const. Prov. Tit de serlis gloss. In Cap. Ex script. p. Corp. Christi.  Sometimes they are Indulgences pro poenitentiis injungendis, for remission of Penance which might be enjoined, sometimes the words run, Indulgentiam in Domino miserecorditer relaxamus: and these Indulgences are some for days; so every Arch Bishop and Bishop at their first coming to their Cathedrals* grant 
† Carem. Epsc. l. 1. c. 2.  40 days: sometimes for one year as at the dedication of a Church, sometimes for 7, sometimes for an 100 years, sometimes for 1000 So the Monastery of St. Sebastian in Catacumbis hath Indulgences of 3000 years for all that visit a stone which hath the print of our Saviour's footsteps: by other Pope's 7000 years were granted on the feast of the Asoention unto the Calends of August every day 4000 years on St Sebastian's day 3000 years, and 40 days of Indulgence, and all these are doubled in Lent and in the double festivals. I could reckon up multitudes of large Indulgences, which some bountiful Popes have bestowed, as at Crowland Abbey a pardon of 8000 years: so the pardon procured by Thomas Cromwel* 
† Acts and Monum. in the life of Cromwell. Pag. 49.  for Boston from Julius the second, that all who are of the gild of our Lady in St. botolph's Church in Boston who resort to the said Chapel on the Nativity or Assumption of our Lady, giving to the support of the Chapel at every such festival, shall have full remission of all his sins: or if they could not come to that Chapel, yet if they said at their Parish Church, one Pater noster, and Ave Maria, they should have like remission, and those that came every Friday to that Chapel should have as much remission, as if they went to the Chapel called Scala Coeli, etc. Or if their Popes are sparing, yet their Priests assure men of greater bounty for saying a prayer which gins O Altissma Crux &c they shall have as many years' Indulgence as there is gravel in the sea, or grass on the ground. This is the practice of their Church, by which we may see the meaning of the Article the exposition of their Doctors reaches not so far as the practice: for they tell us, Indulgence is the remission of temporal punishment 
* Summa. ● 〈◊〉 ●. P. Indulgentia. , or the remission of temporal punishment due by divine Judgement for actual sins, through the application of the superabundant satisfaction of Christ and the Saints, by him who hath power to dispense it: this Doctrine of Indulgences leans on 4 things. First, that after the remission of the fault and the eternal punishment, there is yet a temporal punishment due. Secondly, That a righteous man not only satisfies for himself by his own merit, but may apply his own satisfaction to others. Thirdly, That there is a treasure in the Church made up of the superabundant merits and satisfaction of Christ, and the Saints. Fourthly, That there is a power in the Church appointed by Christ to dispense this Treasure; or thus as others speak, there are temporal punishments left unremitted, though God pardon the eternal, that these punishments must be satisfied either in this life, or hereafter that the Penances imposed by the Priests are satisfactions for the punishment they should undergo, that a righteous person may by the superabundance of his own Merit, satisfy for that which ought to be performed by another, that there is a Treasure of those superabundant merits of Christ, and the Saints. Lastly, That there is a power to dispense this Treasure according as it shall seem fitting. Many things are necessary for the understanding of this Doctrine, and yet every thing in it perplexed and uncertain: I will instance in several things.  
First, The value of them, if there can be no certainty by their Doctrine that there is any profit by these Indulgences, than we have no reason to profess this to be an article of faith, but there is no certainty of any benefit by them. For First, If the Indulgences do valere quantum sonat, are as much worth as the words sound, than these Indulgences should remit the guilt of all sin. For many Indulgences tell us of a remissio omnium peccatorum, of a remission à culpa & poena; and this Article per passiones Sanctorum Indulgentiis Communicatas non propriè redimi peccata nostra; that our sins are not properly redeemed by the passions of Saints Communicated by Indulgences, was condemned by Leo 10. and Pius 5. but now that they do not remit any is the common opinion, yea and is certain de fide Suarez 
* Disp. 50. Sect. 1.  and Filliucius 
* Cas. Constion tract. 8. p●●●. c. 7. n. 3180.  attest. Secondly, It is not certain that they remit any punishment, for the eternal is already pardoned and there needs no farther Indulgence: and as for the temporal punishments which (they say) remains. First, there are many temporal punishments due to the sinner, which are not taken away by the most plenary Indulgence. Suppose God should inflict a disease for the satisfaction of the temporal punishments remaining unpayed, they will then tell us that this Indulgence doth not take away natural punishment which God inflicts for actual sin, as the Plague which God brought upon the people for David's sin. 
* Bellar. the Indulgent. l. 1. c. 7. l. 2. c. 7.  Secondly, these Indulgences do not take away the punishment inflicted in foro externo whether Civil or Ecclefiastical, that's also granted by Bellarmine 
* Bellarm. the Indulgent. ibid., etc.  Thirdly, It it is not certain that they take away the punishments which may be enjoined by the ancient Canon● for as Cajetan argues, nothing can be taken away by the Indulgence, but what a man was bound to perform but the punishments which are not enjoined by the Judge no man is bound to perform ꝑo. for the punishments in the Canons are only taxed to be enjoined by the Judge, ꝑo. till they are actually enjoined no man can be obliged to perform them. Fourthly, It is not certain that they take away all the punishment enjoined by the Confessor in the Court of Penance, for as Valentia 
* Tract. de Indulg. Punct. 3.  says, the Confessor is bound for the integrity of the Sacrament to enjoin, and the Penitent to perform wholesome Penance, and if the Penitent is bound to perform those satisfactions, than the Indulgence doth not take them away. Again Bellarmine says, this is the use of the Church that whosoever intent to get any Indulgences, are wont to confess, and perform the satisfactions enjoined, but then to what profit serves the Indulgence, if it frees them only from those satisfactions which they have already fulfilled? they tell us further, that we cannot be certain that we receive any benefit by the Indulgence, and ꝑo. for greater merit, and security, we should perform the satisfactions enjoined; ob majus meritum & securitatem, neque enim potest quis esse certus de Indulgentia percepta 
* Filliuc. Cas. Consc. Tract. 8. Part. 3. c. 7. u. 176.  and since no man can be certain that he receives any benefit by an Indulgence, ꝑo. no wonder if he must for his own security endeavour to perform the satisfactions imposed, and if he is still bound to endeavour to perform them by himself, than it is not certain, that they take away the punishment enjoined. Fifthly, It is not certain that they take away the punishment due by the Judgement of God. Suppose there be a punishment due here, or to be inflicted in Purgatory hereafter, yet there is no certainty that these Indulgences take away this punishment. For, first, It is uncertain whether the power of the Keys can extend further, than to take away that punishment, which it might inflict: but the power of the Keys reaches not to inflict these punishments: Secondly, It is no way certain whether the Indulgence be valuable further, then according to the worthiness, and devotion of him who receives the Indulgence, and then 'tis no way certain that there is any benefit by the Indulgence: Angelus de Clavasio 
* Summa. Angelica. P. Indulgentia.  tells us that quoad augmentum Gratiae & Gloriae, they are only so much worth as is the devotion of him that receives them, and no more: but in respect of the punishment which is to be inflicted in Purgatory, tantum dimittit quantum sonat, remitts what it expresses: but how comes the value of the Indulgence for the gaining an augmentation of Glory, to depend on the worth of the receiver, and not for gaining a freedom from pain? Again, the Indulgence requires they should be contrite, and have devoutly confessed their sins, and without this they gain no benefit by the Indulgence; but than what certainty whether any benefit come from the Indulgence, or rather that it comes from the Contrition of the Penitent, which also would avail without the Indulgence? others ꝑo. go further, and tell us they are never so much worth as is promised, sed aliquid valent modicum, secundum quod mereter fides & devotio, so Bonaventure says 
* In 4. Dist. 21.  some held. Thus it is no way certain according to themselves, what the real advantage is whether they bring any? and if it be no way certain, than we cannot be bound to profess this as an Article of our Faith, that Indulgences are wholesome and profitable; Indeed I will allow them to be profitable, but 'tis to the Pope's purse, not to the Penitents Soul: you may read the advantage which Pope Vrban the 6. made by the Indulgence published in England 1382. Henry Spenser Bishop of Norwich gathered (says Henry Knighton 
† Chron. Heary Knighton pag. 2671. ) an incredible sum of Gold and Silver and Jewels and Rings and Dishes and Spoons and other Ornaments, specially from Ladies and other women: and that both men and women gave not according, but even beyond their abilities, that their dead friends as well as themselves might receive the benefit of absolution from their sins, which none could obtain, unless they contributed according to their Estates.  
Secondly, The matter of them, (i. e.) the Superfluous satisfactions of Christ and the Saints, which are reserved in the Treasure of the Church, for (say they) there can be no remission of punishments enjoined for sins, unless there be some recompense made by some who have performed more than was due from them: but if it be uncertain whether there be any such Treasure, than the Doctrine of Indulgences is uncertain. First, 'Tis not certain that there is any such Treasure of the Saints satisfactions reserved in the Church; First, Because 'tis not certain, that they have suffered more than they have deserved.  
Secondly, Though they should suffer more than they have deserved, yet 'tis  not certain, that they do or can suffer more than they are bound in obedience to God. Thirdly, 'Tis not certain, that if they do or suffer only, what they are bound in obedience to God, that they can satisfy by that obedience for another, for where they only pay that which is required of them there is nothing superfluous, and ꝑo. nothing to be put into the Treasure. Fourthly, 'Tis not certain, but their sufferings are as much or more rewarded, then is due or can be due to them; and if they are fully rewarded, than they cannot discharge another man's debt: and upon this ground Franc. Mayronis, and Angel. de Clavasio deny the satisfactions of the Saints can be put into the Treasure †. 
* Sum. Angelica. P. Indulgentia. N. 9:   
Secondly, 'Tis not certain that there is any treasure made up of the superfluous satisfactions of Christ, and his Church. For, First, If the Treasure of Christ's satisfactions be infinite than it is not certain, that any thing can be added to it, for an infinite cannot be increased, otherwise there should be an infinite greater than an infinite. Secondly, It is not certain, that there is any advantage by those satisfactions of the Saints, for if Christ's merit be of an infinite value, than there is nothing that can be procured by the satisfactions of Saints, which hath not been already procured by Christ's merit: nor is there any thing we can gain by the satisfactions of Saints but we may much more receive it from the infinite merit of Christ. If then we have no certainty, that there is any use of this Treasure, we can then have no certainty that there is any such Treasure. Thirdly, It is no way certain, that there is any such Treasure of the superfluous satisfactions of Christ; because, first, It is not certain, that any thing Christ did, or suffered, could be more than he was bound to undergo, as he became our Surety and in obedience to the command of his Father was bound to do, or suffer, what ever his Father required for the full satisfaction of his Justice; and if his satisfactions were in this respect necessary, than they cannot be called superfluous. Secondly, Though his satisfaction was infinite, yet it is not certain, that any thing was superfluous; because all that a finite person can do or suffer, can never satisfy infinite Justice. And it is not certain, when the offender deserves the utmost punishment both here, and hereafter which he is capable of undergoing, that every work or suffering, (though of an infinite person) can be sufficiently satisfactory to expiate that debt. Thirdly, Though his satisfaction was sufficient for more, than it was actually extended to, yet 'tis no more certain, ꝑo. some satisfactions are superfluous, than that the light of the Sun (which would enlighten thousands more, than actually receive benefit by it) is so: or that God's Omnipotency is superfluous, because it may create more worlds, than already are. Lastly, This Doctrine contains many perplexities, and insoluble scruples, as, which are necessary and which satisfactions are superfluous? what part of Christ's satisfactions are rewarded? and what not? for those which are already rewarded cannot be put into the common stock; whether the same merit, which merited Glory for himself? or that which merited the pardon of Eternal punishment? or that there is some other merit which only merits the remission of Temporal punishment? and how this merit distinguished from the rest is put into the Treasure? these and many other perplexities are so intervowen in this Doctrine that their wisest Doctors have not yet found out a way to extricate themselves.  
Thirdly, The authority dispensing these Indulgences (i. e.) The Council suppose this for granted that there was a power left to the Church of bestowing these Indulgences, and the Church hath from all Antiquity used it: but if these things be uncertain, than we have no reason to own this Doctrine. First, I say there is no Certainty, that Christ left this power to the Church, they tell us, that the Pope only hath power of bestowing those Indulgences Jure Divino: Bishops and other Prelates Jure humano: that the Pope may grant plenary Indulgences 
* Sum. Angel. c. 1. 100LS. n. 5.  and over all the world: that his power is founded in these words, what ever thou losest on earth shall be loosed in Heaven; and on that text feed my Sheep in which is included all acts of Jurisdiction, which any way conduce to shut or open the Kingdom of Heaven, and of this sort is remission of punishment by these Indulgences; 
† Filliu●. Ca●. 〈◊〉. ●●ct. 8. 〈◊〉 3. n. 62▪  but this is wholly uncertain, and founded rather on mere guesses, than on a rational ground: For,  
First, It is not certain that he who can remit the Eternal punishment, (as they tell us the Priest doth in the Sacrament of Penance) cannot also remit the Temporal punishment: because he who can do the greater, regularly) unless there be some restraint) can do the less. Secondly, It is not certain, that the Pope hath any power of granting these Indulgences from those texts, for it's neither expressed in the texts, nor gathered thence by ancient Interpreters, nor is it evident by fair consequence.  
Secondly, It is not certain, that the Church hath used them from all antiquity, for where will they find the Pope's divine right of granting Indulgences. That these Indulgences were remissions of temporal punishment due to God? that by the remission of these punishments here so much was abated as they must endure in this life or in Purgatory; that there were Indulgences for 100, or 1000, of years? that for repeating a Prayer over hallowed Beads visiting such an Altar praying before such an Image! there should be granted an Indulgence toties quoties, either of all, or half or third part of their sins? as many Bulls of modern Popes speak: and ꝑo. Cajetane 
* Op●●●. 15. c. 1.  will tell us that neither the Holy Scripture nor the writings of the ancient Greek and Latin Fathers brought this to our knowledge, but only à 300 annis Scripturae Commendatum est de veteribus patribus, quod Beatus Gregorius Indulgentias Stationum in: stituit: it was Committed to writing about 300 years ago, concerning the ancient Fathers, that St. Gregory ordained the Indulgences of the Stations: some tell us there are no manifest Testimonies before St. Gregorys time, yet we must believe (though we have no ground for it I warrant you) says Angelus de Cla●asio that they were in use before: others confess, there is nothing the Scripture doth less plainly deliver, or the ancient Fathers less mention, so Alphonsus de Castro: that they began when Charity lessened, and sin increased, say others: yea some will not believe, because the use of them seems to be late, and lately found out among the Christians, sales Roffensis 
* Ad Ar●. 18.  and all he Answers, is this, that there was some use (as they say) among the ancient Romans and that many things are now found out more plainly, out of the Gospels, and other Scriptures than were heretofore: if thus they are not agreed who wrote before the Council, concerning the Antiquity of them, nor are there any evident Testimonies in the Fathers or ancient Writers of such use of Indulgences, as they now practice, it is then not certain that the Church hath from all Antiquity used them, and ꝑo. I have no reason to assent to this Doctrine of Indulgences delivered by the Council.  
This is my first Argument to dissuade from reunion with the present Romish Church, because many of their Doctrines, which they require to be believed as Articles of Faith, are uncertain and doubtful.   

CHAP. II.  
THe second Consideration i● drawn from the Ceremonies of the Romish Church: It is unreasonable to adhere to that Church which commands us firmly to embrace those for Apostolical rites, which are altogether questionable, and dubious: and those for pious, and good, which it is doubtful, whether they be not vain, ridiculous, and superstitious: but the Romish Church commands this: ꝑo. In the Creed of Pius 4. it is required, That they should most firmly admit, and embrace the Apostolical, and Ecclesiastical Traditions, and other observations of that Church, and afterwards, that they receive, and admit the approved rites of Catholic (as they call the Roman Church) in the solemn administration of the seven Sacraments: and it's declared by the Council, that the Church hath used in the Sacrifice of the M●s● ceremonies as mystical blessings, Lights, ●neense, Garments, and many other things from Apostolical Discipline and Tradition. But many things which they affirm to be Apostolical are at best uncertain, and many things which they require thus firmly to be believed are vain, and foolish, and cannot be excused from all superstition.  
First, It is uncertain, that many of those ceremonies which they use in the Mass are of Apostolical Discipline, and Tradition as they pretend. First, There is no certainty that their mystical blessings are delivered down from the Apostles, for though we are bound to receive the creatures with thanksgiving, and by prayer to God they are blessed for that use which he hath appointed, yet it is uncertain whether the Apostles did leave this Tradition, that certain things should be blessed by prayer, and the sign of the Cross to work supernatural effects, as to cure diseases, and drive away Devils, and remit venial sins, which things Bellarmin 
* L. 2. d●●ffect. Sa●ram. c. 31. prop. 3.  makes the effect of these benedictions. In the blessing of the wax lights on E●ster eve (this must be done by a Deacon, and he must put five grains of hallowed incense into it after the fashion of a Cross) he exhorts all to invoke the mercy of God, that he who vouchsafed to admit into the number of Levites, pouring on him the clearness of his light, would enable him to perfect the praises of that wax light, cerei hujus laudem implere perficiat: and then prays that this taper may remain constantly to destroy the mist of this night, and being accepted for a sweet smell may be mingled with the Heavenly lights. In the blessing of holy water the Priest exorcizes the fact to be for the health of believers, and to all that take it soundness of soul, and body, and that all wickedness, and cunning of devils may fly from the place where it is sprinkled: and he exorcizes the water to drive away the power of the devil, and to root out the enemy with the apostate Angels: and again prays, that this creature serving these mysteries, may receive the effect of the divine grace to drive away devils and expel diseases, &c 
* Missal. Rom. in Bened. aquae. . In the blessing of holy bread, he prays that God would bless it with holy spiritual blessing, that it may be to all that receive it, health of Soul, and Body, and a defence against all diseases, and all the snares of the enemies 
† Missal. Rom. in Bened. panis. . So in the blessing of Candles, he prays, that they may receive such blessing by the sign of the Cross, that in what ever places they are lighted, the Princes of darkness may departed, and tremble, and fly away with all his Servants from all those habitations 
* Missal. Rom in Benedict. Candle. . In the blessing of the Cross, he prays, that God would bless that wood of the Cross, ut sit remedium salutare generi humano, sit soliditas fidei bonorum operum profectus, & redemptio animarum, etc. That it may be a wholesome remedy for mankind, it may be firmness of faith, increase of good works, redemption of Souls, and defence against the cruel darts of the devil 
* Hospin. de Orig. Templ. l. 4. c. 4. . These are mystical blessings which the Romish Church uses, and which they pretend are derived from Apostolical Discipline, and Tradition, but it is uncertain, whether ever the Apostles did bless those Creatures for such supernatural ends? and whether they did leave either command, or example which should warrant the Church in after ages to bless any Creatures for the producing such Effects? if it be certain, than they must produce some text of Scripture, so interpreted by the unanimous consent of the Fathers, as the profession of faith by Pius 4. requires: or some constant Tradition delivered down through the several ages of the Church: but neither of these can be done; for, Secondly, Their own Authors have affixed the Institution of these several forms of blessing to the times long after the Apostles, and ꝑo. it cannot be said that the Church hath received them from Apostolical discipline and Tradition: the blessing of the Paschal taper is pretended to be the Institution of Zozimus and Theodore the first, who sat anno 640; the form of blessing to be dictated by Ambrose, and that Augustine, and Peter a Monk of Cassino composed others which are out of use, as Durand 
* Rasienale Diu. Offic. l. 6. c. 80.  tells us; but whether the same form? or any such kind of form as is now in use? or whether any at all? we can have no certainty from Authors, who lived some hundred years' aster. Till ꝑo. they can certainly prove, not only that a Paschal taper was used in the Church, but that it was used from the Apostles times, and used for this end with such like form of blessing as is now practised by the Romanists, I do not see how the Council can declare this to be an article of faith that it came from Apostolical discipline and Tradition: the blessing of holy water was introduced (say the most of them) by Alexander the first, so say Durand 
* R●●ional. l. 4. c. 4 , Polydore Virgil 
† De Invent. Rerum l. 5. 68 , and Platina in the life of Alexander the first, and yet this higher, than we can be certain of it: for there is no certainty of the Epistle ascribed to Alexander, whence they fetch this Institution, nor of the Pontifical ascribed to Damasus as Reynolds 
* De Lib. Apoc. Pralect 179, 180.  shows from the acknowledgement of many of their own authors. The blessing of bread for driving away devils, (if we believe Abdias a frivolous Author l. 2. Histor. Apost.) is derived from St. Peter, as Gavantus 
† Thes. Sacr. Rit. Part. 4. Tit. 19 n. 19  tells us: but what certainty have we of this Tradition, when we have no certainty even by their own confession of the truth, and honesty of this author? and if we believe him, when all antiquity is silent about it, he had need be testis omni exceptione major: besides this, the first blessing which Gavantus could bring was from Gregory's Sacramentary, about 600 years after the Apostles times, and ꝑo. still no certainty that it was from Apostolical Tradition: for the blessing of candles, they tell us Sergius appointed a procession with hallowed candles on the feast of the Purification, but supposE the Institution higher, as Baronius 
* In Martirelogi●.  doth, who fathers it on Eligius, who died anno 665, yet still short enough of the Apostles times: if thus their own authors who purposely inquire their Antiquities, assign their institution after the Apostles days, than it is not certain, that the Church received them from Apostolical Tradition: unless we can believe that rare exposition which some 
* Gavant Thes. Sacr. Rit. p. 4. Tit. 19 n. 2.  give of St. Paul's words to Timothy, 2 Tim. 1. 13. Formam habe sanorum verborum quae à me didicisti. Sanorum, (i. e.) quae possunt sanare sensibiles & insensibiles creaturas, that the form of sound words was the form of blessings for supernatural effects; but such Interpretations, I suppose the soberer Romanists will sooner deride, than believe.  
Secondly, It is no way certain that they received the use of lights from Apostolical Tradition: the Church of Rome requires at Mass the candles to be lighted, and though it be midday, yet allows no Celebration without it: but now, First, Though the Apostles might use lights at the time of Divine Service, when they were forced to meet in Grotts, and Caves, and dark places, and commonly in the night (caetibus antelucanis) as Pliny observed, to avoid the danger of persecution: yet there is no certainty that we are obliged by that example to light up Candles in the Day, nor any certainty that they left that rule for after Ages. Secondly, though the Church after the times of Persecution did use lights to show themselves the Successors of pious men, yet it's not certain that this was a necessary but voluntary imitation. Thirdly, as for those ancients who pleaded for the Continuance of lights ti's no way certain, that they used them to expel devils or pretended any supernatural virtue in them but only as signs of joy, and representations of Christ, as Durand 
* Rationale Div O●●ic. l. 1. c. 1. tit. S.  gives us their mystical signification.  
Thirdly, It is no way certain, that they received the use of Incense from Apostolical Tradition; for, First, though Incense might have been used in the Primitive Church either for some mystical signification, as Bellarmine mentions three mysterious reasons, or ad tetrum odorem siquis ex multudine in Ecclesià exist teret, abigendum; to drive away those Filthy smells which might be occasioned by the concourse of people, which is the most likely reason; for the Christians being forced to assemble in subterranious Cells, and Caves, they might use incense to prevent the infection, which they might fear from the vapours in dark, and low places: but it is not certain, that they used Incense on the same reason it is now used by the Romanists, ut omnes languores Cunctaeque insidiae inimici odorem ejus sentientes effugiant, & seperentur à plasmate tuo, etc. That all faintings and treacheries of the devils perceiving this smell may fly away, and be removed from the workmanship which thou hast redeemed by thy precious blood, and that they may never be hurt by the biting of the ancient Serpent 
* Instit: Baptiz. etc. Se●●. usum. Satum in hened. incensi.  Though the ancients might use Incense for sweetening the places of their assemblies, yet it is uncertain, that they used it for devotion to drive away the devils temptations. The Romish Church requires at the Celebration of the Mass the censing of the Altar, and the Gospels which must be done three times, and the Elements which are to be consecrated, drawing the Censer thrice upon the Host and Chalice together in the fashion of a Cross, and thrice round about them (i. e.) twice from the right hand to the left, and once from the left hand to the right 
† Rubr. General. in offered. Missal. Pii. 5. . afterwards he must cense the Cross and the Altar again, than the Deacon censes the Priest, afterward he censes the Choir and the sub-Deacon, than the censer bearer censes the Deacon, than the Acolites, lastly the People 
* Rubr. General. in offered. c. 7. ●. 10. . And all this is done to drive away devils, says Innocent 
† l. 2. c. 17.  the third in his exposition of the Mass: and Gavantus 
* Com. in Rubr. Missae. pa●t. 2. tit. 4. n. 4. l. ic. ●.  from him: but by what record? or what ground shall I be certain that the Apostles commanded this? or that their Church in conformity to the practice of the Apostles did thus? or Lastly, that the present Roman Church pretends no other virtue, or efficacy in Incense, than was allowed by the ancient Church. Secondly, I have further reason to question the uncertainty of this pretended Tradition, for even several authors of the Roman Communion have affixed a far latter date to the beginning of this Institution: Platina 
† In vitâ Sixti. 1. , and Polydore Virgil 
* De Invent. rerum. l. 5. c. 10.  refer it to Leo the third who was the 98th Bishop of Rome according to Platina.  
Fourthly, It is no way certain, that they received the use of Priestly Garments from Apostolical Tradition, though we do not contend whether the Priest may use distinct Garments in the Celebration, for the practice is according to St. Hierome's expressions, Religio divina alterum habet habitum in ministerio alternm in usu, vitâque communi, that their habits in their ministration were different from those they commonly used: yet we judge these are liberae Institutionis, which are indifferent in themselves, and not absolutely necessary: such things as the Church may enjoin from its own authority in things indifferent, not which it must enjoin from Apostolical command. For, First, We are no way certain that the Apostles practised or commanded such things, that either at the first Institution by our Saviour, or at the Celebration of the Sacrament by the Apostles they used any such Priestly Garments: and ꝑo. Polydor Virgil 
* De Invent. Rerum. l▪ 4. c. 7.  says, Hebraica magis quam Apostolica referunt instituta, they more resemble the Jewish than Apostolical Institutions. Secondly, We are not certain, that though God did appoint in the Old Testament such habits for Aaron and his Sons, when they were to minister, the Priests ꝑo. in the New Testament must have such: for all agree, that nothing prescribed in the Mosaical ministration doth bind us Christians, unless where the nature of it is Moral, else we should be obliged to observe all the Rites and Ceremonies which Moses appointed: and ꝑo. it seems very strange that Bellarmine 
* L. 2. de Mis●●●. c. 14.  should say, that the Garments of the Aaronical Priests were Figures, and Types of those Vestments which the Christians use: for to represent and tipify something to be used in the times of the Gospel requires a Divine Institution: but it is no way certain that they were so appointed by Divine Institution, ꝑo. we cannot assert that they are Figures and Types of the Priestly Vestments which are now used. Thirdly, If we look on the several habits which belong to their Clergy, we shall think it very unlikely, that they were derived from the Apostles, either if we consider the things required, or the significations they assign to them.  
First, As for the things required, there are six things required in the attire of a Priest, but 15 several parts of the attire of a Bishop as Durand 
* Ration. Diu. Offic. l. 3. c. 1. ●it. G. H.  reckons them: and though the High Priest among the Jews had only eight things in his attire, yet the Bishop must have fifteen, because (forsooth) as Durand gives the accurate reason, our righteousness must exceed the righteousness of Scribes, and Pharises. Nay these fifteen are not all, for besides these he wears his Surpliss and his pluviale: now it's very improbable, that the Apostles should require more than Moses did, or that when they imposed such several habits, that yet neither in the Scripture nor Primitive writers, there appear the least footstep of this injunction. Secondly, If we consider the grounds they pretend, and the signification they give them, it will seem altogether improbable that they should be derived from the Apostles. The Sandals (say they) come from the Apostles who used Sandals, Mark, 6 9 But if the Apostles example there be a sufficient argument, than they must neither have a Staff in their Journey, nor Money in their Purse: or if they pretend our Saviour's command, Go, teach all nations, which reason Durand 
* Rationale Diu. Offic. l. 3. c. 8. tit. A.  gives, that will never suit with the grandeur of their Bishops, nor yet with their practice, who do not use to foot it, to Preach in their own Cures. The Mitre (says Baronius 
† Ad annum. 34. n. 298. ) came from the Apostles, and the Bishop with his Mitre represents Moses coming down from the Mount with the 2 Tables: but if it came from the Apostles, how comes it to have 2 Horns? because (say they) Moses when he came from the Mount was Horned 
* Polyd. Virgil. d● Invent. Rer. l. 4. c. 7. ; an error which the vulgar Translation has occasioned by misinterpreting a word. For where it should be read his face shone. That translation renders it cornuta erat facies ejus, Exod. 34. 2. and yet here's an Apostolical Tradition pretended to justify their mistake. But this is not all, why must it be Horned? to note (says Durand 
* Rationale Diu. office. l. 3. c. 13. tit. C. D. ) the 2 Testaments: why must the Mitre have two stays hanging behind? to note (says he) the Spirit and the letter. Why must it be made high? to note the eminency of knowledge which must be in a Bishop: the Gloves (says Durand 
† 161. l. 13. c. 12. ) must be put on according to the Tradition of the Apostles, next after the Dalmatica that his left hand may not know what his right hand doth. And why Gloves to cover their hands? because works must be public, but the intention secret 
* Gavant. Thes. Sacr. Rit. Part 2 tit. 1. pag. 99 : why must he sometimes put them off and sometimes put them on? because good works must sometimes be secret to shun vain glory, sometimes public to edify their neighbours. (Says Durand) will ye see more of these five reasons which their Ritualists give concerning Priestly, and Episcopal habits; and you will then think that those who pretend to give a reason of those Ceremonies do only insanire cum ratione, and that 'tis very unlike the simplicity of Religion which the Apostles delivered. Fourthly, I add that 'tis so far from being certain, that these Garments came from the Apostles, that their own authors tell us, that at first they said Mass in their usual Garments, so Gavantus 
* Part. 1. tit. 18.  out of Walafrid Strabo, and that by degrees the multitude of these habits which are now used, were brought in 
† Gavant. ●61. . Lastly, 'Tis uncertain whether the authors of the greatest antiquity assert, what they affix to them: for some ascribe this to Clement, that he according to Tradition from St. Peter did institute these holy Vestments, but there is no certainty of this pretended Tradition, nor of this pretended Institution: some ascribe it to Anaclet, antiquity enough if it could be proved, (whether he be the same with Cletus, whom some make a Coad jutor to St. Peter, or that there were such an one who was immediate successor to Clement) but we must be first sure of the authority, before we believe the Testimony: Bellarmine 
* D● Roman. Pontif. l. 2. c. 14.  durst not call these decretal Epistles undoubted, though he believed them ancient: but there needs no more proof of the spuriousness of this Epistle fathered on Anaclet; than to observe the Barbarous expressions in it, and those names it mentions, which were of a later Original 
‡ Blondel. Ceus. Epist. Pontif. in Anaclet. Epist. 1.  Thus I have handled the first part of my argument from the Rites, and Ceremonies of the Romish Church, that for many of these things they require us to profess, to be of Apostolical Discipline, and Tradition, it is wholly uncertain, whether they be so.  
Secondly, It is not certain, whether many Rites and Ceremonies of the Romish Church be not vain, unprofitable, and inexcusable from Superstition: I will not instance in the customs of particular Churches, and places. As in the manner of the observations of Innocents' day by the Episcopus puerorum in the Church of Salisbury: in the strange custom which Mr. Gregory 
* Opuse. Posth. in his Discourse de Episc. puerorum.  produces from the Ritual of Osny Abbey of the foot of a Child, which was usually kept in a Chest in the Vestry, and that day was carried about the Church to be adored by the people. In the custom of the Belgic Churches to take up a man on Ascention day, thereby to represent Christ's ascension, and send down a Dove in representation of the descent of the Holy Ghost on Whit-Sunday, as the Antiquitates Liturgicae tells us 
† Yom 〈◊〉. in Sabbate Sancto de Caer. Pasch. Duaci. 1065. . I will not instance in such customs, though many may be produced, because the Romanists will grant, the customs of particular Churches may be vain, and superstitious: ꝑo. the Council of Trent doth only require that we should embrace the Rites of the Catholic Church: and appoints a reformation of those abuses which might have crept in, as in the number of Candles on Easter eve, some (says Durand) have 72 Candles, some 24, some 15, some 12, and all these pretend some mystery: now the Council provides against the Superstitious number of Candles; and also by the Bull of Pius 5. prefixed before the Roman Missal, all other Rites and Ceremonies in other Missals (unless where there is a prescription of 200 years) are abrogated. So that my business is to prove, that there are many Ceremonies universally practised in the Romish Church or allowed in some particular Churches, which are vain, unprofitable, and not unexcusable from superstition.  
First, I instance in the many Ceremonies of blessing the Font, the recital of which is a sufficient evidence of their vanity: one Ceremony is the dividing the water after the fashion of a Cross, and that is done that the water may be fruitful through the holy Spirit, and the unclean one expelled 
* Missal. Pii 5. in Bewed. Fontis. : again, he must touch the water with his hand, that by the Invocation of the blessed Trinity the water may be defended, lest the devil return 
† Durand. Rationale l. 6. c. 82. : again, he divides the water with his hand, and casts the water towards the four parts of the World: another Ceremony is the changing of the Tone, which must be done thrice, after the manner of a prayer he must speak low, than he must raise his voice after the manner of their Prefaces, than he must let fall his voice after the manner of reading the Lessons: but why must the voice be changed thrice?  in Trinitate omnia fiant says Gavantus 
* Part. 4. Tit. 10. 〈◊〉. 25. : another Ceremony is the breathing on the water three times after the fashion of a Cross, and least that should not do the work, he must blow thrice upon it after the manner of the Greek letter 〈◊〉 to denote the Trinity, that he may join the Trinity with the Cross 
† Gavant. 161. n. 26. : but what will this blowing do? they'll tell you (if you believe them) the devil is blown away with a breath and they blow in contempt of him; as if the devil could not withstand a blast: There is another Ceremony the putting the paschal taper into the Font, which must be first a little way and the Priest says, Descendat in han● plenitudinem Fontis Spiritus Sancti virtus, let the virtue of the holy Ghost descend upon the fullness of the Font: but will ye know the reason of this Ceremony, it is to signify the spirits descending with his fullness into the Font, as he descended at the baptism of our Saviour in likeness of a Dove 
* Gavantus 161. 〈◊〉. 27. ; this taper then must be taken out, to note the effect of baptism, which raises from sin to glory, than the taper must be put lower into the water, and the Priest raise his voice, the third time the taper must be put to the bottom, and the Priest repeat the prayer (Descendat in hanc, etc.) louder. I omit the rest of the Ceremonics, for I need not render the office more ridiculous, by repeating more of the like nature: and if there be so little reason for the institution of them, and such antickness in the performance of them, we have reason to judge that it is at the best uncertain, whether they be not vain, and unprofitable.  
Secondly, I instance in many Ceremonies used in Baptism, I do not condemn every Ceremony in it, for some of them were very anciently used, some may not be unfit to signify either some duty, or some privilege: and these are not condemned by us, where they may serve to a decent order, and godly discipline, and may have any aptness to stir up the mind of man by some notable signification to the remembrance of his duty 
* Book of Common prayer Pref. of Ceremonies. , and while they are as St. Augustin advices pause & salubres. I pass by the number of their Ceremonies in Baptism, which Bellarmine says are 22, and only consider, that many of these either have no tendency to excite us by a fit signification, or else are used not only for signification, but extraordinary operation: now these things cannot produce by an extraordinary operation, unless by the virtue and influx of a superior agent: and where there is no assurance of any assistance from such a superior agent, these Ceremonies must be vain, unprofitable, and superstitious.  
First, Some of them have no tendency to excite us by a fit signification, I pass by the Ceremony of putting salt into the infant's mouth, yet I may wonder whence the Priest hath authority to say, take the salt of wisdom, that God may be propitious to thee unto Eternal life. Or what ground to pray that he who tastes this food of salt may not hunger more, as if it was equal to that Heavenly bread which our Saviour promised, of which whoever eats shall live for ever, John 6. 58. I mention the Ceremony of spittle, that the Priest must spit on his left hand, and put the spittle into the ears and nose of the Infant with his right thumb, saying to the right ear, Epphata be thou opened, he must say to the nose for a sweet smell: and to the left ear be thou driven away O devil, for the judgement of God approaches: but why must he say to the ear be thou opened? and why doth he touch the nose with spittle and put his finger into the ears? Durand wants no reason (as he thinks he must touch the nose that it might receive the odor of the knowledge of God, he must touch the ears to hear the commands of God, the fingers put into the ears must represent the words, or gifts of the holy Spirit. He must touch the ears with spittle, to signify the words proceeding from the mouth of the highest, which enter through the ears, and smell sweet to him: the nostrils must be touched, that they may receive divine virtue, by which they may distinguish a good smell from a bad, and separate sound Doctrine from Heretical pravity 
* Durand Rational. l. 6. c. 8. lit. R. : if we think these to be far fetched reasons, I wonder how they first invented such insignificant, vain Ceremonies. Bellarmine will retort on us our Saviour's practice, how he touched the man's tongue, and ears who was deaf and dumb. Mark 7. 32, 33. and cured the blind man's eyes with clay and spittle, John 9 6. and yet he could have cured without those Ceremonies: well, but what is this Ceremony to our Saviour's practice? what he used in the curing of the deaf and blind, they use to them who are neither deaf nor blind: if our Saviour used it in the producing a miraculous effect, is it not ludicrous for them to use it in imitation of him, where they do not pretend to imitate him in working the effect? if then, there's no aptness to signify nor proper reason can be assigned of their Institution, than they are vain and un profitable.  
Secondly, Let us see those Ceremonies which are used not only for signification, but the effecting of some thing: the Child must be Crossed several times, and in several places on his forehead, on his breast and on his right hand, and that not principally for signification, as that they are not ashamed to confess the faith of Christ crucified, but for the effecting some wonderful thing, as driving out the devil, so in the order for making Catecumen when the Priest signs him on the right hand, he says, I deliver thee the Seal of our Lord Jesus Christ in thy right hand that thou may'st sign thyself, and defend thee from the enemy, and abide in the Catholic faith, and live for ever: If this will not suffice, there is another thing, that the Child must be anointed with Oil on the breast, and on the shoulder bones with the Oil of Salvation in our Lord Jesus Christ, that thou mayst have Eternal Life: and the effect of this Oil is for purging of his sins, and defence from the devil 
* Durand Rationale l. 6. c. 71. lit. L. . I pass by the white garment which is put on the Infant, Or the burning taper put into his hand, because as they are barely significative, we leave them among indifferent things, which every Church may enjoin, as she judges them useful for decency, and edification. But there is one rare thing behind, a receipt against the falling sickness 
* Inst. Baptiz. & sec. usum Sarum. in fine Bapt●smi. , The Priest may say a Gospel over the Child, if he will, which (the Doctors say) is very effectual, and that is out of St. Mark concerning the curing of of the Child, which was sometimes thrown into the fire and sometimes into the water; and the like ground Fitz-Simon gives of the reading of the first of St. John after the ending of the Mass, because many had found it effectual against some diseases, with which they had been afflicted: ꝑo. the Priest to satisfy all men's desires used to conclude the Mass with the Gospel. Now I ask what assurance can we have that those Ceremonies which themselves invent, have such power to effect these things? what certainty that the first of St. John read, which the people do not understand, is more effectual than the first of St. John tied about their necks? and whether to ascribe such effects to them, which are above their nature where there is neither divine command, nor promise can be cleared from superstition.  
Thirdly, I instance in the blessing of Bells out of the Instit. Baptizandi, etc. secundum usum Sarum: when the metal is running, the Priest putting on his Surplis, and Stole the Cross going before him with the Clergy, and people, they sing the Hymn Veni Creator: when it is finished, they sing the Te Deum, and in the end Da Pacem, with some versicles: before it is hung, it must be blessed, and consecrated, and ꝑo. first he prays 
* Inst. Bapt. sec. usum Sarum. in Bened. C●mpan. Orat. Bened. Domine.  over the holy water, with which it is sprinkled,  cum hoc vasculum ad invitandos Ecclesiae Filios praeparatum. in eâ fuerit tinctum, ubicunque hoc sonuerit tintinnabulum, longè recedat virtus inimicorum, etc. that wherever this Bell sounds, the power of enemies, the shadows of apparitions, the fury of whirlwinds, striking of thunderbolts, calamities of tempests, and every spirit of storms may be gone: then he must wash it with holy water, hallowed oil, and salt, and say this Prayer, that God who Commanded by Moses silver Trumpets to be made, which the Levites should sound at the time of Sacrifice, and the people admonished by their sweetness be prepared to worship thee, etc. Would grant that this vessel prepared for the use of his Church, might be sanctified with the holy spirit, that by the sound of it the faithful might be invited to their reward, and when the melody of it sounds in their ears, their devotion may increase, the treacheries of the enemy may be driven away, the sounds of hailstones, the storm of whirl winds, and the violence of tempests may be moderated, etc. then he must wipe it with a towel, saying the 28th Psalm, after this he must touch it with Chrism 7 times on the out side and 4 times on the inside, saying O Almighty God who madest Stone walls to fall before the Ark of the Covenant, by the sound of Trumpets, pour out thy blessing on this Bell, that the fiery darts of the enemy, the shaking of Thunder may be driven far off, before the sound of it: and in another prayer, that the enemy's army may be affrighted, the people called by it may be comforted in the Lord, and the holy Spirit even as it was delighted with David's Harp may descend upon them: then the Bell must be sprinkled with holy water, and the Priest must name it, laying his hands upon it, and so must the Godfathers and Godmothers, who must name it after the Priest, and cover it with Linen , and after this benediction the Bell becomes so holy that no man must Tole it, unless he wear a hallowed Surplis, says Gavantus 
* Part. 1. ti●. 20.  from a Council of Colen. This is their strange way of blessing Bells, which almost needs no other refutation, than bare recital of the manner of it: for what reason of anointing within and without? or if it was no more than in imitation of the Jews to separate this for an holy use, yet why 7 times on the outside, and 4 times on the inside, why must this be censed, and so that it may gather up all the smoke? and why must it be named in so solemn a manner? what use of Godfathers and Godmothers here, of laying their hands on it, afterwards of covering it with Linen , which is an imitation of that Ceremony of the white garment they used in Baptism? and why do they pray that their sound may drive away devils, frighten enemies, hinder storms, & c? as by the sound of Trumpets the walls of Jericho fell down: for there was both a command that the Priest should blow the Trumpets, and a promise of extraordinary blessing: here is no ground to pretend either command, or promise.  
I might Instance in their strange forms of exorcizing persons possessed with devils, the vanity of which is sufficiently described by my Lord Bishop of Down in his excellent dissuasive from Popery, for they rather seem like magical Enchantments than devout forms of prayer.  
I might Instance in their consecrations of Chrism, how it must be brought from the Vestry to the Bishop by 12 Priests representing the 12 Apostles; and by other Clergy men signifying the Disciples, how after it is blessed it must be saluted by the Bishop and his Priests 5 times with a loud voice ave Sanctum Chrysma hail holy Chrism; and how the Bishop must breathe 3 times on it, as Durand 
* Rational. l. 6. c. 74.  gives us the form. I could instance in their strange forms of processions with antics going before them, as if they intended rather to Create laughter, than stir up Devotion: a custom which Polidor Virgil 
* de Invent. ●●rum. 〈◊〉. 6. c. 11.  confesses was without doubt received from the heathenish Romans. I could Instance in their acting of the passion, which turns the whole seriousness of religion into a mimical sport, as Ludovic Vives 
* in August. de Civit. Dei. l. 8. c. ult.  complained: many more of this nature I could reckon up, but these are to many.  
The sum of the second argument is this: it is unreasonable to adhere to that Church, which not only practices such ceremonies which are vain, and ridiculous, and which is at best, uncertain, whether they be not superstitious, but requires all to own them for good, and wholesome: but the Church of Rome doth so: ꝑo.   

CHAP. III.  
MY third Consideration shall be drawn from the absurdities and untruths in several Offices, because there are several things false, many things derogatory from the merits of Christ, and ascribing too much to the Creature.  
First, I instance in the prayers they make to the B. Virgin, the Titles they ascribe to her, and the praises they give her. First, In the prayers to her: it is certain that a great part of the devotion of the Romanists is employed in the prayers to her: she hath her Fices, she hath her Hours, she hath her Litany, she hath her Rosary, and Gregory 13. Instituted a Mass in honour of the Rosary with Indulgences to them that celebrate it: she hath her Psalter composed by Bonaventure, which are only David's Psalms deformed, in which the name of Lady is put for Lord, and what he said of God is ascribed to the B. Virgin: she hath 8 Festivals; and lest they should fail in the performance of their duty to her, there is a peculiar Mass i● the Missal of Salisbury, called Miss● 
Missale sec. usum Sarum. an. 1555. in Vigil. Pasch.  recollectionis festorum B. Mariae. Let us consider the prayers themselves, in which they do not only entreat her to pray for them, or pray that God would grant their requests upon the intercession of the B. Virgin, but they desire that by her merits and prayers they may be brought to Heaven 
* Offic. B. dirge. ad matutin. . And if you think they do not derogate from the Son who lean on the merits of the Mother, you shall find them equalled in a prayer of the Mass of the most holy Rosary, where they pray, that God who predestinated Jesus Christ according to the flesh, and chose the most holy Virgin to be his mother, would grant that through both their merits completed by the 15 sacred mysteries of the Rosary, we may be so for the present addicted to them, that we may continually perceive in ourselves the fruit of them in the glory of an Heavenly life, praesta quaesumus, ut amborum meritis per sacra 15 mysteria Rosarij completis ità in praesenti simus illis addicti, quatenus in coelestis vitae glori● fructus eorum jugitur sentiàmus 
* Missal. Rom. in Miss. Rosarij Pari● 1631. ; nay it's well if they do not question▪ whether they do not owe more to the Mother's milk, than to the Sons blood, for that was 〈◊〉 only a Poetical fancy of Carolus Scribanius, but was crept up into a Picture (which they call a Lay man's Book) on a wall in a Church at Bosledue, and there found by the Dutch at the taking of the Town: from intercession she is got to commanding, and she that acknowledged in the Magnificat the lowliness of his Handmaid, is importuned to command by the authority of a Mother: and if we consult their Offices there is little can be desired of our Saviour which they do not ask of her, and ●o. do not only desire her intercession for blessings, but desire from her the blessings themselves: in the Hymn Ave Maris stella, which is sung at the feast of the presentation of Mary, they say Solve vincla reis, proffer lumen caecis, mala nostra pelle bona cuncta posce, which in the Offic● translated into English is something minced, 
The guilty Souls deliver, Light to the Blind restoring,  
Drive hence our Harms for ever, all Good for us imploring;   
But at the prime they go higher, Maria Mater gratiae mater misericordiae, tu nos ab host besiege & in hor● mortis suscipe, which the English office renders, 
O Marry Mother whence grace flows, who Mother of sweet mercy Art,  
Protect us from our dangerous foes, receive us when we hence departed:   
What tolerable excuse can be given for those words, and generous Mary obtain pardon for us, apply grace unto us and prepare glory for us 
* ●x curs● Hor Beat. Mariae. . Or that prayer in the Sequence 
† Missa. Recoll. fest. M●riae in Missal. Sar. 1555.  (as they call it) pro nobis obtine genitrix veniam, reatum dilue & dona patriam in arce siderum: procure our pardon, wash away our guilt, and give us heaven? or for that commendation of the Soul to the Virgin 
* Office of our Lady in English. , O holy Mary my Lady, I recommend myself unto thy blessed trust, and singular custody and into the bosom of thy mercy, this day, and daily, and in the hour of my death, as also my Soul, and body, and I yield unto thee all my hope and consolation, all my distresses, and my miseries, my life, and the end thereof, that by thy most holy merits, and intercession, all my works may be directed, and disposed according to thine, and thy Sons will? if we may place our hope and confidence in the B. Virgin, in all our afflictions, both in life, and death, what could we do more on Christ? or how could they express greater affiance on Christ, than they do here of the Virgin? or in what fuller terms can they resign ●p themselves to their Saviour; than they use here to her, when they commend themselves to her, that by her merits and intercession all their works may be directed according to here's, and her sons will? where then the Creature is drawn off from his entire confidence on Christ, and persuaded to lean on a fellow creature, that must be absurd and impious, but it is so in these prayers. ●o.  
Secondly, In the titles they ascribe to her, and the Praises they give her: I do not speak of those flattering expressions which some superstitious persons have used, as Bernadinus Senensis & Bernardinus de Bustis: of whom the former fays 
* Berna●. ●enens. Serm 61. Art. 1. c. 11. . That the Blessed Virgin did more for God, or at least as much as he did unto all mankind, and for our comfort we may say that in respect of the Blessed Virgin God himself is after a sort more bound to us, than we to him. The other says 
* Bern. d● Bustis Mariale part. 6. Serm. 2. memb. 3.  that though the Virgin sang, he that is mighty hath done great things to me, yet he dared say, thou hast done greater things to him who is mighty. These I will not charge on them, which may seem rather the extravagancies of private fancies, than any allowed expressions, yet if we consult their public Offices, we shall see those things ascribed to her, which are absurd, and unfit to be ascribed to any Creature: to call her the Star of the Sea which seeming like some title the Poets gave to Venus, may pass by a Poetical licence, but to call her Mother of Mercy, Queen of Heaven, Lady of Angels, Empress of the World 
* Offic. B. Mariae ad Laudes Festo. Purif. Him●● Ave Regina. . These we think are groundless Titles, which ●avour rather of a luxuriant wit, than any true piety: for though she is blessed among women, yet we do not find her exalted above Angels: though she was full of grace, yet here's no reason to call her mother of grace: though she be exalted into glory, yet why must she be called Queen of Heaven? why do they pray Queen of Angels bring us into the kingdom of Heaven? as it is in the Breviary of York 
* Infra Octa Assumpt. ●ar. 6. die Bewed. common. : why do they sing in the Office of the Virgin on the Purification? 
Hail Queen the Heavenly armies guiding.  
Hail Lady over Angels biding.   
Enough of this is to be had in the Salisbury Missal, as that God hath 
●iss. recoll. Fest. B. Mar. post oration. secre●am.  done mercifully with us, since he hath appointed his mother to be our Advocate in Heaven, and in the Sequence sung on the Feast of the Conception, that she is the mother of Orphans, the ease of the oppressed, the help of the weak, and they add omnibus es omnia: now what ground to ascribe these superlative honours to her? what assurance that these are not unwarrantable Titles? but they go further, and tell us, the reverence they show to the mother, is given to the Son, and ●o. with their whole desires, and voices, they insist on her praises, and say that she in the bearing of her Son did destroy antiquum diabolicae seditionis Chirographum, the ancient hand writing of devilish sedition, and opened the kingdom of Heaven to believers 
* Breviar Ebor. commem. B. Mar. Lect. 1. . There is a prayer to the B. Virgin, in which they call her Fountain of mercy, Fountain of health and grace, Fountain of comfort and Indulgence, Fountain of piety and joy, Fountain of life and pardon 
† Offic. B. Mar. inter orationes. : If they ascribe to her these Titles, than they give to the Creature, what is due to the Creator, God blessed for ever; how can they call her Fountain of grace? when it is the honour of Christ, that of his fullness we receive grace for grace 
† john 1. 16. ; and in him all fullness dwells 
† Colos. 1. 19 : or how is she the Fountain of life, when 'tis Christ's peculiar honour to have life in him 
† 1 john 5. 11. , and our life is hid in Christ; or how can she be the Fountain of pardon? when through Christ alone we have remission of sins by his blood. Or how can they sing that redundancy of grace is given to the Virgin, whereby all things are fragrant and acceptable to God. O nimia redundanti● gratiae datae Virgini, quâ cuncta sunt fragrantia, & grata summo numini 
† Him●. Aeterni Patris. in Pr●s. B. Mar. Paris apud Mag●. Goursette. 155●. , when 'tis by Christ alone we are made acceptable to the Father: This is the sum of this first Instance, that in the Offices of the Virgin there are many prayers unfit to offer to any Creature, and many Titles ascribed to her, which are groundless, absurd, and derogating from the honour of Christ.  
Secondly, I instance in the absurd expressions which they use to the Cross for they direct their prayers not only to Christ crucified, but (if there be any sense in the expressions) to the material Cross so in the Office of the Cross, they say, O venerable Cross which hast brought Salvation to wretches, with what praises shall 
† Office of the Cr●ss at Matins in Engl●sh.  I extol thee? for thou hast prepared unto us the Heavenly life? at the Prime they say, O Admirable lignum, in Coelesti curiâ fac nos cantare triumphum. O Admirable wood, cause us to triumph in the heavenly Court: now this is absurd to ascribe that to the Cross, which is only due to Christ▪ who by his sufferings on the Cross purchased Salvation for us, or to direct our prayers and praises to that which was only an inanimate Instrument of Christ's sufferings: but if these expressions do not seem strange, there is worse behind. At the Feast of the Invention of the Cross they sing 
* Br●viar. ●bor. Fe●●. Invent. Sancta Crucis. , O Crux splendidor cunctis astris, mundo celebris ●anctior universis, etc. O Cross more glorious than all the Stars, famous in the world, holier than all things, which waste only worthy to bear the price of the world: Salva praesentem catervam laudibus tuis congregatam 
† Br●v. Roman. in Festo Invent. & Exalt. Crucis. . Save this present company assembled for thy praises: but how the Cross should be holier than all things, how it could be called worthy to bear Christ; I understand not: what excellency was there in that wood, which made it worthy to bear our Saviour? what worthy stock was it chosen from to touch his holy parts? as they sing in the Hymn Vixil●a Regis *: or by what propriety, and 
† Dominica in passione inter Himnos editos Pa●●s. 1552.  congruity of speech can they direct their prayers to that material wood to save them, who were met to celebrate its praises? much like stuff if not worse remains behind in that Hymn, O Crux ave spes, unica hoc passionis tempore, auge piis justitiam, reisque dona veniam *: ●ayle O Cross 
〈◊〉 Breviar. Rom. Fest● Invent. Sanct. Crucis.  our only hope in this passion time, increa●e righteousness to the godly, and give pardon to the guilty; but how can they say the wooden Cross is their only hope? how can they beg righteousness and pardon from it? if they tell us these are lofty fancies of pious wits, I must still wonder how their Church can allow such roving humours among their serious devotions; or how these expressions which are designed for the praises of of the wooden Cross can by any tolerable congruity be understood of Christ; or if they be disallowed that yet they should be retained in the Breviaries reform by Pius 5. another of these we have in the Breviary of Salisbury, on the Feast of the Invention of the Cross, Ara Crucis, Lampas lucis, vera salus hominum, nobis pronum fac patronum quem tulisti Dominum: where they entreat the wooden Cross to make Christ propitious to them. Such kind of prayers they have in their private devotions, as to our Lady's girdle, O veneranda Zona fac nos haeredes vitae Aeternae, & have vitam ab interitu conserva, habeamus te vires & auxilium, murum & propugnaculum, etc. O blessed girdle make us the inheritors of eternal life, keep our present life from destruction, O unspotted girdle of the unspotted Virgin save thine inheritance, be thou our strength and help, our wall and defence, our heaven and refuge: such also is the prayer to Veronica or the Picture of our Saviour's bloody face on a napkin. Salve vultns Domini imago beata, ex aeterno munere mire decorata lumen funde cordibus ex vi tibi datâ; & à nostris sensibus tolle colligata, etc. here they pray that by the virtue given to that Picture it would infuse light into their hearts: and they conclude, nos deduc ad propria O foelix figura, ad videndum faciem quae est Christi pura, O happy figure bring us to see the pure face of Christ: but what ground to hope for these blessings from insensible things? or to pray to them for these ends? or what assurance is there that such virtue is imprinted in them? and if there be no ground for such expressions, than they are unwarrantable and absurd.  
Thirdly, I instance in their most sacred office of the mass, this themselves confess was anciently corrupted, and many things crept in (either through the fault of times or men's negligence or wickedness) were far from the dignity of such a Sacrifice: 
* Cone. Trident. Sesse. 22. Decr. de o●s. & evit. in Celeb. Miss.  and ꝑo. the council required such things to be taken away, which either Covetousness or irreverence, or superstition had brought in: accordingly the Missal was corrected by Pius the 5th and after another review published by Clement the 8th which is the Authentic Missal at this day, now in this I observe many things absurd, vain, or untrue I mention not the multitude of ceremonies which clog the service distract the Priests thoughts, and reduce the simplicity of Christianity to the Jewish Pedagogy: as in the frequent Crossing themselves, in the very canon of the Mass the Priest is enjoined to make 25 Crosses at several times, besides the signing himself with the Patten from the forehead to the Breast, and with part of the host he must make the sign of the Cross thrice on the Chalice: as little reason can be given for the Pax which must be given only to Magisttrates and noble persons 
* Carem. Epis●op l. 1. c 24. , or to be most eminent as Gavantus says 
† Part. 2. ●it. 10. , unless it were no matter to have Peace with the Poor, provided they could have it with the rich, a●d so for the Priests murmuring the words of Consecration, and when he places the Chalice on the Corporal for his saying with a low voice, as oft as ye do this do it in remembrace of me, and in the Close of the Lords Prayer speaking low, Amen: of these things they give so little reason that we may, with greater, judge them the fruit only of ignorance and superstition: I shall speak only of the Prayers themselves. First, After the Offertory, when the Priest offers the wafer which he must afterward consecrate, he says, Suscipe sancte pater hanc immaculatam hostiam, quam offero tibi deo vivo pro innumerabilibus peccat is & offensionibus meis 
* Missal Rom. Paris 1631 Ordo. Missae , receive Holy Father this immaculate host, which I thy unworthy servant offer to thee the true and living God for my innumerable sins, offences and negligences, etc. now I ask what they mean by this immaculate host which they offer for sin? either they mean the wafer, or the real body of Christ: they cannot mean this latter for the body is not under the species till after consecration, and the consecration (they say) is not till these words (hoc est enim corpus meum) be pronounced, and ꝑo. they cannot now offer the body, if they mean the wafer, than they offer to God bread for their sins, which themselves will confess is absurd. Secondly, There is a Prayer which gins Suscipe Sancta Trinitas, etc. And in this the Priest says, he offers this oblation for the memory of our Saviour's Passion, Resurrection and Ascension, and in the honour of the Blessed Virgin, St. John Baptist, and the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul that it may profit them for their Honour, and us for our Salvation: now of what doth the Prayer mean? take it either of the Elements or of Christ's body yet I understand not how they can offer for the Saints honour; how they can entreat God to receive Christ's body in honour of his Saints; how an immediate act of adoration to God can be said to be profitable for their Saint's honour; or if it may be profitable to increase their glory, how it can stand with their own tenants, that it is impious to pray for a Martyr, when yet they pray for St. Peter and Paul, ut iis proficiat ad honorem, but of this more afterwards. Thirdly, After the Consecration it is said, we offer unto thy excellent majesty of thy own gifts, a pure Host, a holy Host, the holy bread of Eternal life, and the Cup of Eternal Salvation, super quae propitio ac sereno vultu respicere digneris, upon which things vouchsafe to look with a propitious and serene countenance, etc. Now this is absurd, that we should pray that God would look propitiously on his own Son in whom he is always well pleased: or that God would accept this Sacrifice of Christ, when it is that sweet smelling Sacrifice which God always doth accept. Indeed Bellarmine gives us an excuse for the harshness of these words, and faies, the offering in respect of the thing offered, and of Christ the principal offerer, always pleases God, yet in respect of the minister or people who offer with him it may not please God, and ꝑo. they pray that God would look propitiously on this gift as it is offered by them: but this evasion will not serve, for they tell us, that the value of this Sacrifice is not ex opere operantis, from the condition or worth of the minister, but ex opere operato from the nature of the thing itself, because it is done as the Law requires 
* Bell. l. 2. c. 4. de Missa. ● 〈◊〉 ● s●cundo. , and ꝑo. it pleases God though he who offer it do not please him 
† § tertium est. ; so that since the value of the Sacrifice is wholly from the thing that is offered, ꝑo. as it is offered by us or not, offered by us doth no way alter the acceptableness of it to God, but still the prayer must remain absurd, for they pray that God would look propitiously on the body and blood of Christ, and accept them, when God always doth accept them, and can never be displeased with them. Fourthly, There is a fourth prayer, which gins supplices rogamus, etc. There they pray, that God would command these things to be carried by his holy Angels unto the high Altar in the sight of his Divine Majesty, etc. Now what are these things? if they say, the prayers of the faithful; that cannot be meant, for this prayer is to the thing spoken of in the former prayer, and that was the body and blood of Christ, the holy bread of Eternal life, and the Cup of everlasting Salvation; if they say that they are the body and blood of Christ (as it is plain from the words that they are) than these have been long since in Heaven, and Christ lives there to make intercession for us, how then can they be carried up into Heaven? and ꝑo. he fixes another sense 
* l. 2. de Missa. c. 24. Sect. respond●●. , that those expressions must be understood spiritually, and signify only this, that the Angels by their prayers commend our obedience to God; but still he forgets, that the things here in the prayer are not our obedience, and service, but the body and blood of Christ: that there is no mention of our obedience and service in that prayer, but both this and the former prayer are connected with those words, we offer to thee a pure Host, an holy Host, an undefiled Host, the holy bread of Eternal life, and the Cup of everlasting Salvation: for they subjoin in the next words, upon which things vouchsafe to look propitiously, etc. and then follows this prayer, we humbly beseech thee, command these things to be carried, etc. it must then be meant of his body and blood; but how unreasonable is it to desire the Angels may commend the Sacrifice of Christ with their prayers? or that their prayers should assist to render the Sacrifice of Christ acceptable? as if any thing should add any worth to Christ's Sacrifice: but if this will not remove the incongruities of this expression, Durand 
* Rational. Diu. Offic. l. 4. c. 44. ●it. E.  tells us, tantae profunditatis sunt haec verba, ut intellectus humanus vix ea sufficiat penetrare: These are such profound expressions that humane understanding can hardly pierce into them: well said, a good excuse for nonsense; to call it a profound expression, or to condemn the weakness of our understandings when 'tis the absurdity of their words: these are fine things to please them, who are wont to admire every thing in the Romish Church; like those Courtiers which cry up the Prince's stammering for a grace in his speech: a strange thing, that those expressions must pass for most Divine, which have least reason, and sense.  
Thus I have instanced in several absurdities, untruths and impieties in the Offices of the Romish Church, which justify my third argument, That it is unreasonable to be obliged to believe that to be the purest Church whose public Offices are very corrupt, but the Offices of the Romish Church are so, ꝑo.   

CHAP. IU.  
MY fourth Consideration shall be drawn from the Irreconcilable opposition of their prayers to their public Doctrine: very many prayers which are contrary to their present Innovations are expunged, and many prayers yet retained cannot be reconciled with their present Doctrine, ꝑo. we have no reason to adhere to the present Romish Church.  
First, Many prayers which were contrary to their present innovations are expunged, this is not only our complaint, but of one that lived, and died in the Roman communion Johannes Marsillus 
* Defesadis Gio. Marsilio. Della 4. prop. contra i● Card● Bellarmino●  ●aies, it is a thing known by all, that in the books of Counsels, of Canons, and of the Doctors, yea in the Breviaries and Missals those places, are expunged, which speak in favour of the Laity, that they might see if they could establish from Antiquity, the opinion of the Pope's illimited power in temporals; so that he who compares the Books Printed in 1530 and 1550, and those at present (i) at the time of the interdict of Venice, will wonder that we have found after such a vintage any glean in defence of our Prince: and ꝑo. first I will give you his Instance in the prayer concerning St. Peter in the commemoration of St. Paul June 30. where it was anciently said, qui B. Petro animas, ligandi & solvendi pontificium dedisti, this he says, he saw in Breviaries which had been written above 200 years, and which had been printed about an hundred, and yet the Reformers of the Roman breviary have left out the word [animas]: will you see Bellarmine's answer? in his reply to Marsillus he says forsi la divina providentia ha' inspirato li reformatori, etc. Perhaps the Divine Providence hath inspired the reformers to take it away? but why must it be taken away; because (as Marsilius states the case) the Pope, designing the advancement of his Power that he might Challenge as St Peter's successor a power in temporals, saw that this restriction was no way consistent with his design; for if the binding and losing be properly of Souls, it must be a merely Spiritual Power, and so no way consistent with that supereminent power in temporals, which the Pope and his Courtiers claimed: a good reason then to take this away, and a fine excuse to justify it: God's providence must inspire these reformers such an inspiration indeed as the Trent Fathers had, when if we believe the Proverb, the Holy Ghost came from Rome in a cloak-bag: Secondly, I will give that Instance which the Arch Bishop of Spalleto 
* De. Rep. Eccles. 〈◊〉 c. 5. n. 164.  had observed in Bertrams book, when Bertram would prove that the bread and wine are figuratively the body and blood of Christ, and though they are called the body and blood of Christ, yet there are such things said of them which are Celebrated by the Church in a mystery, as cannot be said according to that manner they are known to exist, and ꝑo. they must be understood to be the body and blood of Christ in a figure, he proves this by two prayers in the Missal, which were said after the Communion, the first is, Pignus aeternae vitae capientes humiliter imploramus, ut quod imagine contingimus Sacramenti manifestâ participatione sumamus: taking the pledge of eternal life we humbly beseech, that what we touch in the Image of the Sacrament we may also receive by manifest participation: from hence Bertram gathered, that a pledge, and an Image only signifying the things which they belong to, but not manifestly showing them, ꝑo. that which is now made in the Sacrament is different from that which shall be afterwards manifested, ꝑo. that which the Church Celebrates is the body and blood of Christ, but yet as a pledge, as an Image, and when there is no more pledge or Image the truth itself, (i. e) the body of Christ will appear: now this Prayer is not to be found in the Missal says Sspalato. Another he mentions, Per ficiant in nobis Domine quaesumus, tua Sacramenta quod continent, ut quae nunc specie geramus rei veritate capiamus: let thy Sacraments O Lord effects in us what they contain, that what we now hold in show, we may receive in truth; from this he argues, there being a difference betwixt species and veritas (i. e) betwixt what is in show, and what is according to its true nature ꝑo. that body & blood of Christ which is here held by the Church differs from that which shall be glorified in the resurrection: this prayer is clipped says Spalleto, & instead of specie they read spe, (yet since that is opposed to truth in this place, it shows that we do not receive that which is truly the body of Christ according to its proper nature) and so it was read in their reformed Missals, in Antiquitates Liturgicae 
* Sabbato 4. tempotum per Balthas. Beller. 1605. , printed at Douai 1605. which the author says he took à capite ad calcem out of the Roman Misal, the prayer runs, ut quae nunc spe geramus, etc. but I wave this latter, for the word [specie] is now restored in the Paris edition of the Missal 1631. Many more alterations in their Offices might be produced, which will evidence the innovations in the Doctrine of their Church, and which (I hope) will be effected by by some industrious person, who hath the opportunity of variety of choice Missals and Breviaries, and their other books of devotion, whereby to discover those alterations of their present from their ancient Offices.  
Secondly, I will rather instance in those passages yet retained, and are not reconcileable with the grounds of their present Doctrine: As, First, I instance in the private Masses, when the Priest communicates alone; for many are bound by the Statutes of their foundation as the Chantry Priests to say Mass for the Souls of their founders, many persons for affection, some by agreement (and the highest ordinary rate in these Countries, says Fitz-Simon 
* Of the Mass 1 book 2 part 12 chapped. , is a shilling) say a Mass, and ꝑo. whether there be any to Communicate or no, yea though but one to answer the Priest, and sometime none 
† Gavant. part. 2. tit. 2. n. 1. , yet he says Mass: and the Council of Trent though it wishes all who stand by would not only communicate by spiritual affection, but Sacramental participation of the Eucharist, yet it doth not condemn those Masses, in which the Priest communicates alone, but approves them, and commends them: now the prayers and rules of the Mass are no way reconcileable with this Doctrine, and practice: for, First, If there be none to communicate, how can the Priest use this exhortation which is in the Ordo Missae after the prayer suscipe Sancta Trinitas? Orate fratres ut meum ac vestrum sacrificium fit acceptabile, etc. pray brothers that my Sacrifice and yours may be acceptable: this exhortation (says the Rubric) must be said by the Priest with his voice toward the people; and his Tone a little raised, and in their private Mass all this is done, though there be none present: the exhortation supposes some communicating or at least some present, why must he say Brethren, if he supposes there needs be none, or at least but one? why should he raise his voice, when he can expect none to answer, unless the stones say Amen? why must he turn to the people if it suppose a Mass where there are none, or but one present? Lastly, why must he say my Sacrifice and yours, if it did not suppose some joining in the sacrifice? Secondly, I instance in that exhortation, lift up your hearts with the response, habemus ad dominum: if we lift them up to the Lord, etc. so the Priest says dominus vobiscum, the Lord be with you, the answer is, and with thy Spirit, now if in the framing this Office, it were not supposed that others were present to whom the Priest might direct the exhortation, and that they should return the answer it had been foolish to have appointed the use of these words: for it's altogether vain, and ridiculous to say, lift up your hearts when there is none to hear him, or to say, let us pray, when he prays by himself, or the Lord be with you, when he speaks to the bare walls. Thirdly, I instance in the commemoratio pro vivis, where the Priest desires God to remember all those that stand by, whose faith and devotion are known to thee, for whom we offer, or who offer to thee this Sacrifice of praise, etc. Now this expression supposes there must be some that stand by, or else the Priest should be bound ridiculously to pray for them that stand by, when there are none at all. Fourthly, I instance in the prayer Supplices te rogamus, etc. there he prays that as many of us as receive the body and blood of thy Son from this participation of the Altar may be filled with all Heavenly Benedictions and Grace: here the Prayer supposes some receiving, or if there be none to receive with the Priest, how can he say that as many of us as receive, & c? Bellarmin 
* l. 2 de Missa. c. 10. resp. ad object. 10.  thinks to solve this scruple by telling us, that these words are used for those who communicate at present, and if there be none than it must refer to those who are absent, who communicate elsewhere: but this will not serve, for the Prayer refers to those who communicate here and not elsewhere: for else how can it say as many of us? and as many as receive from this participation of the Altar? for the words [this participation] ex hac altaris participatione, restrain it to those who are now to receive. Lastly, I instance in the prayer after the Priest hath received, quod ore sumpsimus, etc. what we have O Lord taken with our mouths, let us also receive with a pure mind, etc. Now how can they say this, unless they suppose some receiving? for if they only Communicate spiritually, as the Council of Trent says, assisting with their prayers, than they cannot be said to receive it with their mouths, besides he desires that what they have received with their mouths, they may receive with a pure mind. And ꝑo. this receiving doth suppose that former receiving: so that we may from hence judge this to have been the Primitive institution, that some should Communicate with the Priest, and that as Walafrid Strabo says, it was only a lawful Mass, in which there was the Priest, those that answer, and those who offer, and communicate; sicut ipsa compositio precum evidenti ratione demonstrat, as the frame of the prayers (says he) evidently shows: and I add (as I have now instanced) that the expressions yet retained are contrary to their present Practice, and Doctrine.  
Secondly, I instance in the Doctrine of merit, in this indeed I cannot see much difference betwixt the moderate Romanists and us, as Spalleto 
* De Rep. Eccles. l. 〈◊〉. c. 7. u. 8.  and Forbes 
† Consid. Modest a. l. 5. c. 4.  observe, for they will tell us, that they account good works meritorious, not for the value, and worth of the work itself: but from God's acceptation, promise, and appointment, and so Cassander 
* Consult. ad Art. 6. de operibus bonis.  says, that the Schoolmen and other ecclesiastics did not differ from this opinion, for they placed the force of the merit of their righteousness, in God's free acceptation, and liberal promise, and that their righteousness what ever it was, was God's gift, and due by right of service to him, etc. yet if we consult the Jesuits, and rigid writers among the Romanists, they will tell us, that our works do merit from the dignity of the work: so Bellarmine says 
† De justif. l. 5. c. 16. , that it is communis & verissima Theologorum sententia, that there is a meritum de condigno, that there is a strict equality betwixt the worth of the work itself, and the reward: and from Vasquez 
* In 1 secundae. Tom. 2. Q. 114. Disp. 214. 〈◊〉 5.  we have this assertion that good works of just persons are of themselves without any covenant or acception worthy of the reward of Eternal life, and have an equal value of condignity to the attaining Eternal glory. This opinion they think is backed by the Council which Anathematizes 
* Conc. Trident. Sess. 6. Can. 32.  them, who deny that good works done by the grace of God, and merit of Christ, do truly deserve increase of grace and Eternal glory: and the interest of this opinion hath so far prevailed, that whereas in the ordo baptizandi cum modo visitandi, etc. Printed at Venice 1575., there was this question proposed to the dying man, Credis non propriis meritis, sed passionis Domini nostri Jesu Christi virtute & merito ad gloriam pervenire? dost thou believe that thou shalt come to glory not by thy own merits, but by the virtue and merit of Jesus Christ's passion? and this was also proposed to him, dost thou believe that Jesus Christ died for our Salvation, and that none can be saved by his own merits, or by any other means, but by the merits of his passion? both these are commanded to be expunged by the Index expurgatorius of Card. Quiroga 
* Index. Expurg. per Card. Quirog. Madrit. 1584. & recus. Hanoviae. 1611.  1584. and also by that of Cardinal Sandoval. 1612. This expression is also expunged out of Erasmus Annotations, in the first Chapter of St. Luke on these words they shall call me blessed; Then God's name is glorified when nothing is ascribed to our own merits, but the whole to God's mercy: this Doctrine of merit though disliked by the moderate sort, and hardly owned where they converse with Protestants is yet stiffly maintained as the common opinion in those Countries which are entirely Popish, seems to be countenanced by the decree of the Council, and more fully by those who have been employed in purging Heretical books, yet notwithstanding all this, the prayers which may be found in the Offices are no way reconcileable with it; for though in their disputes with men, they pretend the merit of their works, yet in their Prayers to God they fly to his sole mercy: so they sing 
* In dedi●. Sancti Mich. Archang. ad vesperas in Hi●●. ●ib● Christ.  mundo cord, corpore Paradiso red tuo nos solâ clementiâ: bring us by thy alone mercy to thy Paradise with clean heart, and body: and in the Prayer which gins nobis qu●que, in the Canon of the Mass, they beg, that God would bring them into the society of Saints, non aestimator meriti, sed veniae largitor, not esteeming their merits, but pardoning their offences: if there could be any exact merit, which from its own dignity deserves glory, why do they then fly to his sole mercy? and if the whole be not ascribed to God's mercy, but man's merits, why do they beg that God would not weigh their merits but pardon their offences?  
Thirdly, I instance in the Doctrine of Purgatory, with their Prayers for the dead, the Doctrine of the Romanists is, that the Souls in Purgatory are helped by the Suffrages of the Faithful 
* Conc. Trident. Sess. 25. , for after Death those Souls which have not been throughly purged, in this life are carried into a place of torment, where they are detained till hey are throughly purged, 
† S. C. Answer to Dr. Pierce. c. 10. Sect. 12.  and then are carried into Heaven: and ꝑo. they pray for those that God will forgive their sins and assuage their sufferings*, etc. for those who are very good they give thanks, but for those who are in this middle estate they pray for pardon and Mercy, and that not only on the day of their Burial, but also also the on third, on the seventh, on the thirtieth, and on the anniversary of their death they say Mass for their Souls, and by this hope to rid them quickly out of Purgatory: now the Prayers they use are irreconciliable with this Doctrine. For First, there are Prayers for those whom they believe to be in Heaven, even for the greatest Saints: this S. C. 
* Answer to Dr. Pierce c. 10 Sect. 10.  Confesses was anciently so, but then they were not such Prayers as were Made for the imperfect (i) for remision of sins refreshment, etc. but for accession of glory to Saints already glorified, but there is more than so: for they use the same request for those, who (they say) are in Purgatory, and for those we all believe to be in glory: they pray for all that rest in Christ, that God would give them a place of refreshment, light, and peace 
* Commem. pro. defunct. in Can. Missa. ; now if the Saint's rest in Christ then they are included in this Prayer, and they beg for the Saints who are glorified refreshment and peace, which is the request, (S. C. Says) that is to be made for imperfect Christians. And we find such a prayer, that God by whose mercy the Soul's of the faithful rest, would grant to all thy servants here and every where resting in Christ, pardon of sin, that being absolved from all guilt, they may rest with 
† In crationibus pro his qui in Caemit. requiese.  thee for ever*: and there was a prayer for St. Leo, ut per haec placationis officia illum beata retributio comitetur 
* In festo Sancti Leonis oratio secreta. , that by these offices of atonement a blessed retribution may accompany him: what do these words signify? not an increase of glory, but simply that he may have glory, not an addition of happiness but simply that a blessed reward may accompany him: and how can the Sacrifice they offer here be understood to be a thanksgiven for Leo, (as it must be for those who are very good) when it's called an office of atonement Secondly, there are no prayers in their public offices for deliverance from Purgatory that they may be quickly eased of their pains, and delivered from torments, and if there be no prayer for speedy ease of those pains, and quick riddance from them, than their prayers are not suitable to their Doctrine. The Prayers are either First to prevent falling into punishment; so in the office of burial, they Pray that God would receive the soul returning to him, and  it with an Heavenly Garment, and wash it with the holy fountain of eternal life: and in the next Prayer, they Pray 
* in offic. Sepult. O atio: suscipe domine.  that God would receive the ●oul of his servant, which he hath called from the prison of the body, and free it from the Princes of darkness, and the places of punishments, that being delivered from the bond of his sins he may obtain the blessing of eternal rest, and light: and this Antiphona is sung, when the body is carried to the Church 
* Offic. sepult Antiph. subvenite.  help O ye Saints, meet him O ye Angils of the Lord receiving his Soul, and offering it in the sight of the highest: let Christ receive thee who called thee, and carry thee into Abraham's bosom: and so in the prayer, O God to whom all things do live, etc. they entreat that God would command the Soul of his Servant to be received by the hands of his holy Angels, and to be carried into the bosom of the Patriarches: and in the prayer fac quaesumus, etc. that he may not receive any recompense of his actions in punishments, who hath in his desires kept thy will: I'll instance in one prayer more: Deus origo pietatis, etc. where they desire, that the Soul may endure no treacheries of the devil meeting him, that God would free him from the infernal Gulf, and deliver him from the cruel burn of a hot Hell, placing it in the pleasure of Paradise: Let it not feel O merciful Father the heat of the flames, the anguish of punishments, or the horror of darkness, but being prevented by thy bounty may obtain to escape the Judgement of revenge. Now these prayers are not reconcileable with their grounds, for 'tis their Doctrine, that those who die in an imperfect state must necessarily go to that place of purgation; but now in those prayers, they desire that God would receive the Soul when it comes out of the body, and free it from the Prince of darkness, and places of punishments, and that it may not feel the heat of the flames, but being prevented by God's bounty may escape the Judgement of revenge. They pretend in their Doctrine, that by their prayers they free the Souls from the punishments they feel, for they necessarily must endure punishment, but the prayers themselves speak of preventing the falling into punishment. And ꝑo. these prayers cannot be reconciled with their Doctrine. Secondly, there are Prayers, which suppose the soul as yet in its passage, and ꝑo. they desire, that it may not fall into punishment, but God would place it in the land of rest and light. After the departure of the soul out of the body they pray, that God would receive the soul returning to him: let Michael the Angel of the testament be present with him and vouchsafe by the hands of thy holy Angel to place him in the bosom of thy Patriarch Abraham, that being freed from the Prince of darkness, and places of punishments, no man may be Confounded with the errors of his nativity or ignorance, etc. Now though this may seem suitable, when the soul is newly gone out of the body, with those, that think there is some space of time betwixt the Souls departure, and its receiving its particular doom: but without such a conceit, how can they pray at the burial 
* Offic. sepult. Orat. Te Domine, etc. , that God would give his servant, whom he called out of the whirlepool of this world a place of refreshment, and light, that he may pass by the gates of Hell, and the punishments of darkness, etc. If at the burial they pray that it may pass by the gates of Hell, than the Soul is still in its passage: and further they pray, that he may remain in the mansion of the Saints, and his spirit may receive no hurt: but if his spirit was in purgatory, than it would receive hurt: ꝑo. by this prayer I understand, it is yet in a capacity to receive no hurt, and ꝑo. the Soul must yet be in its passage: and so it is plain from the Absolution, where he says, the Lord Jesus Christ absolve thee from all the bond of thy sins, and I pray thou mayest be absolved before the Tribunal of Jesus Christ; this supposes, that the Soul is yet in its passage to this Tribunal, or why should he pray for this absolution before the Tribunal, if he hath already received the sentence of that Tribunal? there is another prayer, that God would receive the Soul of his Servant freed from Corporal bonds into the peace of his Saints, that being Translated into the Region of the living, it may escape the place of punishment, and the fire of Hell: all this supposes that the Soul hath not yet its doom, but is now in its passage: and ꝑo. when the body is carrying to the grave, they desire, that the Angels would meet him, and receive his Soul, and lead him into Paradise, and the Martyrs receive him into their assembly; and when the body is laid in the grave, still they pray, that the Soul being prevented with the gift of thy bounty, it may obain to escape the Judgement of revenge 
* In Oraticne Deu● Origo pietatis, etc. . Nor do they end here, but they use such expressions on the Trental and Anniversary, as in the Offertory, in Anniversario defunctorum: free them from the mouth of the Lion, let not Hell swallow them up, let not them fall into the dark place, but let the standard bearer St. Michael bring them into the holy Light, etc. and the prayers in the commendatio animarum which suppose the Soul even then in its passage are used at the Trental and Anniversary: 
Offic. sepult sec. usum. Sarum. in rubrica. pag. 103.  but why should those words which commend it in its passage be used at these times, if they did not suppose the Soul yet in its way? thus these prayers contradict their received grounds of Purgatory, and prayer for the dead, for if the prayers they use, still suppose them in this passage, and not come into torment, than they must contradict their usual Doctrine, which concludes them presently in torment, and that by those prayers they may be speedily delivered from the torment they are in. Thirdly, There are other prayers which desire that the Soul may be freed from Eternal punishments, that Hell may not swallow them up, and they may not fall into the place of darkness 
* Missa. ● in die ob●●●s Offert●r. ; and in the first prayer at that Mass they pray for the Soul of thy Servant whom thou hast commanded this day to departed out of this world, that thou wilt not deliver him into the hand of the enemy, nor forget it finally, etc. and because he hoped and believed in thee, that he may not sustain the pains of Hell, but possess joys everlasting. This prayer anciently run that he might not sustain paenas aeternas, but now this is altered in poenas inferni, yet still if they take the word Hell, for Purgatory, than they pray that God would not suffer it to come into Purgatory, which is contrary to their own Doctrine, that every man not throughly purged in this life, must be purged in Purgatory. If they understand it of the Hell of the damned, and of eternal punishments, as there is a Prayer to be used at the funeral of a Cardinal, that by the assistance of God's grace he may obtain to escape the Judgement of everlasting revenge 
* C●. r●m. F●●l. Rom. l. 1. sect. 15. c. 1. f●l. 1● 2. , if they understand it thus, than I ask, whether they suppose those persons for whom they pray are very wicked, or indifferently good: if they be very wicked, than it would be absurd to pray for their deliverance from everlasting damnation; for it is certain (says Bellarmine 
* l. 2. de purgatory. c. 18. ) that the Prayers do not profit the damned, for they can not be helped: if they be indifferently good, such as die in a state of grace though with some venial sins, then why do they pray that he might not fall into Hell? for this is already certain: or that God would not forget them finally, but command them to be received by the holy Angels, and brought into the Country of Paradise; for it is certain, God cannot forget them finally, but the longest duration of Purgatory is only till the resurrection: or why do they pray that they may not sustain the pains of Hell, but possess joys everlasting, and that they may escape Eternal revenge? if their only design was to free the Soul from the torments of Purgatory, why is there nothing of ●ase in Purgatory? nothing of quick riddance from thence? (as they pretend from the apparitions of Souls which have been in Purgatory, and ●aid they were freed by the Masses and prayers of the living) yea further, there is one prayer, which refers the pardon of sin to the resurrection: in the prayer which gins, Te Domine Sancte, etc. 
Offic. sop●lt. sec. usum Sa●um.  they pray, Let his Spirit receive no hurt, but when the great day of the resurrection comes, vouchsafe to raise him with the Saints and blot out all his offences and sins even unto the last farthing: now if by the prayers of the living they can procure pardon, than there would not be a farthing to be blotted out at the resurrection: and so this prayer would be useless All this while we meet with no prayer to put an end to their torments, to free them quickly from the pains they are now in: they'll tell us indeed, they pray for refreshment and pardon of sins, and where must they be for whom they pray thus, except in Purgatory? but this doth not follow; for, First, There are ancient prayers extant, in which they prayed even to give rest to them, whom they believed already to be in rest: and therefore this doth not suppose them in Purgatory: so in St. James Liturgy (as it is called) he prays for all from Abel the just until this present day, that God would give them rest in the kingdom of heaven: and so in Alcuinus 
* Offic. per Ferias. Col. 228. Oper. Edit. Paris 1917. , he prays for the spirits of thy servants, and handmaids which thou hast called to thee from the beginning of the world, that thou wouldst vouchsafe to give them a lightsome place, a place of refreshment and ease. Secondly, I gather that they were not in Purgatory, from that commemoration of the dead, which S. C. mentions, for those who are gone before us with the sign of faith, and repose in the sleep of peace, and rest in Christ refreshment, light and peace; for the Romanists suppose the torments to be greater, than the greatest torments of this life; now how do they repose in the sleep of peace, when they endure both a punishment of loss in the want of the sight of God, and a punishment of sense? how do they rest in Christ, when they are perhaps in far greater torments than they in this life? whereas Those who die in the Lord rest from their labours 
* Rev. 14. 13. . Thirdly, Though the prayer runs, that God would absolve him from his sins, yet still there is no necessity, that there should be a Purgatory; for those prayers may suppose as you see many do, the Soul yet to be in suspense, and in its passage to God's tribunal, and that they use the commendatio animae at the burial, or Trental which they did, when the Soul just went out of the body, so that these prayers rather signify a prevention of punishment, than any mitigation or ending of it: or again these prayers may refer to the resurrection, for it is not said, absolve him from the bond of his sins, that he may be presently released from Purgatory, but that in the glory of the resurrection being raised among the Saints, he may breathe again: and so we have such a prayer in the Pontifical, which gins, Deus cui omnia vivunt, etc. that God would command the Soul of his Servant to be received by the holy Angels, and carried into the bosom of Abraham his friend and be raised at the last day: and what ever faults by the deceit of the devil be incurred, thou of thy pity and mercy wash away by forgiving them. Here is a prayer for pardon, but then 'tis at the resurrection, and thus though there are prayers for pardon, yet still they are no way reconcileable with their Doctrine. Thus I have finished the considerations which at present I intent and (perhaps if occasion offer itself (may add more: my conclusion is a request to those who begin to entertain such fair opinions of the Romish Church, that they would not exchange their Religion, before they consider, what they shall gain by the bargain: I see many who did not much mind to understand the duties of their own religion, much less to practise them, are easily drawn over to the Romish party, and when they live like Atheists, at least to seem some body, they pretend to be Papists: I envy them not such Proselytes, who add nothing to the repute of any side, but only number: nor do●●e lose any thing by such Renegadoes whose practice disgraced their profession: the Church is purer when the dregs are purged out: Rome had at first wanted men to inhabit it if Romulus had not opened an Asylum, and modern Rome would not be so much replenished, if there were not a Sanctuary to shelter such converts: 'tis hardly any matter what religion men profess if their practice be not answerable, and 〈◊〉 though they glory in their multitudes, yet many who seem to be of their religion, would prove (if they were ●i●ted) of none at all. There are others well meaning persons, who (as in Charity I must judge) are moved either through affection to peace, or love to truth (as they think) to incline to the Romish Church: these I do not condemn for their love to peace: 'Tis a noble design in imitation of the good Samaritan to pour Oil and Wine into the Church's wounds and reconcile brethren who are at od's: and God ●orbid but we should meet them for peace's sake so far as we can without prejudice to piety and truth: but what benefit can we expect by our concessions? when they pretend (what ever we can judge from Scripture, reason or Antiquity) they cannot err: yea the least concession that they have erred or can err, oreturns their foundation, destroys the Infallibility of their Church. What hopes to reclaim them to moderation, when those who mediate for peace are looked on as enemies? Erasmus, Modrevius and Cassander are in their account damnati authores and if they be not high flown Papists they account them (though they die in the communion of their Church) but only close Heriticks. I do not condemn those who are inquisitive after truth, and ready to embrace that which is attended with suitable motives. To these 〈◊〉 I offer these considerations, whether 'tis fit to adhere to that Church which requires all to believe those Doctrines, as necessary to salvation which are uncertain, and dubious? to embrace those for Apostolical Traditions which are not such? to receive those Ecclesiastical rites for wholesome and good, of which many are vain and foolish, and cannot be excused from Superstition? Let them consider, whether it be fit to adhere to that Church, whose sacred Offices contain many untruths and impieties? and Lastly, whose very prayers do in many things contradict their avowed Doctrine? he that can swallow down such considerations and turn Romanist, has (as I may judge) bidden adieu to his reason, as well as Religion.  
Soli Deo Gloria.  
FINIS.