Vindication of the Animadversions on Fiat Lux, Chapter 4

Vindication of the Animadversions on Fiat Lux · Chapter 4

p. 48CHAP. IV.

Further Vindication of the first Chapter of the Animadversions. Church of Rome not what she was of old. Her Falls and Apostacy. Difference between Idolatry, Apostacy, Heresie, and Schism. Principles of the Church of Rome condemned by the antient Church, Fathers, and Councels. Imposing Rites unnecessary. Persecution for Conscience. Papall Supremacy. The Branches of it. Papall Personall Infallibility. Religious veneration of Images.

THe third Assertion which you review is, That the Roman profession of Religion, and practice in the worship of God, are every way the same as when first we received the Gospel from Rome, nor can they ever otherwise be; whereunto you say, This indeed though I do no where formally express it, yet I suppose it, because I know it hath been demonstratively proved a hundred times over. You deny it hath been proved, why do you not then disprove it? because you decline, say you, all common places. All that I affirmed was, that you did suppose this Principle, and built many of your Inferences on the supposition thereof, which you here acknowledge. And so you have already owned two of the Principles, whereof in the foregoing Page you affirmed, that you could hardly own any one, and that in the sense wherein by me they are proposed and understood. But what do you mean that you no where formally express it? If you mean, that you have not set it down in those syllables, wherein you find it expressed in the Animadversions, no man ever said you did; you do not use to speak so p. 49openly and plainly: To do so would bring you out of the corners, which somewhat that you pretend unto never lead you into. But if you deny, that you asserted and laboured to prove the whole and entire matter of it, your following Discourse wherein you endeavour a vindication of the Sophisme, wherewith you pleaded for it in your Fiat, will sufficiently confute you. And so you have avowed already two, of the hardly any one, Principles ascribed unto you: And this you say hath been demonstratively proved an hundred times over, and ask me why I do not disprove it, giving a ridiculous Answer, as from me, unto your Enquiry. But pray S^r talk not of Demonstrations in this matter; palpable Sophismes, such as your Masters use in this Cause, are far enough from Demonstrations. And if you think it enough for you to say, that it hath been proved, why is it not a sufficient. Answer in me to remind you that it hath been disproved, and your pretended proofs all refuted. And according to what Rules of Logick, do you expect Arguments from me to disprove your, Assertion, whilest I was only answering yours that you produced in its confirmation? But that you may not complain any more, I shall make some addition of the proofs you require by way of supererrogation, when we have considered your vindication of your former Arguments, for the confirmation of this Assertion, wherewith you closed your Discourse in your Fiat Lux. This you thus propose again, The Roman was once a true flourishing Church, and if she ever fell, she must fall either by Apostasie, Heresie, or Schisme. So you now mince the matter; in your Fiat it was a most pure flourishing and Mother Church; and you know there are many that yet acknowledge her a true Church, as a theif is a true man; who will p. 50not acknowledge her to be a pure Church, much less most pure. God be mercifull to poor worms, this boasting doth not become us; it is not unlike hers who cryed, Is it as a Queen and shall see no sorrow; I wish you begin to be sensible and ashamed of it: But yet I fear it is otherwise; for whereas in your Fiat you had proclaimed your Roman Church and Party, to be absolutely innocent and unblameable, you tell us pag. 10. of your Epistle, that you can make it appear that it is far more innocent and amiable than you have made it; more than absolutely innocent it seems, a note so high that it sounds harshly. And whereas we shall manifest your Church to have lost her native beauty, we know that no painting of her, which is all you can do, will render her truly amiable unto a spirituall eye: She hath too often defiled her self, to pretend now to be lovely. But to this you say I reply, The Church that then was in the Apostles time was indeed true, not the Roman Church that now is; and adde, So, so, then I say that former true Church must fall sometime or other, when did she fall, and how did the sall by Apostasie, Heresie, or Schisme. S^r, you very lamely represent my Answer, that you might seem to say something unto it, when indeed you say nothing at all. I discover unto you the equivocation you use in that expression, the Church of Rome, and shew you that the thing now so called by you, had neither being nor name, neither essence nor affection in the dayes of old; its very being is but the terminus as quem, of a Churches fall. I shewed you also, that the Church of old that was pure, fell, not whilest it was so, but that the men who succeeded in the place, where they lived in the profession of Religion, gradually fell from the purity of that profession, which the Church at its first planting did p. 51enjoy. But all that discourse you pass by, and repeat again your former Question, to which you subjoyn my first Answer, which was, it was possible she might fall by an Earthquake, as did those of Colosse and Laodicea; to which you, We speak not here of any casuall or naturall downfall, or death of mortals, by Plague, Famine, or Earthquake, but a morall and voluntary lapse in faith. What do you speak to me of Earthquakes? It is well you do so now explain your self; your former enquiry was only in generall, how or by what means she ceased to be what she had been before, as though it were impossible to assign any such; neither did I exclude the sense whereunto you now restrain your words. And had I only shewed you, that it was possible she might fall, and come to nothing, and yet not by any of the wayes or means by you mentioned, without proceeding unto the consideration of them also, yet your especiall enquiry being resolved into this generall one, from whence it is taken, how a pure flourishing Church may cease to be so, I had rendred your enquiry useless unto your present purpose, though I had not answered your intention: For certainly that which ceaseth to be, ceaseth to be pure, seeing non entis nullae sunt affectiones. The Church of the Brittains in this part of the …sland, now called England, was once as pure a Church as ever was the Church of Rome, yet she ceased to be long since, and that neither by Apostasie, Here sie, nor Schisme, but by the sword of the Saxons. And to tell you the truth, I do not think the old Church of Rome unconcerned in this instance, then especially when Rome was left desolate by Totilas, and without inhabitant; for the Church of Rome is urbis, and not as you vainly imagine, orbi… Ecclesia.

p. 52Again, I told you she might fall by Idolatry, and so neither by Apostasie Heresie, or Schisme. To which you reply, Good S^r, Idolatry is a mixt misdemeanour both in faith and manners; I speak of the single one of faith; and he that falls by Idolatry, if he keep still some parts of Christianity entire, he falls by Heresie, by Apostasie if he keep none. I am perswaded you are the first that ever gave this description of Idolatry, and the last that will do so; it is a mixt misdemeanour in faith and manners. Manners you speak of in contradistinction to Faith, and you so explain your self, in which sense they relate only unto morall conversation, regulated by the second Table. That Idolatry hath been and is constantly attended with corruption in manners, the Apostle declares, Rom. 1. and I willingly grant; but how in its self, or its own nature, it should come to be a mixt misdemeanour in faith and in manners, I know not; neither can you tell me which is the fleshy, which is the fishy part of this Dagon; what it is in it that is a misdemeanour in faith, and what in manners. According to this description of yours, an Idolater should be an ill mannered, or an unmannerly Heretick. But you speak of the single misdemeanour in faith; but who gave you leave so to restrain your enquiry? I allowed you before to except against one instance, whereby many a Church hath fallen; but if you will except Idolatry and Manners also, your endeavour to provide a shelter for your guilt, is shamefull and vain. For what you except out of your enquiry, if you confess not to have been, yet you do that it may be, or might have been: And you do wisely to let your Adversary know, that he is to strike you only where you suppose your self armed, but by all means must let your naked parts alone; and p. 53doubtless he must needs be very wise who will take your advice. The Church of Judah was once a pure Church in the dayes of David; how came she then to fall? by Apostasie Heresie, or Schisme? I answer if you will give me leave, she fell by Idolatry, and corruption of manners, against both which the Prophets were protestants, 2 King. 17. 13.—foreign God protested against them by his Prophets. Again the same Church reformed in the dayes of Ezra, Nehemiah, Zerubbabel,—foreign the men of the Great Congregation, was a pure Church; how did it fall? not by Idolatry as formerly, but by corruption of life, unbelief, and rejecting the Word of God for superstitious traditions, untill it became a den of Thieves. You see then there are other wayes of a Churches falling from its pristine purity, than those by you insisted on. And if you shall enquire how it may fall, you must exclude nothing out of your enquiry, whereby it may do so, and whereby some Churches have done so. And if you will have my thoughts in this matter, they are, that the beginning of the fall of your Church and many others, lay in unbelief, corruption of life, conformity to the world, and other sins that were found in the most of its members. And it is a fancy to dream of the purity of a Church, in respect of its outward order, when the power and life of godliness is lost in its members; and a wicked device to suppose a Church may not be separated from Christ by unbelief, whilest it abides in an externall profession of the doctrine of faith. Such a Church though it may have a name to live, yet indeed is dead, and dead things are unclean. We speak of its purity and acceptation thereon in the sight of God; neither will men dead in trespasses and sins, be terrible unto p. 54any, as an Army with banners, unless they are like those in Lucilius, who,

Vt pueri infantes credunt signa omnia ahena

Vivere & esse homines; sic isti omnia ficta

Vera putant; credunt signis cor inesse ahenis.

as Lactantius reports him. But you say. If they fall by Idolatry and yet keep any parts of Christianity, they fall by Heresie. But why so? would you had thought it incumbent on you to give a reason of what you say. Are Idolatry and Heresie the same? Tertullian who of all the old Ecclesiasticall Writers most enlargeth the bounds of Idolatry, defines it to be omnis circa omne Idolum famulatus & servitus; Any worship or service performed in reference to, or about any Idoll. I do not remember that ever I met with your definition of Idolatry in any Author whatever. Bellarmine seems to place it in Creaturum aeque colere ac Deum to worship the creature as much or equally with the Creator: which description of it, though it be vain and groundless, for his aeque is neither in the Scripture nor any approved Author of old required to the constituting of the worship of any creature Idolatrous, yet is not this Heresie neither, but that which differs from it toto genere. We know it to be cultus religiosus creaturae exhibitus, any religious worship of that whish by nature is not God: and so doth your Thomas grant it to be. Gregory de Valentia another of your great Champions contends, that tanqnam Deo, as unto God, is to be added unto the definition: As though religious worship could be given unto any thing, and not as unto God really and indeed, though not intentionally as to the worshipper. Where a man gives religious worship, there he doth ipso facto assign a divine eminencie, say he what he will to the p. 55contrary: Neither will his intention of not doing it as unto God, any more free him from Idolatry, than an Adultress will be free by not looking on her Adulterer as her Husband. I confess he adds afterwards a distinction that is of great use for you, and indispensably necessary for your defence; de Idol. lib. 2 cap. 7. S^t Peter he tells us insinuates some worship of Idols, cultum aliquem simulachrorum, to wit, that of the holy Images to be right, or lawfull, when he deterreth believers ab illicitis Idolorum cultibus, from the unlawfull worship of Idols; 1 Pet. 4. 3. foreign, This were somewhat indeed, if all epithetes were distinguishing, none aggravating or declarative. When Virgil said dulcia mella premes, Geor. 4. he did not insinuate that there was any bitter honey. Nor is it allowable only for Poets, to use explaining and declaring epithetes; but Aristotle allowes it in the best Oratours also, so they use not foreign, long or unseasonable ones, or the same frequently: and the use of this here by Peter is free from all those vices. When the Romane Orator cryed out ô scelus detestandum, O wickedness to be abhorred, he did not intend to insinuate that there was a wickedness not to be abhorred, or to be approved. But if it will follow hence that your Church is guilty only of lawfull Idolatry, I shall not much contend about it. Yet I must tell you, that as the poor woman when the Physicians in her sickness told her still that what she complained of was a good sign, cryed out foreign, good signes have undone me; your lawfull Idolatry if you take not better heed, will undo you. In the mean time as to the coincidence you imagin between Idolatry and Heresie, I wish you would advise with your Angelicall Doctor, who will shew you how they are contradistinct evils, p. 56which he therefore weighs in his scales, and determines which is the heaviest, 22^ae q. 94. a. ad 4. The Church in the wilderness fell by its foreign, its making and worshiping a golden Calfe, as a representation of the presence of God. That they kept some parts of the Doctrine of Truth entire, is evident from their proclamation of a feast to Jehovah. Do any men in their wits use to say this fall was by Heresie, though all agree it was by Idolatry? so that your Church might fall by Idolatry and not fall formally by Heresie, according to the genuine importance of the word, the use of it in the Scriptures, or the definition given of it by the Schoolmen, or any sober Writer of what sort soever. And here I must desire you to stay a little, if you intend to take Protestants along with you: They constantly return this Answer unto you in the first place, and tell you, that your Church is fallen by Idolatry; It is fallen in the worship which you give unto the Consecrated Host, as you call it, wherein if the Scriptures which call it bread, and the Fathers who terme it the figure of the body of Christ, if Reason, and all our senses deceive us not, you are as plainely Idolatrous as the poor wretches which fall down and worship a piece of Red Cloth: So your own Costerus assures us, Enchirid. cap. 8. Tolerabilior, saith he, est eorum error, qui pro Deo solunt statuam auream, aut argenteam, aut alterius materis imaginem, quomodo Gentiles Deos suos venerabantur, vel pannum rubrum in hastam elevatum, quod narratur de Lappis, vel viva animalia at quondam Aegyptii, quam eorum qui frustum panis colunt. Their errour is more tolerable who worship a golden or silver Statue, or an Image of any other matter for a God, as the Gentiles worshipped their Gods, or a ragge of Red Cloth lifted upon a spear, as it is reported of p. 57the Laplanders, or living Creatures, as did the Egyptians of old, than theirs who worship a piece of bread. This is that which made Averoes cry out, seeing the Christians eat the God whom they worship, let my soul be among the Philosophers. You do the same in your worship of the Cross, which the chiefest among you maintain …o be the same that is due to Christ himself. And you are in the same path still in the religious adoration you give unto the blessed Virgin, your prayers to her, and invocations of her, which abound in all your books of Devotion, and generall practice. And what need we mention any particular instances, when you have begun some of your Conciliary actions; the greatest solemnities of Christianity amongst you, with invocation of her for help and assistance. So did your Councell of Lateran joyning with Cardinall Cajetan in their opening of the second Session, in these words; Quoniam nihil est quod homo de semetipso sine auxilio ope que divina possit polliceri, ad Gloriosam ipsam Virginem Dei matrem primum convertam orationem meam. Seeing there is nothing that a man may promise to himself as of himself without divine help and assistance, I will first turn my prayer unto the Glorious Virgin the mother of God. This was the Doctrine, this the Practice, this the Idolatry of your Lateran Councell. And again in the 7^th Session, Deiparae nostrae presidium imploremus; let us pray for the help or protection of our blessed mother of God. And in the 10^th Session of the same Councell, Stephen Arch… bishop of Patras prays; Vt ipsa beata Virgo, Angelorum Domina, fons omnium Gratiarum, quae omnes Hereses interemit, cujus opera magus reformatio, Concordia Principum, & vera contra Infideles expeditio fieri debet opem ferre dignetur: That the blessed Virgin, the Lady of Angels, the fountaion of all Graces, p. 58who destroyeth all heresies, by whose assistance, the great Reformation, the Agreement of Princes, and sincere expedition against the Infidels (the business of that Councell) ought to be performed, would vouchsafe to help him, that he might, &c. And thereupon sings this Hymne unto her, recorded in the Acts of the Councell;

Omnium Splendor decus & perenne

Virginum Lumen, genetrix superni

Gloria humani generis Maria unica nostri.

Sola Tu Virgo dominaris astris,

Sola Tu Terrae Maris at que Coeli

Lumen, inceptis saveas rogamus Inclyta nostris.

Vt queam sacros reserare sensus

Qui latent chart is nimium severi

Ingredi & celsae, duce te benigna Maeniaterra.

O Mary the beauty, honour and everlasting light of all Virgins, the mother of the Highest, the only glory of mankind; Thou Virgin alone rulest the Stars; Thou alone are the light of Earth, Sea and Heaven; do thou O glorious Lady, wee entreat, prosper my endeavours; That I may unfold the sacred senses which lye hid in the too severe writings (of the Scripture) and kindly give me under thy goodness to enter the walls of the heavenly Countreys. I suppose it cannot be doubted whence the pattern of this Conciliary Prayer was taken; it is but an imitation of

Phaebe, Sylvarúm que potens Diana

Lucidum Coeli decus, O colendi

Semper & culti, date quae precamur tempore sacro.

p. 59Alme Sol curru nitido diem qui

Promis & celas alius que & idem

Nasceris, possis nihil urbe Roma visere majus.

Rite maturos aperire partus

Lenis Itithia, tuere matres

Sive tu Lucina probas vocari seu Genitalis

Diva.

And if this be not plainely to place her in the Throne of God I know not what can be imagined so to do. Your worship of Angels and of Saints is of the same importance, concerning whom you do well to entitle your Paragraph Hero's; your Doctrine and Practice concerning them, being the very same with those of the antient Heathen, in reference unto their Daemons and Hero's. So your own Learned Vives confesseth of many of you; in August. de Civit. Dei, lib. 28. cap. ult. Multi Christiani, saith he, Divos Divas que non aliter venerantur quam Deum; nes video in multis quod sit discrimen inter eorum opinionem de Sanctis, & id quod Gentiles, putabant de suis Diss. Many Christians worship hee and shee Saints, no otherwise than they do God; neither do I see in many things what difference there is between their opinion concerning the Saints, and that which the Heathen thought of their Gods. And it is known what Polidore Virgil before him affirmed to the same purpose: Your Idolatry in the worship of Images of all sorts shall be afterwards declared. Be then this a single or mixt misdemeanour it matters not, a misdemeanour it is, whereby we affirm that the Roman Church is fallen from its pristine purity. And this we think is a full answer unto your enquiry. We need not, you cannot compell us to go one step farther. But our way p. 60is plain and invites us. I shall therefore proceed to let you see once again that she is fallen by all the wayes you thought meet to confine your enquiry unto.

You proceed, finding your self puzled, in the third place you lay on load, she fell say you, by Apostasie, Idolatry, Heresie, Schisme, Licentiousness and prophaneness of Life. And in this you do not much unlike the drunken youth, who being bid to hit his Masters finger with his, when he perceived he could not do it, he ran his whole fist against it. Seriously S^r, you have the worst success in your Attempts for a little wit and merriment that ever I met with. If you would take my advice, you should not strain your Genius for that which it will not affoard you: you forget the old rule, Tu nihil invita dies faciesve Minerva. Any other diversion were better than this which proves so succesless: Yet I must confess you deserve well of pastime, seeing to serve its interests you so often make your self ridiculous, as you now do in this pittifull story. And I cannot tell you whether my Answer have touched your finger or no, but I am sure, if it be true, it strikes your Cause to the heart; and I am as sure of the Truth of it, as I am that I am alive. And you see how I am pusled, even as he was who cryed inopem me copia fecit. Your Church hath fallen so many wayes, all so foully and evidently, that it is hard for any man to chuse what instance to insist upon, who is called on to charge her, as you by your enquiry of them, do on your Protestant Readers. And for my part, I had rather you should take your choyce, against which of the things mentioned you think your self best able to defend her. And may it please you to chuse your Instance, if I prove not your Church to have fallen by it, I will p. 61promise you to become a Papist. You proceed to your own particulars, and ask, Did shee fall by Apostasie: to which you subjoyn my words, by a partiall not a totall one; with your reply, Good S^r, in this division Apostasie is set to express a totall relapse in opposition to Heresie which is the partiall. I see you have as little mind to be drawn to the consideration of your Apostasie, as of your Idolatry; and would fain post off all to Heresie, under a corrupt notion of which terme, you hope to find some shelter for your self and your Church, although in vain. But

Verte omnes tete in facies, & contrahe quicquid

Sive animis, sive arte vales.

You must bear the charge of Apostasie also. For why must that needs be the notion of these termes in the division you made, that you now express? Is it from the strict sense and importance of the words themselves, or from the Scripturall or Ecclesiasticall use of them, or whence is it, that it must be so, and that it is so? None of these will give you any relief, or the least countenance unto your fancie. Both foreign and foreign, are words foreign, in themselves of an indifferent signification, denoting things or acts, good or evill, according to their accidentall limitations and applications. It is said of some foreign, they will depart from the faith, 1 Tim. 4. 1. And the same Apostle speaking of them that name the name of Christ, sayes, let every one of them depart from iniquity, foreign, 2 Tim. 2. 19. so that the word it self signifies no more but a single and bare departure from anything, way, rule, or practice be it good or bad, wherein a man hath been ingaged, or which he ought to avoid and fly from. And this is the use of it in the best Greek Authors: foreign p. 62are such in Homer who are farre distant or remote on any account from any thing or place. And foreign in Aristotle things very remote. To leave any place, company, thing, Society, or Rule, on any cause, is the common use of the word in Thucydides, Plutarch, Lucian, and the rest of their companions in the propriety of that language. Apostasia by Ecclesiasticall writers, is restrained unto either a back sliding in Faith subjective and manners, or a causeless relinquishment of any Truth before professed. So the Jews charge Paul, Acts 21. 21. foreign, thou teachest Apostasie from Moses Law. Such also is the nature of foreign, a speciall option, choyce, or way in profession of any Truth or Error. So Paul calls Pharisaisme foreign, Act. 26. 5. the most exact heresie or way of Religion among the Jews. And Clemens Alexandrinus, Strom, lib. 8. calls Christian Religion foreign, the best Heresie. And the great Constantine in one of his Edicts calls it foreign, the Catholick or generall Heresie; and foreign, the most holy Heresie. The Latines also constantly used that word in a sense indifferent. Cato, faith Cicero, est in ea heresi quae nullum orationis florem sequitur. The words therefore themselves you see are of an indifferent signification, having this difference between them, that the one for the most part is used to signifie the Relinquishment of that which a man had before embraced, and the other a choice or embracing of that which a man had not before received or admitted. And this difference is constantly observed by all Ecclesiasticall writers, who afterwards used these words in the worst or an evill sense; so that Apostasie in this appropriation of it, denotes the relinquishment of any Important Truth or way in Religion; and p. 63Heresie the choice or embracement of any new destructive Opinion or Principle or way in the profession thereof. A man then may be an Apostate by partiall Apostasie, that is depart from the Profession of some Truth he had formerly embraced, or the performance of some duty which he was engaged in, without being an Heretick, or choosing any new opinion which he did not before embrace. Thus you signally call a Monke that deserts his Monasticall Profession an Apostate, though he embrace no opinion which is condemned by your Church, or which you think hereticall. And a man may be an Heretick, that is choose and embrace some new false opinion, which he may coyn out of his own imagination, without a direct renunciation of any Truth which before he was instructed in. And this is that which I intended, when I told you that your Church is fallen by partiall Apostasie and by Heresie. Shee hath renounced many of the important Truths which the old Roman Church once believed and professed, and so is fallen by Apostasie. And she hath invented or coyned many Articles pretended to be of faith, which the old Roman Church never believed, and so is fallen by Heresie also. Now what say you hereunto? Why, good S^r, in this division Apostasie is set to express a totall relapse in opposition to Heresie, which is the partiall. But who gave you warrant or leave so to set them? It would it may be somewhat serve your turn, in evading the Charge of Apostasie, that lyes against your Church; but, Good S^r, will not prove that you may thus confound things for your advantage. Idolatry is Heresie, and Apostasie is Heresie, and what not, because you suppose you have found a way to escape the imputation of Heresie. I say then yet again in answer to your enquiry, p. 62duplicate page p. 63duplicate page p. 64that your Church is fallen by Apostasie, in her relinquishment of many important truths, and neglect of many necessary duties, which the old Roman Church embraced and performed. That these may be the more evident unto you, I shall give you some few instances of your Apostasie, desiring only that you would grant me, that the primitive Church of Rome believed and faithfully retained the doctrine of truth, wherein from the Scripture it was instructed.

That Church believed expresly, that all they who die in the Lord do rest from all their labours, Rev. 14. 8. which truth you have forsaken, by sending many of them into the flames of Purgatory.

It believed, that the sufferings of this life are not worthy of the glory that shall be revealed in us, Rom. 8. 18. Your Church is otherwise minded, asserting in our works and sufferings a merit of, and condignity unto the glory that shall be received.

It believed, that we were saved freely, by grace, by faith, which is not of our selves, but the gift of God, not by works, left any one should boast, Eph 2. 8. Tit. 3. 5. and therefore besought the Lord not to enter into judgement with them, because in his sight no flesh could be justified, Psal. 130. 4. 143. 2. And you are apostatized from this part of their faith.

It believed, that Christ was once only offered, Heb. 10 12. and that it could not be that he should often offer himself, because then he must have often suffered and died, Heb. 9. 25. Which faith of theirs you are departed from.

It believed, that we have one only Mediatour and Intercessour with God, 1 Tim. 2. 5. 1 Joh. 2. 2. Wherein also you have renounced their perswasion; as likewise you have done in what it professed, that we may invocate only him, in whom we do believe, Rom. 10. 14.

p. 65It believed, that the Command to abstain from Meats and Marriage, was the doctrine of Devils, 1 Tim. 4. 1, 2. Do you abide in the same faith?

It believed, that Every soul without exception, was to be subject to the higher Powers, Rom. 13. 1. You will not walk in the steps of their faith herein.

It believed, that all Image-worship was forbidden, Exod. 20. And whether you abide in the same perswasion, we shall afterwards examine. And many more instances of the like kind, you may at any time be minded of.

You hast to that you would fain be at, which will be found as little to your purpose, as those whose consideration you so carefully avoid. You say, Did she fall by Heresie in adhering to any errour in Faith, contrary to the approved doctrine of the Church? Here you smile seriously, and tell me, that, since I take the Roman and Catholick Church to be one, she could not indeed adhere to any thing, but what she did adhere unto. S^r, I take them indeed to be one: but here I speak ad hominem, to one that doth not take them so. And then, if indeed the Roman Church had ever swerved in faith, as you say she has, and be her self as another ordinary particular Church, as you say she is, them might you find some one or other more generall Church, if any there were, to judge her; some Oecumenicall Councell to condemn her; some Fathers, either Greek and Latin, expresly to writs against her, as Protestants now do; some or other grave Authority to censure her; or at least some company of Believers, out of whose body she went, and from whose faith she fell. None of which, since you are not able to a assign, (wherein you have spoken more rightly, than you were aware of; for, not to be able to assign none of them, infers at least an ability to assign some, if not all of p. 66them) my Query remains unanswered, and the Roman still as flourishing a Church as ever she was.

Answ. 1. You represent my Answer lamely. I desire the Reader to consult it in the Animadversions, pag. 66, 67, 68. What you have taken notice of, discovers only your fineness, in making Heresie an adherence to an errour in faith, contrary to the doctrine of the Church; and your selves the Church, whereby you must needs be secured from Heresie, though you should adhere to the most hereticall Principles that ever were broached in the world. But nothing of all this, as I have shewed, will be allowed you. 2. As we have seen some of the Reasons, why you were so unwilling to try the Cause of your Church, on the heads of Idolatry and Apostasie; so here you discover a sufficient Reason, why you have passed over your other head of Schism, in silence. You avow your self one of the most schismaticall Principles, that were ever adhered unto by any professing the name of Christ. The Roman Church and the Catholick are with you one and the same. Is not this Petilianus his, in parte Donati; nay Basilides his, foreign. Epiphan. Heres. 4. We only are men, all others are Dogs and Swine. Macte virtute! If this be not to shew modcration, and to persue reconciliation, at once to shut out all men but your selves from the Church here, and consequently Heaven hereafter, what can be thought so to be? In earnest S^r, you may talk what you please of moderation, but whilest you avow this one wretched schismaticall Principle, you do your endeavour to exclude all true Christian moderation out of the world. 3. Why do you conclude, that your Query is not answered? Suppose one Question could not be answered, doth it necessarily p. 67follow that another cannot? I suppose, you take notice that this is another Question, and not that at first proposed, as I told you before. Your first enquiry was about your Churches crime, this is about her conviction and condemnation; and your Conclusion hath no strength in it, but what is built on this unquestionable Maxim, that, None ever offended, who was not publickly judged; as though there were no Harlot in the world but those that have been carted. It is enough S^r, that her condition is sub judice, as it will be, whether you or I will or no; and that there is not evidence wanting for her conviction, nor ever was since her fall, though it may be it hath not at all times been so publickly managed. And yet so vain is your triumphant Conclusion, that we rest not here, but prove also that she hath been of old judged and condemned, as you will hear anon.

And thus I have once more given you an Answer to your enquiry, how your Church fell; namely, that she hath done so by all the wayes and means, by which it is possible for a Church to fall. She failed under the just hand of God, when the persons of that Vrbick Church were extirpated, partly by others, but totally by Totilas; as the Brittish Church in England fell by the sword of the Saxons. She hath fallen by Idolatry, and corruption of life, as did the Church of the Jews before the Captivity. She hath fallen by her relinquishment of the written Word, as the only rule of faith and worship, and by adhering to the uncertain traditions of men, as did the Church of the Jews after their return from captivity. She hath fallen by Apostasie, in forsaking the profession of many important truths of the Gospel, as the Church of the Galatians did for a season, in their relinquishment of the doctrine of Justification by p. 68grace alone. She hath fallen by Heresie, in coyning new Articles of faith, and imposing them on the consciences of the Disciples of Christ, as the Montanists did with their new Paraclete, and rigid observances. She hath fallen by Schisme in her self, as the Judaical Church did when divided into Essenes, Sadduces, and Pharisees: setting up Pope against Pope, and Councell against Councell, continuing in her intestine broils for some ages together; and from all others, by the wretched Principle, but-now avowed by you, as the Donatists did of old. She hath fallen by Ambition, in the Hildebrandine Principle, asserting a Soveraignty in the Pope over the Kings and Potentates of the earth, whereof I can give you no precedent instance, unless it be of him, who claimed the Kingdomes of the world to be his own, and boasted that he disposed of them at his pleasure, Mat. 4. And now I hope you will not take it in ill part, that I have given you a plain Answer unto your Question, which, as I suppose, was proposed unto us for that end and purpose.

But although these things are evident and sufficiently proved, yet I see nothing will satisfie you, unless we produce testimonies of former times, to manifest that your Church hath been arraigned, judged, condemned, written against, by Fathers, Councils, or other Churches. Now though this be somewhat an unreasonable expectation in you, and that which I am no way bound unto by the Law of our Discourse to satisfie you in; yet to prevent for the future such Ivasions, as you have made use of on all occasions in your Epistle, I shall in a few pregnant and unquestionable Instances, give you an account both when, how, and by whom the falls of your Church have been observed, reproved, condemned, and written p. 69against. Only unto what shall be discoursed unto this pnrpose, I desire liberty to premise these three things, which I suppose will be granted. Dabitur ignis tamen, et si ab inimicis petam.

The first is, that, What is by any previously condemned, before the embracing and practice of it, is no less condemned by them, than if the practice had preceded their condemnation. Though you should say that your avowing of a condemned errour, would make it no errour; yet you cannot say that it will render it not condemned: for that which is done, cannot be undone, say you what you will.

Secondly, that, Where any opinion or practice in Religion, which is embraced and used by your Church, is condemned and written against, that then your Church which so embraceth and useth it, is condemned and written against. For neither do Protestants write against your Church, or condemn it, on any other account, but of your opinions and practices; and you require but such a writing and condemnation, as you complain of amongst them.

Thirdly, I desire you to take notice, that I do not this, as though it were necessary to the security and defence of the Cause which we maintain against you. It is abundantly sufficient and satisfactory unto our consciences, in your casting us out from your communion, that all the wayes whereby we say your Church is fallen from her pristine purity, are judged and condemned in the Scripture, the Word of truth; whither we appeal for the last determination of the differences between us. These things being premised, to prevent such evasions as you have accustomed your self unto, I shall, as briefly as I can, give you somewhat of that, which you have now twice called for.

p. 701. Your Principle and Practise in imposing upon all Persons and Churches a necessity of the observation of your Rites and Ceremonies, Customes and Traditions, casting them out of Communion who refuse to submit unto this your great Principle of all the Schisms in Europe, was contradicted, written against, condemned by Councels and Fathers, in the very first instance that ever you gave of it. Be pleased to consider that this concerns the very Life and Being of your Church: For if you may not impose your Constitutions, observances, and customes upon all others, actum est, there is an end of your present Church State. Let us see then how this was thought of in the dayes of old: Victor the Bishop of Rome, An▪ Dom. 96. condemns and excommunicates the Churches of Asia, because they would not joyn with him in the Celebration of Easter precisely on the Lords day. Did this practise escape uncontrolled? He was written against, by the great Irenaeus, and reproved that he had cast out of Communion foreign, whole Churches of God, for a triviall cause. His fact also was condemned in the justification of those Churches, by a Councell in Palestine, where Theophilus presided; and another in Asia, called together for the same purpose by Polycrates; Euseb. Eccles. Hist. lib. 5. cap. 22, 23, 24, 25. This is an early instance of a considerable Fall in your Church, and an open opposition by Councels and Fathers made unto it. And do not you, S^r, deceive your self, as though the fact of Victor were alone concerned in this censure of Irenaeus and others. The Principle before mentioned, which is the very life and soul of your Church, is condemned in it. It was done also in a repetition of the same Instance attempted here in England by you, when Austine that came from Rome would have imposed p. 71on the Brittish Churches the observation of Easter according to the custome of the Roman Church; the Bishops and Monks of these Churches, not only rejected your Custome, but the Principle also from whence the attempt to impose it on them did proceed; protesting, that they owned no subjection to the Bishop of Rome, nor other regard, than what they did to every good Christian. Concil. Anglican. p. 188.

2. Your Doctrine and Practise of forcing men by carnall weapons, corporall penalties, tortures, and terrors of death, unto the embracement of your profession, and actually destroying and taking away the lives of them that persist in their dissent from you, is condemned by Fathers and Councels, as well as by the Scriptures, and the light of Nature its self. It is condemned by Tertullian, Apol. cap. 23. Videte, saith he, ne & hoc ad irreligiositatis elogium concurrat, adimere libertatem Religionis, & interdicere optionem Divinitat is, ut non liceat mihi colere quod velim, sed cogar colere quod nolim; with the like expressions, in twenty other places. All this externall compulsion he ascribes unto profaneness. So doth Clemens Alexand. Stromat. 8. So also did Lactantius; all consenting in that Maxim of Tertullian, Lex nova non se vindicat ultore gladio: The Law of Christ revengeth not its self with a punishing sword. The Councell of Sardis, Epist. ad Alexand. expresly affirms, that they disswaded the Emperour from interpesing his Secular power to compell them that dissented. And you are fully condemned in a Canon of a Councell at Toledo, Cap. de Judae. distinc. 45. Praecipit sancta Synodns, nemini deinceps ad credendum vim inferre; cui enim vult Deus miseretur, & quem vult indurat. The holy Synod commandeth, that none hereafter shall by force be p. 72compelled to the faith: for God hath mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Athanasius in his Epistle ad Solitar. falls heavily on the Arians, that they began first to compell men to their heresie, by force, prisons, and punishments; whence he concludes of their Sect, at que ita seipsam quam non sit pia nec Dei cultrix manifestat: it evidestly declares it self hereby, to be neither pious, nor to have any reverence of God. In a Book that is of some credit with you, namely Clemens his Constitutions, you have this amongst other things for your comfort, foreign. Christ left men the power of their wills free (in this matter), not punishing them with death temporall, but calling them to give an account in another world. And Chrysostome speaks to the same purpose on Joh 6. foreign. He asked them saying, Will you also go away? which is the Question of one rejecting all force and necessity. Epiphanius gives it, as the character of thesemi-Ar…ians, foreign. They persecute them that teach the Truth, not confuting them with words, but delivering them that believe aright to hatreds, wars and swords, having now brought destruction not to one City or Countrey alone, but to many. Neither can you relieve your selves, by answering that they were true believers whom they persecuted; you punish Hereticks and Schismaticks only, for they thought and said the same of themselves, which you assert in your own behalf. So Salvian informs p. 73us, Haeretici sunt, sed non scientes, deni que apud nos sunt Haeretici, apud se non sunt. Nam intantum se & Catholicos judicant, ut nos ipsos titulo Haereticae praevitatis infament; quod ergo illi nobis sunt, & hoc nos illis. They are hereticks, but they know it not; they are hereticks unto us, but not unto themselves: for they so far judge themselves to be Catholick, that they condemn us for the guilt of Heresie: So then, what they are to us, that we are to them, Especilly was your whole practice in this matter solemnly condemned in the Case of Priscillianus, recorded by Sulpitius Severus in the end of his second Book, the only Instance the Bellarmine could fix upon in all Antiquity for the putting of any men to death upon the account of Religion; for, the other whom he mentions, he confesseth himself to have been a Magitian. Ithacius, with some other Bishops his Associates, procured Maximus the Tyrant to put Priscillianus a Gnosticke, with some others, to death; and to banish some of their followers. What saith the Historian thereon: Hoc modo, saith he, homines luce indignissimi pessimo exemplo necati, aut exili is mulctati; On this manner, were those unworthy wretches either slain or punished by banishment, by a very evil precedent. And what was the success of this zeal? Non solum, saith he, non repressest haeresis, sed confirmata & latius propagata: The heresis was so farre from being repressed by it, that it was the more confirmed and propagated. And what ensued hereupon in the Church its self? Inter nostros perpetuum discordiarum bellum exarsit, quod jam per quindecim annos foedis dissensionibus agitatum nullo modo sopiri poterat. Et nunc cum maximè discordiis Episcoporum turbari & …isceri omnia cernerentur, cunctá que per eos odio aut gratia, metu, inconstantia, invidia, factione, av…arit…a, arrogantia, somno, desidia essent depravata; p. 74postremo plures adver sum paucos b…nè consulentes, insanis consiliis & pertinacibus studiis certabant. Inter haec plebs Dei, & optimus quisque, probro at que ludibrio habebatur: With which words he shuts up his Ecclesiasticall story. Amongst ours, a lasting war of discord was kindled, which, after it hath now for fifteen years been carried on with shamefull contentions, can by no means be allayed. And now especially when all things appear to be troubled and perverted by the discord of the Bishops, and that all things are depraved by them through hatred, favour, fear, inconstancy, envy, faction, covetousuess, pride, sleepiness and sloth; the most with mad counsels and pertinacious endeavours opposing themselves to the sew that are better advised. Amongst all these things, the people of God and every honest man, is become a reproach and scorn. Thus that Historian complaining of the consequents of this proceeding. But good men lest not the matter so: Martinus Turonensis presently refuseth all communion with them who had any hand in the death or banishment of the persons mentioned. So doth Ambrose declare himself to have done, Epist. 27. as did the rest of the sober godly. Bishops of those dayes. At length both Ithacius and Idacius, the promoters of this work, were solemnly excommunicated, though one of them had before for very shame foregone his Bishoprick. See Prosp. Chron. 389. and I sidore de Viris Illustribus. So that here also the judgment and practice of your Church which she is fallen into, is publickly eondemned and written against, 1300 years ago. Should I insist on all the Testimonies that of this kind might be produced, Antè diem clauso componet vesper olympo than I could make an end of them. I have added this p. 75Instance to the former, as knowing them to be the two great pillars on which the tottering fabrick of your Church is raised; and which if they were removed, the whole of it would quickly fall to the ground: and you see how long ago, they were both publickly condemned.

3. Your Papall Oecumenicall Supremacy hath two main Branches, 1. Your Popes spirituall Power over all Persons and Churches, in the things of Religion. 2. His Power over Emperors, Kings, and Potentates, in reference unto Religion; or, as you speak, in ordine ad spiritualia. The first your Church stumbled into by many degrees, from the dayes of Victor, who made the first notable halt to this purpose. The latter you stumbled into in the dayes of Gregory the seventh, or Hildebrand. It were endless to declare how this fall of your Church hath been declared, written against, opposed, condemned by Churches, Councels, Fathers, Princes, and learned men in all Ages. Some few evidences to this purpose, to satisfie your request, I shall direct you unto: It was written against and condemned by Cyprian Bishop of Carthage, and that in a Councell at Carthage, an. 258. upon an attempt made by Stephen Bishop of Rome, looking in some small degree towards that usurped Supremacy, which afterwards was attained unto. You may, if you please, there see him rebuked, and the practice of your Church condemned. The same Cyprian had done no less before, in reference unto some actings of Cornelius the predecessor of Stephen, Epist. ad Cornel. Though the pretensions of Cornelius and Stephen were modest in comparison of your present vast Claim; yet the Churches of God in those dayes could not bear them. It is prejudged in the most famous Councell of Nice, which assigned p. 76bounds unto the Jurisdiction of Bishops, giving to severall of them equall Authority, Can. 6. foreign. Let the ancient Customes be observed, that, as to Egypt, Lybia, and Pentapolis, the Bishop of Alexandria have power over them, (or the Churches in them) for so is the custome of the Bishop of Rome, (that is, to have power over the adjoyning Churches;) likewise about Antioch, and in other Provinces, that the ancient Rights of the Churches be preserved. Your Great Pope whom you so frequently call the Pastor of Christendome, was here but foreign, The Bishop in the City or Church of Rome, or of the Church in the City of Rome. And bounds are assigned unto the Authority which he claimed by custome, as to his of Alexandria and Antioch. It is true, the Church of Alexandria hath some power assigned, ascribed, or granted unto it, above other Churches of Egypt, Lyb…a, and Pentapolis, for a warranty whereof, the usage of the Roman Church in reference unto her neighbour Churches, is made use of: which to deal freely with you, and to tell you my private thoughts, was a confirmation of a disorder by your example, which you were from that day forward seldome wanting to give plenty of. So to this purpose, Concil. Antioch. Can. 13, and 15. an. 341. Concil. Constantinop. Can 2. an. 381. But this Canon of the Nicene Fathers, openly condemneth and is perfectly destructive of your at present claimed Supremacy. Three Councels together in Africk, within the space of twenty years, warned your Church of her fall into this Heresie, and p. 77opposed her attempts for the promotion of it. The first at Carthage, an. 407. which forbids all appeals. unto any beyond the Sea; which Rome was to them in Africk, no less than it is unto us in England. The next was the second Milevitan, an. 416. where the same prohibition is revived with express respect unto the See of Rome, as Binius acknowledgeth. The same order is again asserted by another Councell in Africk, wherein the pretensions of Boniface unto some kind of superintendency over other Churches, are sorely reproved, and his way of prosecuting his attempt by pretended Canons of the Councell of Nice, after great pains taken and charge disbursed in the discovery of the forgery, censured and condemned. All these testimonies of the condemnation of this fall of yours by Fathers and Councels you have gathered unto your hand in the Cod. Can. Conc. Afric. and by Binius, with others. Also the substance of all these Canons of Provinciall Synods is confirmed in the fourth Chapter of the Decree of the third Oecumenicall Councell at Ephesus, an. 431. Act. 7. foreign. It seemeth good to the holy and generall Councell, that every Province retain its Rights, pure and inviolate, which, according unto ancient custome, it had from the beginning. The Decree, I confess, was purposely framed against the Bishop of Antioch, who had taken on him to ordain Bishops in Cyprus out of his Province; but it is built on that generall Reason, which expresly condemns the Roman pretensions to an unlimited Supremacy. The great and famous Councell of Chalcedon, an. 451. condemned the same Heresie, and plainly overthrow the whole foundation of your Papall p. 78plea, Act. 15. Can. 18. as the Canons of that Councell are collected by Balsamon and Zonaras; though some of them, with intolerable partiality, would separate this and some others, from the Body of the Canons of that Councell, giving them a place by themselves. The Decree contains the Reasons of the Councel's assigning priviledges next unto, and equall with, the Roman, unto the Constantinopolitan Church; foreign, say they, foreign. The Fathers (our Predecessors) granted priviledges to the See of ancient Rome, because that was the Imperiall City. Do you see from whence proceeded all the priviledges of the Roman throne? meerly from the grants and concessions of former Bishops; and I wish they had been liberall only of what was their own. And what was the reason of their so doing? Because the City was Imperiall; in which one sentence, both their Supremacy and the grounds of it are discarded and virtually condemned; for their pretensions are utterly inconsistent with this Synodicall determination. They proceed: for the same reason, foreign. They (the hundred and fifty Bishops) assigned the same or equal Priviledges unto the holy See of new Rome, rightly determining that the City which is honoured with the Empire and Senate, should enjoy equal Priviledges in things Ecclesiasticall with the ancient Queen-Rome, or Rome regent of old, Is not your present Supremacy here sufficiently condemned, and that by as famous a Councell as ever the Christian world enjoyed? And it will not avail you, that you p. 79fell into this Heresie fully afterwards, and not before the determination of this Councell; for he that falls into an Heresie after the determination of a Councell, is no less condemned therein, than he that fell into it before, and gave occasion to the Sentence; yea his guilt is the greater of the two, because he despised the Sentence which he knew, which the other it may be neither did, nor could foresee. I gave you an Instance before, how it was condemned and written against by the Brittish Church here in this Island, and many more Instances of the same nature might be added.

The Hildebrandine branch of your Supremacy, I mean the power that you challenge over Kings and Potentates, in ordine ad spiritualia, which having made some progress by insensible degrees, was enthroned by Pope Gergory the seventh, hath as little escaped opposition, censure, and condemnation▪ as any Heresie whereinto your Church is fallen. This Gregory may be accounted the chief Father of this Heresie, for he sicked the unshapen Monster into that terrible form, wherein it hath since ranged about in the earth. What this mans Principles and Practices were, I shall not desire you to learn of Cardinall Benno, whom yet I have reason to judge the more impartiall Writer of the two, but of Cardinall Baronius, who makes it his business to extoll him to the skies: Facit eum apud nos Deum, virtutes narrat, he makes almost a god of him, or at least foreign, as Socrates tells us the Lacedaemonians called an excellent man, Plato in Menn. The chief Kingdoms of Europe, as England and Spain, with Sicilia and Sardinia, and sundry other Principalities, he claimed as his own unquestionable fee. The Empire he accounted his proper Care, making the deposing of p. 80Emperors much of his business. The Principles he proceeded upon, the same Cardinall informs us of, in his Annals ad … 1076. n. 30. And he hath done well to record them, that they might be preserved In perpetuam rei memoriam, that we might learn what your great Father exercised himself about, Dum succus pecori & lac subducitur agnis, whilest the poor sheep famished for want of knowledge and instruction. They are called Dictata Papae, and ex tripode we may not doubt, being in number twenty seven, whereof I shall mind you of a few. The first is, Quod Romana Ecclesia à solo Domino sit fundata; That the Roman Church was founded by the Lord alone. 2. Quod solus Romanus Pontifex jure vocatiur Vniversalis; That the Roman Bishop is rightfully called Vniversall. So some think indeed, ever since Pope Gregory the first taught them, that he who assumed that Title, was a forerunner of Antichrist. 3. Quod ille solus possit deponere Episcopos, vel reconciliare; That he alone can depose Bishops, or restore them; which agrees well with the practice of all the Councels from that of Antioch, which deposed Paulus Samosatenus. 7. Quod illi soli licet, pro temporis necessitate, novas leges condere; That he alone as necessity requires can make new Laws. Let him proceed; 8. Quod solus possit uti Imperialehus insigniis; He alone can use Imperiall ensigns. It is a great kindness in him doubtless to lend them to any of his neighbours, or rather subject, Kings. 9. Quod slius Papo pedes omnes Principes deosculaetur; That it is the Pope alone whose feet all Princes may or ought to kiss. Yea and it is a kindness if he kick not their Crowns from their heads with his foot, as one did our King John's; or tread upon their necks, as another p. 81did on the Emperor Frederick's. 11. Quod unicum sit nomen in mundo, Papa scilicet; That there is only one name in the world, to wit, that of the Pope; no other name it seems given under heaven. Once more; 12. Quod illi liceat, Imperatores deponere; That it is lawfull for him to depose Emperours. I hope you will not be offended at the calling over these Heresies, because the so doing is not suited to our present design. I took them out of your Cardinal Baronius, in the place above quoted, who hath placed them as on a pillar, V. D. P. L. P. where they may be easily read by all men. And that you may not think that these were the Heresies of Gregory alone, the same Baronius affirms that these Dictates were confirmed in a Synod at Rome, whereby they became the Heresies of your whole Church. Did Peter thus feed the sheep of Christ? seeing Pasce oves meas, is the great pretence for all these exorbitances. Alas Hic alienus oves custos his mulget in hor… all this is but the shearing, milking, and slaying of a stranger; the shepherds being driven into corners. But have these noisome Heresies of your Church, think you, passed without controll? Was she not judged, censured, written against, and condemned in the person of her chief Pastor? You must be a very stranger unto all History, if you can imagine any such thing. A Councell assembled by the Emperor at Worms in Germany, reckons up the miscarriages of this Hildebrand, and pronounceth him deposed, with all those that adhered unto him. Another Synod, an. 1080. at Brixia in Bavaria, condemns him also for the same causes. All the Heroick Potentates of Europe, especially the Emperors of Germany, the Kings of England, and France, with whole Assemblies p. 82of their Clergy, have alwayes opposed and condemned this branch of your Supremacy. And to this purpose, hundreds of their Laws, Decrees, Edicts, and Declarations, are at this day extant.

4. Your Pope's Personall Infallibility with the requisite Qualifications, is another Hereticall Opinion that your Church hath fallen by. And herein you are foreign, condemned of your selves, and we need no further witness against you; you have been often taken foreign, in the very fact. I know there is an Opinion, secretly advancing amongst some of you, whereby you would cast out of the bounds of your defence this Personall Infallibility of your Pope; but we have no more reason to esteem that opinion the Doctrine of your Church, than we have to conclude that the Jesuits new Position, asserting him Infallible in matter of fact, is so. And though I know not perfectly, what your opinion is in this matter; yet I may take a time to shew how utterly unserviceable unto your purpose the new way of the explication of Infallibility is. For it hath but these two generall inconveniences attending it. First, that it is not the opinion of your Church; Secondly, if that be the only Infalliblity we are to rest on, the whole claim of your Church, and its interest therein, falls to the ground; both which I hope to have an opportunity to manifest. In the mean time, we take that for the Doctrine of your Church which is declared by its self so to be, which is explained and defended by her most famous Champions. And indeed, you in your Fiat, assert, as I have shewed, the Pope (Personally) to be an unerring guide, which is that we enquire after. Bellarmine tells us, that all Catholicks agree in these two things: 1. Pontificem, cum Generali, Concilio, non posse errare in condendis decretis fidoi, vel generalibus praeceptis p. 83morum; That the Pope with a generall Councell cannot erre in making decrees of faith, or generall precepts concerning manners. 2. Pontificem solum, vel cum suo particulari Concilio, aliquid in re dubia statuentem, sive errare possit sive non, esse ab omnibus fidelibus obedienter audiendum; All believers must willingly obey the Pope, either alone, or with his particular Councell, determining in doubtfull matters, whether he may erre or no. I confess, if this be so, and he must be obeyed, whether he do right or wrong, whether he teacheth truly or falsly, it is to no great purpose to talk of his Infallibility; for, follow him we must whither ever he leads us, though it should be to Hell. And the Catholick Pro…osition that he asserts himself, is, that, Summus Pontifex, cum totam Ecclesiam docet in his quae ad fidem pertinent, nullo casu errare potest. The Pope when he teacheth the whole Church, can in no Caseerre in those things which appertain unto faith. De Rom. Pontif. lib. 4. cap. 2, 3. What a Blind that is, of teaching the whole Church, children can see. The Pope can no way teach the whole Church, but as he declares his opinion, or judgement, which may be divulged unto many, as those of another man. Let us see then, how well they have made good this their Infallibility; and how well their judgement hath been approved of by the Church of old. I will not here mind you of the Decree fathered on Clemens, wherein he determines that all things among Christians ought to be common; and, among them, wives; because I know, it is falsly imposed on him, though you may be justly charged with it, who are the Authors of those forgeries whereof that is a part. Nor shall I rake the Epistles which you ascribe unto divers of the Ancient Bishops of Rome, that are full of ignorance, errors, and pittifull p. 84non-sence; because they are, questionless, Pseudopigraphcall, though you who own them, may be justly charged with their follies. Nor will I much insist on the Testimony of Tertullian in his Book against Praxeas, that the Bishop of Rome owned the Prophesies of Montanus, untill Praxeas perswaded him to the Contrary; because, it may be, you will say, that perhaps Tertullian spake partially in favour of a Sect whereunto he was himself addicted; though, for ought I know, he is as sufficient a Witness in matter of fact, as any one man upon the Roll of Antiquity. But what say you to Marcellinus? Did he not sacrifice to Idols, which, according unto you, is a mixt misdemeanour in faith and manners, (Con. Tom. 1. Vita Marcell.) and therefore certainly a shrewd impeachment of his Infallibility: and was he not judged for it? What think you of Liberius, did he not subscribe to Arianism? Soomen tells you expresly that he did so; Lib. 4. cap. 15. And so doth Athanasius Epist. ad Solitarios, giving the reason why he did so, namely out of fear. And so doth Hierome both in Script. Ecclesiast. Fortunat. and in Euseb. Chron. Pope Honorius was solemnly condemned for a Monothelite-Heretick in the sixth generall Councell, Act. 12, 13. which Sentence was afterwards ratified by your own darling, the second of Nice Act. 3 and Act. 7. and is mentioned in a decretall Epistle of Pope Leo the second. So Infallible was he during his life, so infallible was he thought to be when he was dead; whilest he lived he taught Heresie, and when he was dead, he was condemned for an Heretick, and with him the Principle which is the hindg of your present faith. Neither did Vigilius behave himself one jot better in his Chair. The Councell of Pisa deposed Gregory the twelfth, and Benedict the thirteenth, p. 85for Schismaticks and Hereticks. The Councell of Constance accused John the twenty third of abominable Heresie, Sess. 11. And that of Basil condemned Eugenius, as one, à fide devium & pertinacem Haereticum, Sess. 34. an erroneous Person and obstinate Heretick. Other instances of the like nature might be called over, manifesting that your Popes have erred, and been condemned as persons erroneous; and therein the Principle of their In fallibility.

I would be unwilling to tire your patience, yet upon your reiterated desire I shall present you with one Instance more: and I will do it but briefly, because I must deal with you again about the same matter.

5. Your Church is fallen by Idolatry; as otherwise, so in that Religious Veneration of Images which she useth, whereunto you have added Heresie in teaching it for a Doctrine of Truth, and imposing the belief of it by your Tridentine Determination, on the Consciences of the Disciples of Christ. I know you would fain mince the matter, and spread over the corrupt Doctrine of your Church about it, with foreign silken words, as you do the Posts that they are made of with Gold; when as the Prophetspeaks of your predecessors in that work, you lavish it out of the bagge for that purpose. But to what purpose? Your first Councell, the second of Nice (which yet was not wholly yours neither, for it condemns Honorius, calls Th…rnsius the Oecumenicall Patriarch, and he expounds in it, the Rock on which the Church was built to be Christ and not Peter) your last Councell that of Trent, your Angelicall Doctor Thomas of Aquine, your great Champions Bellarmine and Baronius, Suarez, Vasquez, and the rest of p. 86them, with the Catholick practise and usage of your Church in all places, declare sufficiently, what is your faith or rather misbelief in this matter. Hence Azorius Institut. Lib. 9 cap. 6. tells us, that, Constans est Theologorum sententia, Imaginem èodem honore & cultu coli, quo colitur id cujus est Imago; It is the constant judgement of Divines, that the Image is to be worshipped with the same honour and worship, wherewith that is worshipped whose Image it is. The Nicene Councell, by the instigation of Pope Adrian, Anathematizeth every one who doth but doubt of the Adoration of Images, Act. 7. Thomas contendeth that the Cross is to be worshipped with Latria, p. 3. q. 25. a. 4. which is a word that he and you suppose to express Religious worship of the highest sort. And your Councell of Trent in their decree about this matter, confirmed the Doctrine of that Lestricall convention at Nice, whose frauds and impostures were never paralleled in the world, but by it's self. And do you think that a few ambiguous flourishing words of you, an unknown person, shall make the world believe that they understand not the Doctrine and Practise of your Church, which is proclaimed unto them, by the Fathers and M…sters of your perswasion herein, and expressed in practises under their eyes, every day? Do you think it so easie for you, Cornieum oculos configere, as Cicero tells us an Atturney, one Cn, Flavius, thought to do, in going beyond all that the great Lawyers had done before him, Orat. pro Muraena. We cannot yet be perswaded, that you are so great an Interpreter of the Roman Oracles, as to believe you before all the Sages before mentioned, to whom hundreds may be added. And what do you think of this Doctrine and Practise of your Church? Hath it been opposed, judged, and p. 87condemned, or no? The first Writers of Christianity, Just In Martyr, Irenaeus, Origen, Tertullian, Arnobius, Lactantius, utterly abhorred the use of all Images, at least in Sacris. The Councell held at Elib… ris in Spain, tw…ve or thirteen years before the famous Assembly at Nice, positively forbid all use of Pictures in Churches, Can. 36. Plaquit, Picturas in Ecclesia esse non deb…re, ne quod colitur & adoratur in parietibus depingatur; The Councell resolved that Pictures ought not to be in Churches, that … which is worship…d and adored, be not painted on walls. Cyprian condemns it, Epist. ad Demetriad. And so generally do all the Fathers, as may be gathered in the pittifull endeavours and forgeries of the second Nicene Councell, endeavouring to confirm it from them. Epiphanius reckons it among the errors of the Gnosticks; and himself brake an Image that he found hanging in a Church, Epist ad Johan. Hierosol. Austin was of the same judgement; see Lib. de mori… Eccles. Cathol. cap. 34. Your Adoration of them i… expresly condemned by Gregory the great, in an Epistle to Serinus, Lib. 7. Ep. 111, and Lib. 9. Epist. 9. The Greek Church condemned it, in a …ynod at Constantinople, an. 775. And one learned man in those last dayes undertaking its defence, (and indeed the only man of learning that ever did so, untill of late) they excommunicated and cursed him. This was Damascenus, concerning whom they used those expressions repeated in the second Nicene Councell, foreign. Unto Mansour of an evil name, and in judgement consenting with Saracens, p. 88Anathema; To Mansour, a worshipper of Images and writer of Falshood, Anathema; To Mansour, contumelious against Christ and traytor to the Empire, Anathema; To Mansour, a teacher of impiety and perverse interpreter of Scripture, Anathema Synod. Nic. 2. Act. 6. For that it was Johannes Damascenus that they intended, the Nicene Fathers sufficiently manifest in the Answer following, read by Epiphanius the Deacon. And this reward did he meet withall, from the seventh Councell at Constantinople, for his pains in asserting the veneration of Images; although he did not, in that particular, pervert the Scripture as some of you do; but laid the whole weight of his opinion on Tradition, wherein he is followed by Vasquez among your selves. Moreover, the Western Churches, in a great Councell at Frankeford in Germany, utterly condemned the Nicene Determination, which in your Tridentins Convention you approve and ratifie, An. 794. It was also condemned here by the Church of England, and the Doctrine of it fully confuted by Albinus, Hoveden Annal. an. 791. Never was any Heresie more publickly and solemnly condemned, than this, whereby your Church is fallen from its pristine purity. But hereof more afterwards.

It were no difficult matter to procced unto all the Chief ways, whereby your Church is fallen; and to manifest that they have been all publickly disclaimed and condemned by the better and founder part of Professors. But the Instances Insisted on, may, I hope, prove sufficient for your satisfaction. I shall therefore proceed to consider what you offer unto the remaining Principles, which I conceived to animate the whole Discourse of your Fiat Lux.