A few plain reasons why a Protestant of the Church of England should not turn Roman Catholick by a real Catholick of the Church of England. Barlow, Thomas, 1607-1691. 1688 Approx. 106 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 26 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images. Text Creation Partnership, Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) : 2005-12 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1). A30976 Wing B831 ESTC R18233 12868913 ocm 12868913 94780 This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A30976) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 94780) Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 731:6) A few plain reasons why a Protestant of the Church of England should not turn Roman Catholick by a real Catholick of the Church of England. Barlow, Thomas, 1607-1691. [2], 49 p. Printed for R. Clavel ..., London : 1688. Attributed to Thomas Barlow, Bishop of Lincoln, by Wing. Imperfect: "Postscript" (p. 51-53) signed: N.N. lacking in filmed copy. Reproduction of original in Duke University Library. Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford. Re-processed by University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. Gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO. EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor. The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines. Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements). Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site . eng Catholic Church -- Controversial literature. 2005-03 TCP Assigned for keying and markup 2005-05 SPi Global Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2005-07 Andrew Kuster Sampled and proofread 2005-07 Andrew Kuster Text and markup reviewed and edited 2005-10 pfs Batch review (QC) and XML conversion A FEW PLAIN REASONS WHY A PROTESTANT OF THE CHURCH of ENGLAND , Should not Turn Roman Catholick . By a real Catholick of the CHURCH of ENGLAND . 1 Thess. 5.21 . Prove all things , hold fast that which is good . IMPRIMATUR . Jo. Battely . Septemb. 15. 1687. LONDON , Printed for R. Clavel , at the Peacock at the West End of St. Paul's . MDCLXXXVIII . My Reverend Friend , I Received Yours , wherein you tell me , That some Emissaries have of late earnestly solicited some of your Parish , ( and so belonging to your Cure and Charge ) to desert the Church of England , and turn ( as they would be call'd ) Roman Catholicks . The Motives ( amongst some others ) they principally insist upon , ( you say ) are these Two : First , That if they return to their Mother Church of Rome , they will have ( what they say , Protestants neither have , nor pretend to ) a sure and Infallible Guide to secure them from all Error and Heresies ; which will be a great Blessing and comfort to them . Secondly , They will free themselves from the great and mortal sin of Schism : For the Protestants ( they say ) neither have , nor can have any just reason to desert the Catholick Church of Rome ; and so their Separation from it , is evidently Schismatical . You desire me , to give You some directions , how to Reply to these Pretences , and fortifie your People against them , who are not skilled in such Controversies . You should rather have apply'd your self to your Diocesan ; for his Abilities , and immediate concern to assist you , being more than mine , I doubt not , but he would willingly have assisted you . But seeing you say , you are not particularly known to him , and therefore not willing ( by any such Address ) to trouble him ; and seeing we are bound to give a * reason of the hope and faith which is in us , for the Confirmation of some , and Conviction of others ; I shall ( in obedience to your Command ) crave leave to say a few things , and leave the management of them to your Prudence , according to the several Circumstances of Persons , Times , and Places wherein You may have occasion to make use of any of them . And here , 1. In the general , I shou'd advise ; That when you have occasion to discourse of any of these Points , with the Romish Priests and Emissaries , who endeavour to seduce any of your Parishioners ; you remember and observe that good Rule in the * Gospel — If any man be overtaken in a fault , You who are spiritual restore him ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) in the spirit of meekness . All railing , all bitter and provoking language should be avoided ; and then by your good Reasons , and a Christian and Meek urging of them , you may possibly bring your Adversary to see the Errors of his own Church , which he endeavours to propagate in Ours . 2. For the Infallibility of their ‖ Church ( of which they continually , and ( without any thing like a good reason ) so vainly boast of . ) I consider , 1. That if it did ( which neither does , nor even can ) really appear , that they had an Infallible Guide , we of the Church of England are not so irrational as not to follow an Infallible Guide ; nor so simple , to take an ignis fatuus , for a real and true fire , and believe they have such a Guide , because ( against evident reason ) they confidently say so . 2. They are not yet agreed amongst themselves , who is their Infallible Guide : And can they think it possible for them to perswade us , that they have an Infallible Guide , when they themselves know not who it is ? For , 1. Many of them place this Infallibility in the Pope , so Gratian ( and the Canonists who follow him ) who tells us : That (a) all the Pope's Sanctions are to be taken as if they had been confirmed by the divine mouth of S. Peter . And the (b) Gloss , and (c) Marginal note , in another place , tells us , That to dispute or doubt of the goodness of any of the Pope's actions is a mortal sin , and sacrilege . So we have it in the best (d) Edition of their Canon-Law with the Glosses . So Pope Leo 10. in his Bull against Luther , tells us , That neither the Roman (e) Church , nor any of the (f) Popes ever err'd in any of their Constitutions . And to this purpose , the Jesuits make the Popes as Peter's Successors , Infallible ; not only in matters of Faith , but of Fact too : as appears by their famous (g) Theses publickly defended in France . 2. Many place the Infallibility in the Pope and Church , or General Council concurring : So the Clergy (h) of France . 3. Others in a General Council without the Pope : So the Council of Pisa and Constance , and Basil , in which several Popes are condemn'd as Hereticks , Schismaticks , &c. and the supream Power to be in the (i) Council , and that Infallible . Now is it not unreasonable for them to boast of an Infallible Judge of Controversies , and think to perswade us to believe it ; when they themselves know not who that Judge is . If Sempronius were very sick , and Caius coming to him , and pitying his condition , should tell him , that there was an excellent Physician in that City , but knew not who he was , nor where to find him : Sempronius would have little comfort or benefit from such a story . No more can we from them , who tell us ( with great confidence , but without any just proof or probability ) that they have an Infallible Guide in their Church , but can neither tell us who it is , or where to find him . But to manifest the exceeding vanity of their pretence to an Infallible Guide ; there are certain , and ( to all Impartial Judges ) evident reasons to demonstrate , That neither the Pope , nor Council , nor both together are Infallible . 1. For the Pope , they say , that he is Infallible as S. Peter's Successor , and ( as Peter was ) Vicar of Christ. But this is gratis dictum , without any just proof or probability . For , 1. Admit S. Peter was 25 years ( as they say ) Bishop of Rome ; ( which is evidently untrue ) yet that he left Infallibility to his Successor there , is an Assertion which has no ground in Scripture , or Antiquity ; the Popes themselves not so much as pretending to Infallibility , for a thousand years after our Blessed Saviour . 2. S. Paul was an Apostle , and as Infallible as Peter , and planted many Churches in Asia , Macedonia , and Achaia , &c. and left his Successors there : But it is confess'd , that S. Paul did not leave his Infallibility to any of his Successors , ( not to Timothy at Ephesus , nor Titus in Crete ) and therefore , that Peter should ( which S. Paul did not ) leave his Infallibility to his Successor , is a Position for which they neither bring , nor can bring any just proof . 3. They say , that Peter was ( before he came to Rome ) Bishop of Antioch 7 years ; and 't is certain and confess'd , that his Successors at Antioch , ( tho' that was his first Bishoprick ) had no such Infallibility left them by Peter ; and therefore I desire to know , how his Successors at Rome ( his second Bishoprick ) come to have the privilege of Infallibility , which his Successors at Antioch ( his first Bishoprick ) had not ? most certain it is , that Infallibility is a personal privilege , depending solely and wholely on the free grace and gift of God ; nor had ever any Prophet or Apostle power to transfer it to their Successors , or any body else ; and therefore unless they can make it appear from Scripture , or some Divine Revelation ( which is impossible ) that God has granted and given Infallibility to the Pope , as Peter's Successor and Christ's Vicar , their pretence to it , will be ( what indeed it is ) very irrational . 4. And this Position ( that the Pope is not Infallible ) does farther appear ( to say nothing of particular Writers ) by the clear and undeniable Testimonies of National and General Councils . 1. The Church of France in a * late and National Assembly of her Clergy , expresly denyes the Popes Infallibility , as much as we Protestants , whom they are pleased commonly to miscal Hereticks . 2. Their General Council of Basil tells us ; That ‖ several Popes have fall'n into Errors and Heresies . And again , it often * happens , and may happen ( as that Council says ) That the Pope may err . 3. Their General Council of Constance , ( amongst other crimes ) declares Pope Benedict 13. a ‖ Notorious Schismatick , incorrigible , and a pertinacious Heretick . 4. To omit Pope Vigilius condemn'd for Heresie in the Fifth General Council , ( which is by * Dr. Crakanthorp fully and evidently proved ) I shall only add ( which is undeniable and authentick Authority against the Popes Infallibility ) That the Sixth General Council , ( held at Constantinople in Trullo ) did condem and ‖ Anathematize Pope Honorius . And tho' some Zealots for Rome and the Popes Infallibility , ( such as Bellarmine and Baronius ) have endeavoured to excuse Honorius , and question the Authority of the Council , and the Truth of those things , which in the Council were urged against him : yet the evidence on which they condemned Honorius for an Heretick , was undoubtedly good , even his own Epistles read in the Council ( which Bellarmine pretends were fictitious ) But both the Authority of the Council , and of Honorius his Epistles , ( which were the Evidence on which they condemn'd him ) are so fully and evidently justified ( to omit many others ) by a * Learned Sorbon Doctor , and a Roman Catholick , that I neither need , nor shall say any more of this particular , but refer the Reader ( who desires more satisfaction ) to that Judicious and learned Author . I shall only add ( in short ) two things , which to me seem very material . 1. That notwithstanding , that Sixth General Council condemned Honorius for an Heretick , yet it was approv'd and receiv'd as a General Council by Pope Leo the second , ( the next Successor ( save one ) to Honorius ) as evidently appears by his own Epistle * to the Emperors , and ‖ their own Roman Breviary , of their most * correct Edition . And to make it more evident that the Sixth Synod , and the condemnation of Pope Honorius for Heresie , was anciently approv'd even in the Church of Rome ; their own General Council , the Second of Nice , is a witness beyond exception , as by the words and place in the Margin ‖ may evidently appear . 2. But that which may seem strange , ( tho' it be most true ) by the Decree of the Council of Constance , every Pope at his Consecration , was to take a solemn Oath to believe and maintain ( amongst other Councils ) the * 6. Synod ( of which we are now speaking ) and every part and particle of it ; and consequently they were bound to approve that Synod , and their Condemnation of Pope Honorius , as an Heretick . For this condemnation of Honorius it was evidently an Act of the 6 Synod ; and the Popes ( by the said Decree of the Council of Constance ) were bound ( amongst other Councils mentioned in the Decree ) to believe and profess the Acts of that sixth Synod , Vsque ad unum Apicem , for so the Decree expresly says . The Premisses consider'd , I believe it may , and will appear to all intelligent and impartial Judges , that the Opinion of the Popes Infallibility , is not only without , but against manifest reason . For , 1. 'T is certain , that the Greek , Asiatick and Aethiopick Churches never believ'd , but expresly oppos'd it . 2. For the Western or Latin Church , it is evident , by their General Councils of Nice , Pisa , Constance and Basil ( in which several Popes have been declar'd Hereticks ) that they were so far from believing it , ( tho' Pope Gregory the 7 th was for it ) that they condemn'd , and Synodically declar'd against it , for 1500 years , till Leo the 10 th in his Lateran Council , in the year 1513. did again set on foot that Apocryphal opinion of the Popes Infallibility : So that it is not only erroneous , but a very late and novel invention . That a General Council is not Infallible , is a truth ( from many cogent and undeniable reasons ) so evident , that as there is no need I shou'd , so it is not my purpose to say much : only I shall ( in short ) say a few things , and refer them to your prudence , to make use of all , or any of them , as to you ( circumstances consider'd ) may seem convenient . Here then I desire it may be consider'd , 1. That a General Council is never so much as named in Scripture , nor any promise of Infallibility given it . The * Council of the Apostles ( which was no General Council ) was Infallible , and might truly say * Sic visum est spiritui sancto & nobis . Because the Apostles had the Infallible Assistance of the Holy Ghost . But that any General Council had any such Assistance , truly to say , after their Decrees , Sic visum est Spiritui Sancto & nobis ; ( Tho' that of * Trent , and others vainly pretend to it ) is an Assertion without all proof or probability . 2. But there is no necessity of such an Infallible Guide , as a General Council ; because Christians for several Ages , have attain'd Heaven and Eternal Salvation , who never had any General Council to be their Guide . For 't is certain , and on all sides confess'd , that the first Nicene Council , which was held An. Christ. 325. was the first General Council , the Christian Church ever had . Now I desire to know ( and you may ask those who endeavour to seduce your Parishioners ) whether the Christians in those 325. years , ( when there was no General Council ) were saved or not ? If they were saved , then 't is evident that a General Council is not necessary to guide us to Heaven ; seeing Christians for 325. years obtain'd Salvation , and yet in all that time , there was no General Council to guide them . But if it be said , Christians ( for want of a General Council to guide them ) were not saved in those three Centuries ; Then , 1. They contradict the sense of Christendom , and the constant testimony of Fathers and Historians , who universally tell us of thousands , not only of pious Christians , but of many hundred thousands of pious Confessors and Martyrs . Now to say that they were not saved , who laid down their lives for Christ and his Gospel , is such an uncharitable and unchristian Censure , as no sober Christian ever did , or ( I believe ) ever will be guilty of . 2. They contradict their own Martyrologies , their Missals and Breviaries , wherein they acknowledge many hundred Saints and Martyrs who lived and dyed in those 3 Centuries , and in their Offices pray to them , as to glorify'd Saints and Martyrs . 3. But to put the case ( in short and ) beyond dispute , it is certain there never was any truly General Council , or any Synod wherein the Representatives of the Universal Church did meet and determine Controversies . The greatest Council the Christian Church ever had , was only Imperial , of the Roman Empire , not Universal of all Christendom ; few , if any , out of the Roman Empire being ever call'd , or coming to any of those Councils we now call General or Oecumenical . 'T is true , there are several Councils ( as the first of Nice , that of Constantinople , that of Ephesus and Chalcedon , &c. ) which we commonly call Oecumenical or General Councils ; but then the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( whence we call a Council Oecumenical ) must be taken in that signification it has in * St. Luke , There came a Decree from Augustus , that ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) the whole World should be taxed . Now 't is evident , that by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there , the Roman world only must be meant , or the Roman Empire ; for Augustus had neither intention , nor any Authority to tax any , but his own Subjects . So when the Emperours call'd Councils ( as is evident they did call all the first ‖ Oecumenical Councils ) they had neither Intention , nor any Authority to call those Christians which were out of their Empire , and none of their Subjects . Now 't is evident that when the Nicene Council was call'd , and others after it , a very great part of Christendom was without the bounds of the Roman Empire , whose Bishops as they were never call'd , so they never came , as may appear by the Subscriptions to the Councils themselves . 4. Is it not irrational for them to boast of the Infallibility of their General Councils ? when their greatest * Writers , and Publishers of their Councils , ridiculously contradict themselves , and give us this distinction of General Councils . 1. Generalia Concilia approbata . 2. Concilia Gen. reprobata . 3. Concilia Gen. partim approbata , partim reprobata . 4. Concilium Gen. nec approbatum nec reprobatum . They mean the first of Pisa , about the year , 1409 which they will not ‖ approve nor reject . In short , if General Councils may be reprobate and rejected , then sure they are not Infallible . 5. It seems your Emissaries ( to perswade your People to desert the Church of England ) tell your Parishioners , that the Church of England is in a miserable condition for want of ( what they have ) an Infallible Guide and Judge of Controversies . For hence it is ( say they ) that our Church is divided into so many Sects and Factions , some being Presbyterians , some Independents , some Quakers , &c. To this you may with great reason and truth reply ; That they have in the Roman Church , more Sects and Factions , than we have in England ; & they differing in things of an higher nature , such as concern the Being of the Papacy . For , to say nothing of the late great , and hot differences and disputes between the Jansenists and Molinists , between the Dominicans and their Adherents on the one side , and the Jesuits and Franciscans on the other : Their Church is divided into great Sects and Factions , which differ in things which concern the foundation of their Church and Papacy . For , ( to omit others ) many in their Church publickly affirm and maintain , 1. That the Pope is Infallible . 2. That he is the Supream Head of their Church above all General Councils , and that no Appeal lies from him to the Council . 3. That his Supremacy is not only in this Ecclesiastical , but ( at least indirectè ) in temporals too . 4. That he has power to depose Kings , ( as for other causes so ) for Heresie ; 5. and to absolve their Subjects from their Oaths of Allegiance , and give away their Kingdoms . And altho' these Opinions pass ( with approbation ) at Rome , yet they are all ( of them ) deny'd and condemn'd by the Church of * France , and thousands more , who publickly and in Print declare against them as Erroneous and Impious , highly prejudicial to the Rights of Kings and temporal Princes , and Inconsistent with the Peace of Christendom . Now if our Sects in England , have risen and continued , because we have no Infallible Judge to determine the Controversie ; Then ( by a parity of Reason ) seeing their great Sects and differences in the Church of Rome , remain undetermin'd , it must follow , that they want an Infallible Judge to determine those Controversies . So that it is ( to give it no worse name ) a very strange confidence in your Roman Emissaries , to think they can perswade Protestants to desert the Church of England , because there are some Sects and Divisions in it ; and yet perswade them to Communicate with the Church of Rome , in which there are far more and more material Sects , and undetermin'd Divisions : for this were ( as the Country Proverb is ) to perswade us out of the Frying Pan into the fire , and ( instead of bettering it ) to put us in a worse condition . Let them make it appear , that they are indeed at Unity amongst themselves , and no Sects or Divisions amongst them ; then this Argument may have some more shew of Probability ; but ( as the case now stands ) it is not only irrational , but ridiculous . I say , some more shew of Probability , yet no just proof . For admit they were at Unity amongst themselves , yet there are many other gross Errors and Superstitions , which ( while retain'd by their Church ) makes all Communion with them impossible ; but enough of this ( if not too much ) for nothing can be ( to an Intelligent and Impartial Judge ) more evident than this ; That since the decease of the Apostles , there never was any Man or Congregation or Council of Men , who pretended to Infallibility for above a thousand years after our Blessed Saviour . But the Roman Church is so far from having ( what she commonly and vainly boasts of ) Infallibility , that there neither is , nor ever was any Christian Church in the world in such a miserable condition ; for the great incertainty of her Faith and Religion ; which incertainty arises from her own Principles , approv'd and receiv'd by the Supream Authority of that Church , and they are two , 1. From their requiring the Intention of the Minister , as necessary to the real Being of every Sacrament . 2. Their denying the certainty of our Senses . 1. For the first , that the Intention of the Minister is necessarily requir'd to the real Being of any Sacrament ; We have the Decree of * Pope Eugenius expresly affirming it ; and he says ( tho' ‖ untruly ) that it was approbante Concilio ; Their * Trent Council confirms the same , as do other of their ‖ Authentick Books . Now this Principle being ( as it is ) by them granted , it evidently follows , 1. That no man in their Church can be certain that he is a Christian , or that there is any one true Christian in the whole Church of Rome . For if they be not baptiz'd , then 't is certain they are no Christians , nor Members of the Visible Church ; and that they are truly Baptiz'd is impossible for man certainly to know . For if the Minister who Baptiz'd him , did not intend it , he is not Baptiz'd ; and what the Minister intended , God only ( who knows the heart and our Intentions ) can certainly know . It is true , if I Baptize any Person , I may certainly know my own Intentions , that I did intend to baptize him ; and so I may be certain he is truly Baptiz'd ; but whether he who Baptiz'd me , did intend it , is impossible for me certainly to know . So that although I may certainly know that another man is truly Baptiz'd , yet no man in the Church of Rome , can be certain that he is so . All the assurance I can have , that I am truly Baptiz'd , and a Member of the Christian Church , is , from the Minister who Baptiz'd me . But he being always Fallible , and ( for ought I do or can know ) may be false ; such a testimony cannot assure me that I am truly Baptiz'd , and indeed a Christian , within the Church ; and then seeing — Extra Ecclesiam non est salus , it follows , that ( for ought I do or can know ) I am in a miserable and damnable condition . Now suppose a General Council , call'd by the Pope or Emperor , if they are not Christians , I may be sure they are not Infallible Judges ; God ( as is and must be confess'd ) having never promised Infallible assistance to any without the Christian Church : and that they are Christians I can never certainly know , because 't is impossible for me to be assur'd that they have been truly Baptiz'd , by any Minister really intending it . Now admit they were Infallible Judges , yet they cannot be so to me ; who can never be sure they are so . For I can have no more Assurance of their Infallibility , than I have of their Christianity , of which 't is impossible for me to be assur'd , seeing it is impossible for me certainly to know , whether they be Baptiz'd . 2. Upon the same Principle it is impossible for any certainly to know , whether there be any one true Priest in the whole Papacy ; and consequently that there is any true Bishop , ( for it is certain , every true Bishop must be a Priest ) now if none can be certain that there is any true Bishop or Priest in the Roman Church ; then ( seeing it is certain , that Bishops and Priests , and true Orders are necessary to the Being of a True Church ) it evidently follows , that they are so far from being certain , that their Church is Infallible ; that they neither are , nor can be certain , that their Church is any True Church at all . 3. Upon the same Principle , ( Marriage being with them a Sacrament , and the Intention of the Minister who marries any , being necessary to make the Marriage good and valid ) all marryed People in the Church of Rome , for ought they do , or can know ( not knowing the Intention of the Priest who marryed them ) may live in perpetual fornication , and their children ( if they have any ) illegitimate , as begot by Fornication , and not in lawful Marriage . 4. And on the same Principle , none in the Church of Rome , can be certain , that the Bread in the Eucharist is truly Consecrate , ( because the Priests intention , who Consecrates , cannot possibly be known to them ) and if it be not truly Consecrate , it ( as is confess'd ) remains Bread , and then ( as is confess'd too ) they in Worshipping it , are most impious Idolaters , worse than they of * Lapland , who worship a piece of Red Cloth , &c. So that this is the miserable condition of all Communicants in the Church of Rome , that ( for ought they do , or can certainly know ) they are most impious Idolaters . Now let any intelligent and pious Person judge , whether our most wise and gracious God hath left his Church in such a miserable condition , that it shou'd be in the power of wicked Ministers , to make all his People abominable Idolaters . 2. The Second thing I nam'd , from which the great incertainty of the Roman Churches Religion ( tho' they vainly brag of Infallibility ) arises , is their denying the certainty of our Senses . For this being deny'd , it will evidently follow , that the Roman Catholicks neither have , nor can have any certainty of their Religion : That this may appear , consider , 1. That our Blessed Saviour ordain'd his Apostles to be * Witness of his Resurrection , and that he had a real Body , and was not a Spirit . 2. And that they might be sufficient Witnesses , He appear'd several times to them , that they might ‖ see , and touch , and handle * him ; blames them for not believing those who had seen him after his Resurrection ; and S. Luke tells us , that these ‖ were infallible proofs of his Resurrection , &c. and so thinks S. * John too . 3. The Roman Catholicks deny this certainty of our Senses , and tell us ; that the Bread in the Eucharist after Consecration , is not Bread , but the very glorifyed Body of our Blessed Saviour ; ( tho' all our Senses assure us , That 't is Bread still ) and tell us that we must not trust our Senses , but believe it to be his Body . Well , ask them how they know it is his Body ? they say by Faith ; but how came they by that Faith ? They say ( as the Text saith ) by * hearing : But then 1. Sense ( they say ) is no certain Assurer of what we have by it . 2. If all my five Senses may be deceiv'd , in judging the Wafer to be Bread , certainly their Hearing , ( which is but one ) may be deceiv'd : And then all their Faith , and the certainty of it , depending upon their Hearing ( none of the Senses according to their Principles , being to be trusted in matters of Faith , because they may deceive us ) it manifestly follows , That they are so far from Infallibility , that they neither have , nor can have any ( so much as moral ) certainty of any thing they Believe . But ( if not too much ) enough of this . For indeed , their pretences to Infallibility are so weak , that they deserve no confutation . I come now to the second thing , which you desir'd me to do ; that is , to give some Reasons to justifie our Separation from Rome , that it may appear , that we are not ( what they commonly miscal us ) Schismaticks . And here it is to be consider'd , 1. That Schism ( to pass by all other significations of the word ) is a Criminal or sinful violation , or a breach of Ecclesiastical or Church-Union , which Union is two fold , 1. Internal , consisting in an Union of Judgment , and that mutual Love and Charity which Christians ought to have mutually one to another . 2. External , consisting in an outward profession of the same Faith , Communion in the same Liturgies and Sacred Offices and Sacraments . 2. Schism , ( as now we speak of it ) does not consist in a violation or breach of that Internal Union of Judgment and Love ( tho' this may , and is call'd Schism * in Scripture , and is a sin ) for such Internal Divisions , and breach of the Union of Love and Judgment , are not of humane cognizance , nor can the Church know who are , or censure , such Schismaticks . 3. But Schism ( in the sense we now speak of ) consists in a Violation or breach of the External Church-Union , when men refuse to Communicate with their Fellow-Christians , in the Belief of the same Creed , coming to the same publick Prayers , and receiving the same Sacraments , &c. 4. This Schism must be a Criminal or Sinful Separation ; when those who separate have no Rational and firm grounds to justifie their Separation . For if any Church hath Apostatiz'd from the Ancient and true Christian Faith , and ( as necessary conditions of her Communion ) require of her Members , to believe any thing in fide erroneous , or to do any thing in facto impious ; then Separation from such a corrupted Church , is so far from being Schismatical and sinful Impiety ; that it is a * necessary duty . This is on all sides ‖ confessed , that 't is no Schism to Separate from an erroneous Church ; It being evident that no Christian can be bound to Communicate with any Church in Errors or Impieties ; and therefore may without any Schism , lawfully Separate from such Churches , whether that Church disbelieve and deny any Articles of the Ancient and True Christian Faith , or ( which the Pope and his party do ) add new ones , inconsistent with it , and the truth of the Gospel , and that Faith which our Blessed Saviour and his Apostles deliver'd to the Christian Church . The Premisses concerning the Nature of Schism , consider'd , and ( as they are and must be ) granted : I say , That the Errors of the Church of Rome , are so many , and grievous , that they are a just ground to condemn Her , and to justifie our Separation from her . I shall only instance in some few ; and the first * concern the Sacred Scripture ; which , 1. Many of her Writers speak most irreverently of the Sacred Scriptures ( tho' they be on all sides confess'd to be the Holy Word of God ) calling them nasus ‖ Cereus , Regula Lesbia , Vnsens'd Characters , &c. These and many more such occur in their greatest Writers , as is notoriously known , and cannot be deny'd . Sure I am , that She her self * tells us — That the reading of Scripture in any Vulgar tongue , has ( by reason of mens rashness ) done more mischief than good . And therefore the Church of Rome forbids all Reading the Scriptures in any Vulgar Tongue ; which consequence ( notwithstanding her Infallibility ) is most irrational , and not better than this — None shall drink any Wine , because many , through their temerity and drunkenness abuse it , to their great hurt and detriment . But this is not all , nor ( tho' bad enough ) the worst of it . Other ‖ of their Authors ( approv'd at Rome ) tell us ; That the reading of Scripture in a vulgar Tongue , is so far from being profitable , that it is pernicious to the people : Nay ( horresco referens ) They farther say — That the permitting of the People to read the Bible was the Invention of the Devil , and a likelier means to build Babylon , than Jerusalem . Having thus given so foul a character of the Holy Scriptures , to fright men foom reading them as dangerous , and to the People pernicious ; they do in the next place 2. Absolutely * prohibit the reading or hearing the Bible , or any Summary or Compendium of it , in any vulgar Tongue , understood by the People ; and if any have any prohibited Books , they are to bring them to the Bishop or Inquisitor , who are presently to see them burnt , ‖ ( the Bible not excepted ) for it is , all * prohibited Books whatsoever , &c. Now this giving such an irreverent character of Holy Scripture , and prohibiting the reading or hearing it in any vulgar Tongue , is not only erroneous , but highly unjust , and ( to the People , who are deny'd the * benefit and comfort they might receive by reading the Scriptures ) pernicious , which will evidently appear ; because such prohibition of reading or hearing the Bible , in any vulgar Language , is expresly contrary 1. To the Scripture it self . 2. To the command and precepts of God in It. 3. To the practice of the Church of God , ( both Jewish and Christian ) as may and ( to intelligent and impartial Judges ) will evidently appear . 1. For the Jewish Church ; 't is undeniably certain , That the Sacred Books of the Old Testament , were ( either immediately by God himself , or mediately by his Prophets ▪ ) given to the Jews in their own vulgar Tongue . 2. That they were not given only to the Levites , or learned amongst the Jews , but to ‖ all Israel ( Levites or Laity ) Remember ( saies the Prophet ) the Law of Moses , which I commanded in Horeb for all Israel , with the Statutes and Judgments . 3. And by the express * command of God , they were bound to read that Law , in that vulgar Language , to all Israel , men , women , and children , and to that end , that they might ‖ learn to fear the Lord , and keep his Statutes . 4. And accordingly ( in praxi & de facto ) it was read in their vulgar Tongue , to men , * women and children ; and afterwards both the Law and Prophets were read in every Synagogue , every ‖ Sabbath day . 5. And that they had the Scriptures in the vulgar Tongue , and could read and be directed by them ( as divine Oracles ) was the * greatest and most profitable privilege , and the ‖ man is Bless'd , who read and did meditate in them day and night , &c. The Premisses consider'd , I think 't is evident , that their undervaluing the Scriptures , and prohibiting the reading them in any vulgar Tongue , is directly contradictory to the express command of God , and practice of the Jewish Church ( the only true Church then ) before our Blessed Saviour had constituted the Christian Church of Jews and Gentiles . 2. Concerning the Christian Church ; That the Scriptures were had and read by Christians , ( either in the Originals , or in Versions , and Translations into other vulgar Tongues ) is an undeniable truth , and indeed confess'd . For 't is manifest , that all Churches in Christendom * anciently had , and ( except the Roman ) to this day have the Scriptures , and read them , in their vulgar Tongues ; and the Church of Rome had , and read the Scriptures in Latin , ( which was for many ages their vulgar Tongue ) till it did degenerate into Italian . 2. The Apostle commends Timothy , that he had known the Scriptures from a ‖ child , and that they were able to make him wise unto Salvation ; or ( as S. James expresseth it * ) able to save his soul. The Scriptures , which Timothy is said to know from a child , were the Scriptures of the Old Testament , ( little , if any , of the New being then writ , when he was a child ) which he had and read in vulgar Tongue ; and such reading was so far from being ( what the Popish Writers , and the Popes themselves say of them ) dangerous and pernicious to his Soul ; that ( if we will believe the Apostle ) it was a happy and powerful means for the Salvation of it . 3. St. Paul * preaches the Gospel to the Jews at Berea : they had , and daily search'd the Scriptures , whether those things which Paul preach'd , were so . The Apostle commends them for it , and shews them the great benefit and blessing they gain'd by doing it . They daily searched the Scriptures , Therefore ( says he ) Many of ‖ them believed . Their having and reading the Scriptures ( the Old Testament ) in their vulgar Tongue , was a happy and powerful cause and means of their Believing the Gospel , which S. Paul preach'd . 4. S. John assures us , that the Gospel was by him writ to that very end , That * we might believe , and have eternal Life . The Reading and Knowing of the Scriptures was the means God himself had appointed to bring us to true Faith and Salvation : and therefore to forbid all reading or hearing the Scriptures in a vulgar and ( to the People ) intelligible Language , is to contradict God and his Apostles , and to deprive men of the great and effectual means of their Salvation . 5. S. Peter writing to the dispersed Jews ( who by God's appointment had , and read the Scriptures in their vulgar Tongue ) he admonisheth and requires them ; That as new-born babes they should ‖ desire the sincere milk of the word , that they might grow thereby . As the Mothers milk is a wholesom nourishment for young Children , to preserve and promote a temporal life ; so ( in S. Peter's Judgment ) the Scriptures are a wholesom nourishment for young Christians to preserve and promote a Spiritual Life , and therefore he exhorts them to desire the sincere milk of the word , that they may grow thereby : And farther , as to take away Milk from new-born Children , were evidently injust in it self , and pernicious to the Children ; so to take away the Scriptures from young Children in Christ , would be equally ( or rather more ) impious in him who should take them away , and more pernicious to them from whom they are taken . Because taking away the Mothers milk from Infants , and young Children , is only prejudicial to the Body , and a temporal Life ; but to take away the Scriptures from young ( or any ) Christians , is prejudicial to their Souls and Salvation . 6. But altho' S. Peter exhorts the Jews to desire the sincere milk of the Word , that is to read and understand it , for the benefit of their Souls ; for he well knew that they had the Scriptures given by God himself , in their vulgar Tongue , and that there was none then , who would hinder them to read them . And tho' our Blessed Saviour * commanded the Jews to search the Scriptures , to bring them to the knowledge and belief that he was the true Messiah , and so to eternal Life . And altho' S. Paul commands the Colossians that ‖ his Epistle to them be read to the Brethren in Laodicea , and that the Epistle from * Laodicea be read to the Colossians . Now tho' those Epistles were writ in Greek , a vulgar and well known language to the Colossians , and Laodiceans ; yet S. Paul commands that they be publickly read in both Churches . But let Peter and Paul , and our Blessed Saviour himself , say what he will for diligently reading and searching the Scriptures in any vulgar , and ( to the people ) known Tongue ; his pretended Vicar , in contradiction to our Blessed Saviour and his Apostles , does absolutely condemn all such Reading of Scripture , as dangerous , and ( to the people ) pernicious . Lastly , you may ( if you think it convenient , and have an opportunity ) propose this case to your Popish Emissary ( who ever he be ) that endeavours to seduce your Parishioners from truth , and the Church of England . Suppose Sempronius , a great and very rich man , make his last Will and Testament , and divide his estate amongst his Children , and give many considerable Legacies to his Friends and Servants ; and in his Will particularly expresses what , and to whom , and upon what conditions his Legacies are bequeath'd : now Sempronius dyes , and some great man has got his Will into his hand and keeping , and ( it being a Will in a Language not understood by the Legatees ) will neither let them have the Will , nor a true and attested copy of it , in a Language they understand : So that they cannot be assur'd , nor any way certainly know , either who are ( by the Will ) Legatees , or what the Legacies are , or upon what conditions they are given ; save only , as he who keeps the Will , shall be pleased to signifie to them ; who ( if he be not an honest man ) may cheat and cousin them , and they have no remedy to secure their right , especially , if he who keeps the Will be , or pretend to be a supream Power , from whom lyes no appeal to any superiour Judge , who might examine the cause , and do them justice . In this case , 't is most evident , that he who keeps the Will is unjust in himself , and injurious to the Legatees , in keeping them from the knowledge of the Testators Will , and so from the knowledg of what he has given them . This being granted , ( as of necessity it ought and must ) you may desire him ( as a like case ) to consider , 1. That our Blessed Saviour even as Man , and our Mediator was very * great , the Prince of Peace , and head of his Church . 2. That he liv'd and dy'd for his Church , and in his Will , left exceeding great Legacies to his Saints and Servants , with the conditions he required of the Legatees , to make them capable of those Legacies . 3. That the Gospel was his last Will and Testament , in which , who are Legatees , and upon what conditions their Legacies become due , are particularly express'd . 4. His Will was writ in a Language the People do not now understand ; and the Bishop of Rome having got it into his hand , and pretending that he ( as Vicar of Christ ) is the sole * Supream keeper of it , does absolutely deny the People any copy of it in any vulgar Language , by them understood ; and so deprives them of the knowledge of their Blessed Saviour's Will and Testament , of the gracious Promises , and great Legacies given in it , and of the holy Precepts and conditions required of the People , to give them a right to those Legacies . So that ( in contradiction to our Blessed Saviour's express command ) they must neither search or read , or have the Gospel ( in any vulgar Tongue by them understood ) upon pain of Excommunication . They are not permitted to read the Gospel , nor must they trust to their own eyes and understanding , ( tho' given them by God for that purpose ) but they must believe the Church , and the Pope ( or rather an ordinary Priest from him ) must tell them , what Legacies are given , and what Duties are requir'd by our Blessed Saviour in the Gospel . Now in the former case , if the keeping Sempronius his Will from the Legatees was evidently unjust , and injurious to the Legatees : much more will the detaining our Blessed Saviour's Will from his People ( the Salvation of whose Souls , are so highly concern'd in it ) be unjust in the Pope and his party ; and not only injurious , but pernicious to the People . For in Sempronius his Will , the Legacies were only temporal things , and so the loss of them less considerable : But in our Blessed Saviour's Will and Testament , the Legacies are Spiritual , the promises of Grace here , and eternal Glory hereafter ; and therefore to take away the Gospel from the People in any Language understood by them , so that they cannot certainly know the Promises , or their duties requir'd for the attaining of them ; is ( as I said ) not only injurious but pernicious to the poor people , detain'd from the only means to know those things , which ( in order to their Salvation ) they are ( by the Law of God and the Gospel ) bound to know . For 1. Without the knowledge of Christ , and belief in him , there is no possibility of Salvation , ( Joh. 3.16 . Act. 10.43 . Joh. 17.3 . ) And 2. such knowledge of our Blessed Saviour , whereon we may fiducially , and with certainty rely , can no where be had but in Scripture , the only Infallible rule of our Faith. 3. Now the Pope and his party , severely prohibiting the People to read , or have the Scriptures ( or any part of them ) in any vulgar Language which they understand , do by consequence deprive them of the only sure , and certain means of their Salvation . Which how unbecoming it is , the pretended Successor of S. Peter ( who was commanded by our Blessed Saviour , to feed his Sheep , not to famish them , by taking the Scriptures from them ) and how pernicious to the poor People , let the Reader judge . 4. And that the Pope ( quantum in se est ) deprives the People of the knowledge of Scripture ( besides what is above said ) I shall only add a signal passage out of a late Popes Bull , wherein he condemns a French Translation of their own vulgar Latine in these words , * The said Gallican Version of the New Testament , wheresoever Printed , or hereafter to be Printed , as rash , and mischievous , differing from the vulgar Latin , and scandalous to the ignorant ; We ( by our Apostolical Authority ) condemn and prohibit : so that hereafter , none , of what Degree or condition ‖ soever he be , under pain of Excommunication , shall dare , or presume to read , have , sell ▪ print , or cause it to be printed : and whosoever has that French Translation of the N. Testament , he is bound under pain of Excommunication to deliver it presently to the Ordinary of the place , or the Inquisitors , notwithstanding any thing whatsoever , which may be to the contrary . Thus Pope Clement the 9 th . ( about 20 years since ) condemns and prohibits the Gospel of Jesus Christ in French , ( a vulgar Tongue ) and we are told by a great and learned Casuist of their own , that long before him , Innocent the 3 d. condemned , and prohibited a French Translation of the Bible . * Azorius ( in the place cited ) gives the reasons , why the Scriptures are not to be permitted to be read , or had in any vulgar Tongue ; where his irreverent speeches of the holy Word of God , are so many and horrid , that I shall not offend the pious Reader , nor pollute these papers with them : he , who would be satisfied , may see them in the place ‖ cited . The Premisses consider'd , I believe that intelligent and impartial Judges , ( who love and seek truth ) will think , that we had just reason to forsake the Church of Rome , which unjustly ( in contradiction to Scripture and the practice of all Christian Churches , ( except her self ) took the Holy Scriptures from us , and consequently depriv'd us of the happiness which God himself had given us , to be a sure and sufficient ground of our spiritual comfort , and hope of Heaven . For ( tho' they are pleas'd to contradict it ) the Apostle * assures us , That whatever things were written aforetime , were written for our Learning , that we through patience , and comfort of the Scriptures , might have hope . The Scriptures were dictated by the Holy Ghost , and given to the Church ( not to be lockt up in an unknown Language , but ) for our Learning , and a firm foundation of our comfort and hope of Heaven . 2. The Gospel was dictated by the Holy Ghost , and given to this very end , that it might be an effectual and powerful means to bring us to true Faith , and by it to eternal life ; So the * Apostle ( or Holy Spirit by him ) tells us — These things are written , that you might believe that Jesus is the Christ , and believing them might have life . 3. Nor is the Scripture an imperfect and defective means , or ( without Traditions ) unable to beget such a Faith , as will bring us to eternal life : For the Apostle ( who knew better ) expresly tells Timothy , ‖ That the Scriptures were * ABLE to make him wise unto Salvation . 4. Lastly , Nor are the Scriptures so obscurely penn'd , ( as they are commonly , and most unjustly slander'd by our Adversaries ) that to ordinary people , and understandings they are unintelligible . I shall not go about to prove this , ( being abundantly done by many of our Protestant Divines already , ) I shall only add one testimony of a Cardinal ( I mean Bessarion ) who at the Council of ‖ Florence , in a Speech to his Countrey-men , expresly says ; That in Scripture ALL Doctrines of Faith , are either plainly explain'd , or if they be hid , they may without difficulty be found out . This Assertion of Bessarion , is ( to me and all Protestants ) an evident and clear truth ; and is more considerable , in that a Roman Cardinal dares , and does publickly attest it , in contradiction to the receiv'd Doctrine of the Church of Rome . And while I am writing this , there providentially comes in my way , something concerning the taking away the Scriptures from the people , which ( if I mistake not ) is very pertinent to our present purpose . For , 1. I find that * Dioclesian in his Bloody Persecution of the Christians , published an Edict ; that the Christians should bring in their Bibles , to be ‖ publickly burnt . They knew ( by the suggestion of Satan and their Pagan Priests ) that the Scriptures were the great and most effectual means to convert Pagans to Christianity , and confirm them in it ; and therefore they did cunningly and impiously endeavour to deprive the Christians of the Benefit of those Sacred Books ; because no other Books were so destructive of their Pagan Religion , and therefore they might not read them . 2. And let sober and pious men consider , whether the Pope does not for the same reason forbid the Scriptures to the People ; because no other Books make a clearer discovery of their Errors . For they absolutely * forbid the Bible in any vulgar Language whatsoever ; so that none of their Superiors could ‖ Licence them to have it , and yet * permit the abominable Turkish Alcoran to be read in a vulgar Tongue . This may justly seem strange , that the Gospel of our Blessed Saviour Jesus Christ , shall be absolutely prohibited , and yet the Turkish Alcoran permitted to be read in a vulgar Tongue . 3. Tho' the Pagans permitted not the Christians to have the Scriptures , yet never any Christian Church ( no not the Roman ) for above 1000 years after our Blessed Saviour , depriv'd the People of the use and benefit of the Sacred Scriptures . In * France they had the Scriptures in their vulgar Tongue , till Pope Innocent the third , ( which was somewhat above 1200 ‖ years after our Blessed Saviour ) condemn'd and prohibited the reading or hearing the Scriptures in any vulgar Idiome . And amongst impertinent things ( which they mis-call reasons ) which they then ( and others since ) alledg'd against reading Scripture in a vulgar Tongue ; this was one ; — That such * reading of the Scriptures would be the cause of several Heresies , Seditions , Schisms , and almost infinite other mischiefs . Certainly all good Christians , who ( as surely they are bound ) love God and the Gospel of Jesus Christ , will judge this to be ( what indeed it is ) not sober reasoning , but railing at , and reviling the Holy Scriptures , and that Holy Spirit who did dictate them , to be a proper and powerful means , to bring us to the knowledge of the truth , and ‖ Salvation by it . For if the Scripture be not a good means to procure such an end , then they must say , ( which if they do , 't is no better than blasphemy ) That the Holy Spirit could not , or would not give a good means for that end , for which he intended it . But it is certain , that the Holy Scriptures are so far from being ( what they untruly say ) a cause of Heresie , Sedition or Schism , that no Book in the world , does , or can condemn those crimes , with that clear evidence and Authority , which the Bible doth . Especially seeing the Scripture is the sole authentick Rule to know , what Doctrines are de fide , and what heretical ; and therefore I have often wonder'd , what Heresies they mean , when they say that reading the Scripture , is the cause of Heresie ; seeing no Doctrine is , or can be de fide , a Doctrine or Article of our Christian Faith , which is not contain'd in Scripture ( that being the adequate Rule and measure of our Christian Faith ) nor can any thing be truly and properly Heresie , which is not contrary to some Divine truth reveal'd in Scripture : But * Azorius ( and others ) tell me , that Articles of Faith and Heresies are not to be measured and defined by their agreement or disagreement with Scripture only , but also by their agreement and disagreement with the Doctrinal definitions of the Church of Rome . So that not only the Articles of the Apostles Creed , of that of Nice , of Constantinople , and Chalcedon , are de fide , and all contrary Doctrines , Heresies : ( in which we and they agree ) but also all the Articles of their new Trent * Creed , ( first published by Pope Pius the 4 th . in the year 1564. ) are at Rome ‖ de fide , and all Doctrines contrary to any Article of that new Creed , they call Heresies , and condemn them . Here I consider , 1. That all Protestants do believe and profess many Doctrines contradictory to the Articles of their New Trent-Creed , as is confess'd . 2. And the Sacred Scriptures are the reason and ground why we do so ; which ( in express terms , or by evident consequence ) condemns many of their Doctrines ( as their worshipping of Images , denying the Cup to the Laity , and to Priests , that do not Consecrate , forbidding the Clergy to marry , &c. ) And yet they mis-cal us Hereticks , and our Doctrines maintain'd against them ( tho' consonant to the Sacred Scripture ) Heresies , and accuse Scripture as the cause of Heresies , not that it is the cause of Heresies properly and truly so call'd , which are errors contrary to the infallible Rule of Faith , ( for this would make Scripture contradict it self ) but because it is the true ground and reason why we believe and profess many Doctrines , which are contrary to the erroneous definitions of their Church ; so that we confess the Scripture is the cause of those things , which ( tho' real truths ) they mis-cal Heresies . But to deprive the People of the benefit , and comfort of the Scriptures , upon so irrational and frivolous a pretence , is evidently injust in them , and not only dangerous , but pernicious to the people . So that , had we no other reason but this ( the depriving the people of the use and benefit of the Scriptures ) it were abundantly sufficient , to justifie our Separation from Rome . reason 2 But Secondly , The Church of Rome does not only deprive the People of the benefit and comfort of Scriptures ( prohibiting the reading or having them in any vulgar Language by them understood , ) but , for the same reason they deprive them of the benefit , and Edification , they might , and ought to have had , in the publick service of God ; all their Liturgies , and publick Sacred Offices ( Missals , Breviaries , &c. ) being in Latin , a Language not understood by the people ( and many times not by the * Priests themselves ) who not understanding the Language in which the Publick Service of God was celebrated , could not possibly know to whom , ( whether to God , or Saint , or Angels ) or for what , the Priest prayed ; and so could not ( which the Apostle thinks they should in publick Prayers and Thanksgiving , ) say * Amen to any thing said by him , who did officiate . For this practice of the Church of Rome ( in having their Liturgies in a Tongue not understood by the People ) that it is unjust in them , and pernicious to the People , I shall only say two things : 1. That it is expresly against Scripture , and the directions ‖ the Apostle has given against it . He spends a whole Chapter to this purpose , and with so much zeal , and so many reasons demonstrates , that publick Prayers , and Divine Service ought not to be in an unknown Language ; that it is a wonder , that any , who pretend to be Christians , should ( as they of Rome do ) dare to contradict an Apostle of Jesus Christ , and that Holy Spirit by which he spoke . I know , that some of the greatest * Writers for Rome , and the Vindication of their Sacred Offices in an unknown Tongue , indeavour to Answer the Apostles reasons in this Chapter , but with such insignificant , and miserable shifts , that you will easily see that they indeavour that which they cannot possibly do . 2. And that it was as manifestly against the practice of the Church of God ( Jewish and Christian ) in all Ages , is as manifest , and by sober and ingenuous persons of the Roman Communion , confess'd . Now do you consider , how pernicious this must needs be to the People to deprive them of that great comfort , and edification , which they might , and ought to have had by the publick Service of God in a Language by them understood ; especially seeing Cardinal Contarenus and Cajetan ( convinced of this truth ) confess in the places now cited ; that if the Sacred Offices , and publick Prayers were in a known Tongue , it would tend much more to the Edification and benefit of the People . reason 3 Thirdly , While we were in the Communion of the Church of Rome , the one half of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was taken from us ; therefore we had good reason to separate from their Communion . The Cup in the Eucharist , was taken from the Laity , and all Priests too , ( save him who did * Consecrate ) and this is most unjust and illegal : 1. Because it is against the express Institution , and Command of our Blessed Saviour , who says , ‖ Drink ye All of this ; and S. Mark particularly observes , that they did * All drink of it . So that they might ( tho' with no just reason , yet ) with more pretence , have taken away the Bread ; For 't is never said , Eat ye All of this , nor express'd that they did all eat of it . And the Decree of the Council of ‖ Constance ( the first Council that took away the Cup from the Laity , in the year 1415. ) is most intolerable ; for they command ( upon pain of Excommunication ) that none should Communicate the Laity in both kinds ) in express contradiction to our Blessed Saviour's command . * Non obstante Institutione Christi . They say indeed , that the whole ‖ Body and blood of our Blessed Saviour , is truly contain'd as well under the species of Bread , as the species of Wine . But admit this ( which is a great error ) that the whole Body and Blood be really and truly in the Bread , so that the Laity in their Wafer receive both the Body and Blood ; then 1. Why did our Blessed Saviour institute it , in both kinds ? if the Apostles receiv'd his body and blood in the Bread , why did he give the blood a second time in the Cup ? 2. If the Laity receive the whole Sacrament ( the body and blood of our Blessed Saviour ▪ ) in the Wafer , why needs the Priest who Consecrates , receive any more ? 3. But admit that our Blessed Saviour's blood were wholly in the Wafer , and the Body in the Cup ( as the Fathers of Constance say , ) yet by their own receiv'd Principles , the blood is not * Consecrated in the Wafer , nor his Body in the Cup : ( their form of Consecrating the bread in the Wafer , being different from the form of Consecrating the blood in the Cup ) and then admit , that the blood were in the Wafer , yet it is not Consecrated in the Wafer , and therefore is not Sacramental blood , or any part of the Sacrament as it is in the Wafer , and therefore the Lay-men who receive only the Bread or Wafer , do not receive the whole , but only one part of the Sacrament , and so ( contrary to our Blessed Saviour's command ) are depriv'd of the Blood , the other part of the Sacrament . 4. But however it is most certain and evident , that they do not drink the blood in the wafer , and therefore disobey our Blessed Saviour's command , who expresly says , Drink ye All of this . By the Premisses , I think it may and ( to impartial Judges ) will appear , That the taking away the Cup from the Laity , is a kind of Sacriledg in the Church of Rome ; as being against the Institution , and express command of our Blessed Saviour : Nor is this all , for it is as much contrary to the practice 1. Of the Apostles ; and 2. Of the Christian Churches after them . For the first , S. Paul hath two signal things concerning this Subject . For writing to the Corinthians about the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper , ( and he tells them that he had * received of the Lord , what he writ to them ) he says , 1. That the Host ( to use their word ) was only Bread , and not the very Body and Flesh of our Blessed Saviour . For in two Chapters to the Corinthians he calls it Bread ‖ five times after Consecration ; and we may be sure , he call'd it what he thought it was ; and what both his own , and all their Senses manifestly saw , and judg'd it to be . It is true , the Apostle in the same Chapter says ; That the eating of the Bread is the Communion of the * Body of Christ. Not Communio propria & substantialis , as if they had really eaten the very substance of our Saviour's flesh ; but Communio typica & Sacramentalis ; they eat his Body in eating the bread which was a Sacramental sign of his Body . So a little before in the same Chapter , he says , that the Jews ( in Moses his time ) eat the same ‖ spiritual meat , and drank the same spiritual drink , for they drank of the spiritual Rock , which was Christ. Not that they did , or could then , really and properly eat or drink his Flesh and Blood ( for it was above 1400 years before our Blessed Saviour had any flesh or blood ) but they eat his flesh , and drank his blood in signis & typis Sacramentalibus . They eat our Blessed Saviour's Body in the Manna , which was a type only , and our Saviour himself the true * Manna , Sacramentally signify'd by it ; so he says , the Rock was Christ , that is ( the Sign having the Name of the thing signified , as is most usual ) a type of Him. 2. It is evident by the places ‖ cited ) that the Corinthians ( by the Apostles directions ) receiv'd the Cup as well as the Bread. But besides our Blessed Saviour's Institution of the Sacrament in both kinds , and the Apostles directions ( which are obligatory and commands ) that it should be so receiv'd ; there is one thing more which aggravates the error and injustice of the Church of Rome in taking away the Cup from the Laity , which they do in contradiction to all other Christian Churches , which ( ever since the Apostles time to this day ) have approv'd and practis'd the receiving the Sacrament in both kinds . Nay in the Church of Rome itself for above 1200 years after our Saviour , all ( both Lay and Clergy ) received in both kinds . I shall not take any pains to prove this , because it is a truth so evident , that many Roman Catholicks , and they ( both for Learning and Dignity ) eminent persons have confess'd it . Cardinal * Bona , in a book by him lately publish'd , has a signal passage to our Purpose ; his own words you have faithfully cited in the margin . And for the meaning of the words in the Margin — Cum offerebant , & de oblatis participabant , if you consult * Cassander , he will tell you ; Quod omnes Laici qui aderant ‖ offerebant , & Diaconi * & omnis populus de calice communicabant . For farther confirmation of this truth , that anciently in the Roman Church , the Laity had the Cup for above 1200 years ; I shall refer you 1. To the 27. Canon * of the Lateran Council , under Alexander the third , in the year 1180. 2. Can. 28. Concilii ‖ Claromontani celebrati , anno 1095. 3. Petrum de Marca , de Primatu Lugdunensi , pag. 441 , 442 , &c. 4. Cassandrum vid. in Consultatione , de utraque specie Sacramenti , pag. 182. 5. Lindanum vid. Panoptiae lib. 4. pag. 342. 6. Lastly , Greg. * de Valentia goes farther than some of his followers will , and plainly confesses , That the custom of Communicating in one kind only ‖ began to be general , a little before the Council of Constance , ( in his Tract de legitimo usu Eucharistiae , cap. 8. & 10. ) and that Council sate , and made that bold Decree , to take away the Cup , An. 1414. And here it is very observable , that altho' it was the express command of our Blessed Saviour , and of the Apostle S. Paul from him , that all should receive the Cup , as well as the Bread ; and although it was the practice and custome of all other Christian Churches in the World to this day , to receive it so , and ( as Greg. de Valentia confesses ) of the Roman Church , till a little before the Council of Constance ; yet that Council ( in * contradiction to all this ) ‖ grounds the prohibition of the Cup , upon ( which is most false ) a most ancient and approv'd custome of the Church , to receive only in one kind ; which custome ( they say ) has the obligation of a Law , and ought to be observ'd . This Decree of the Council ( to say no worse ) is highly irrational . For can any intelligent person think , that a late custom of a particular ( the Latin ) Church , should be sufficient to warrant Communion in one kind , and taking away the Cup from the Laity ; when the institution , and express command of our Blessed Saviour , and his Apostles , did ( as 't is evident S. Paul did ) require the People to receive in both kinds ; and the perpetual practice and custome of the Vniversal Church of Christ , ( even of Rome herself ) for above 1200 years , was to give the Sacrament in both kinds : However what was most erroneously decreed at Constance , is confirm'd at Trent , and the Cup taken from the Laity , though both the * Emperour and the King of France ( by their Bishops in that Council ) earnestly desir'd that it might be restored . Seeing then , that ( the Premisses consider'd ) it is , or ( ●o Impartial Judges ) may be evident ; That the Church of Rome injuriously forbids the Laity and all Priests ( save he who Consecrates ) to drink of the Cup in the Sacrament , and our Blessed Saviour expresly commands the contrary , saying , — Drink ye * All of this , and in obedience to his command they did All ‖ drink it . I suppose we may justly say to the Pope * and his party , what the Apostles ( on the like occasion ) said to the high Priest , and the Council of the Jews : It is better ‖ to obey God than men , and to separate from the Communion of that Church , which ( with great wrong and Iniquity ) denyes us the Communion of the Cup , which our Blessed Saviour commands us to drink in Remembrance of him . reason 4 4. Another Reason , to justifie our Separation from Rome ; that it was not Sinful nor Schismatical , may be taken from their denying Matrimony to the Clergy ; against the light of Nature , of Scripture , and the Judgment , and Practice of the Church of God , ( Jewish and Christian ) in all Ages . Concerning this , I shall only set down some few particulars , in short ; and leave them to your prudence , to use these , or add such other particulars , as ( circumstances consider'd ) may seem to you more convenient . And here I consider 1. That here in England , not only in the Saxon , but also in the Norman times , the Secular Clergy were married ; concerning which , we have a signal passage in Matth. * Paris . ( out of Rog. Wendover ) as also in our ‖ other Historians . Matth. Paris . tells us , 1. That Pope Gregory the 7 th . in a General Council , prohibited all married Priests to celebrate any Divine Offices , and forbid the Laity to hear any of their Masses , which was in the year 1074. 2. That this was a New thing , and an Innovation brought into the Church by that Pope . 3. That many believed it to be a rash and inconsiderate act of that Pope against the Judgment of the Holy Fathers . 4. And then he tells of the horrid effects and ill consequences which follow upon it . However ( to say nothing of the Ethiopick or Greek Churches , who never did receive the Doctrine of the Roman Church concerning the Celibacy of their Priests ) by the Premisses , it is certain , that even in the Roman Church , for above 1000 years after Christ , Priests were some of them marry'd , and afterwards when they were prohibited to marry , it was judged to be ( as the Historian tells us ) 1. An Innovation . 2. A Rash and Inconsiderate act . 3. Against the Judgment of the Holy Fathers . 4. And that it had mischievous consequences ; scarce any Heresie having made a greater Schism in the Church , than this Prohibition of Priests marriages . 2. But however the Popes prohibition of Priests marriages was censur'd then ; yet it prevail'd afterwards in the Roman Church , as may appear ( to omit others ) by the Council of Trent . For that Council ( tho' the * French were earnest for the marriage of the Clergy ) condemns all those , who say that the Priests ‖ marriages are lawful , or valid if they do marry . This ( they know ) all Protestants say , and ( as they have good reason ) believe , and so they lye under the Councils Anathema . But tho' they are so fierce against their Priests Marriages ; yet their Canon-Law will allow him who has no wife , to keep a * Concubine , and it shall be no hindrance to him , but he may receive the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper , in contradiction to the Apostle , 1 Cor. 5.11 . But of late , they will not allow ( at least they will not publickly own it ) the keeping of Concubines , yet they do say , that ‖ if a Priest keep a Concubine , and commit fornication , ( tho' it be a sin , yet ) it is a less sin , than to have a wife of his own ; that is ( in plain and true English ) it is a greater sin with them , to disobey the Pope and his party , who disapprove and prohibit Priests Marriages ; than to disobey our Blessed Saviour and his Apostles , who approve , and in some cases ( as to avoid * burning , and preserve Chastity ) expresly command it , as shall hereafter evidently appear . 3. And here it will be worth our time and pains diligently to consider , what the reason and cause is , why the Pope and his party so severely forbid the Marriages of their Clergy . For 1. It cannot be for Religion , and Reformation of their Clergy , to make them and their lives more conformable to the Gospel , and the Laws of the primitive and purer Christianity . For 't is evident , that the Gospel approves the Marriages of the Clergy , and several of the ‖ Apostles themselves were marryed , and so were the Bishops and Priests in the Primitive and purest times of Christianity ; as is both in itself evident , and * confess'd by our Adversaries , even by the Jesuites , the most zealous Advocates for the Errors of the Roman Church . So that the disapproving and prohibition of Priests Marriages , is so far from being a matter of True Religion , and Reformation of them and their lives , according to the Gospel , and purest times of Christianity ; that 't is directly contrary to it . 2. Nor can the Prohibition of Priests Marriages be for this end and reason , to make their Clergy better men and more pious Christians . For ( upon our Adversaries own principles ) it deprives them of the good means , which God himself has instituted , for their Justification and Salvation . For , First , The Trent Fathers tell us ; That all * true justice is either begun , or increas'd , or repair'd by the Sacraments . Secondly , They say , that Matrimony is a Sacrament instituted by our Blessed Saviour , and ‖ confers grace . And therefore the forbidding the Clergy to marry , deprives them of that means , which ( by their own confession ) our Blessed Saviour instituted to confer Grace ; and therefore the Celibate and single Life of the Priests cannot be a means to make them better men , or more pious Christians ; seeing it deprives them of the means which our Blessed Saviour instituted to make them such . If it be said , that Matrimony was not a Sacrament instituted for Priests , as the Sacrament of Orders was not for the Laity . To this I say , First , If Matrimony was ( as they say ) a Sacrament instituted by our Blessed Saviour to confer Grace , then whoever was legally married , according to the mind of Christ , and the Law of the Gospel , received Grace by it Secondly , Several of the Apostles and Primitive Bishops and Priests were so legally married , and so had the Sacrament of Matrimony , which ( in the judgment of the Church of Rome ) did really confer Grace to all , qui non * ponebant obicem , who by their own Impiety did not hinder the gracious effect of that Sacrament . Whence we may evidently conclude ; that if the Sacrament of Marriage did ( as our Adversaries say it did ) confer Grace on all , whose impiety did not hinder the effect of it ; then certainly it conferr'd Grace on the Apostles , and the Apostolical Bishops and Priests in their time ; it being irrational and uncharitable to think , that the impiety of those excellent and Divinely inspired Persons , should be so great , as to hinder the effect of that Sacrament . Now if the married Apostles did receive Grace signified and sealed to them by that Sacrament , so might their Successors too , to this very day , had not the Church of Rome by prohibiting Priests to marry , depriv'd them of that Sacrament , and so of that Grace and Spiritual Benefit they might have received by it . So that although the Pope and his party might pretend the pious ends above mention'd , for their prohibition of Priests marriages , ( as they want not fair pretences for foul Actions ) yet 't is evident , they were but vain pretences , seeing the prohibition of those marriages , is so far from being a means to attain those ends , that it utterly overthrows them both . 3. But the true reason why at Trent they prohibited the Clergy to marry , was ; because the Popes greatness and interest in all Countreys where Popery prevail'd , would be lost , if Priests were permitted to marry ; as evidently appears , by the reason given in the Trent Council , by the greatest Advocates for Rome , why the marriage of the Priests was deny'd ( tho' the ‖ Emperor and the French desir'd it ) for Father Paul of Venice , thus expresses it , * It is plain ( say the great Advocates for Rome , and the Popes Authority ) that marryed Priests will turn their affections to their Wives and Children , and by consequence , to their house and Countrey , so that the strict dependence which the Clergy hath upon the Apostolick See , would cease ; and to grant marriage to Priests , would destroy the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy , and make the Pope to be Bishop of Rome only . So that their prohibition of marriages was to make the Clergy faithful * subjects to the Pope , and to depend upon him , and not on their King and Country where they were born and lived . And hence came the Papal exemptions of the Clergy from the Jurisdiction of all temporal Princes ; so far , that they deny the Clergy to be Subjects to Kings , and therefore cannot be guilty of any Treason against them . They condemn this Proposition as erroneous ( if not Heretical ) ‖ Sacerdotes Principibus Jure Divino subditi . But this Rebellious doctrine is so generally and publickly aspersed by their Canonists , Casuists , and other approved Writers of the Church of Rome , that I neither need , nor shall say any more to prove it . By the Premisses it may appear , that the Doctrine of the Church of Rome in disapproving Priests marriages ( especially , for such unjust and unworthy ends ) is erroneous , and their practice the occasion * of great scandal . Which will farther appear , because our infinitely good and gracious God has ever approved , and his Church in all Ages practised the contrary . And here consider , 1. That Marriage was instituted by God himself before the Fall , while Adam was in Innocence ; so that the Institution of Marriage is divine , whereas the Prohibition of it , is only humane ( as is confess'd ) and for unjust and unworthy ends . 2. In the Patriarchal Ages before Moses and the Law , there were Priests as well as Lay people ; and the Primogenitus , or First-born ( as is known and confess'd ) had Imperium and Sacerdotium , was both Prince and Priest. So that the Priests ( in that interval of time ) were certainly married . 3. Under the Mosaical Law , it is as certain ( and confess'd ) that the Priests and Levites were marryed , and the Succession of them continued per Generationem Naturalem . For had their Marriages been prohibited , one Tribe had necessarily perished . 4. In the time of the Gospel the Marriage of the Clergy was * approved by God , and ( as is , and must be confess'd ) was practised by the ‖ Apostles , and Apostolical Clergy . Nor are such Marriages only approved , but to avoid Fornication , expresly * commanded in the Gospel . Continence is Dei donum , a gift which he has not ‖ given to all , ( as is evident and confess'd ) and then Marriage is the ‖ Means appointed by God to preserve Chastity , and where that is forbidden ( as in the Church of Rome it is ) abominable pollutions will be the fatal consequence ; seeing nothing can be more irrational , than to think , that of so many hundred thousands to whom Marriage is forbid in the Church of Rome ( men and women in the strength and flourish of their Age ) all should have ability to live Chastly , neglecting the means which God himself has appointed to preserve it . To conclude this point , This Prohibition of the Clergy to Marry ( had we no other reason ) were sufficient to justifie our Separation from the Roman Communion ; especially , seeing such Prohibition of Marriage is declared to be a mark and indelible * character of Antichrist , from whose Communion we are ‖ commanded to separate . Notes, typically marginal, from the original text Notes for div A30976-e160 * 1 Pet. 3.15 , 16. * Gal. 6.1 . 1 Pet. 3.15 . ‖ That the Church of Rome was Infallible , no man before Gregory the 7 th . ever said . He tells us indeed , in his Dictatus Papae . Num. 22. — Quod Romana Ecclesia nunquam erravit , nec ( Scriptura Teste ) in perpetuum errabit . Vide Edmundi Richerii Historiam Concil . Generalium cap. 13. pag. 197. Edit . Colon. 1680. (a) Sic omnes Apostolicae sedis Sanctiones accipiendae sunt , tanquàm ipsius divini Petri voce firmatae . Can. Sic omnes 2 Dist. 19. (b) Glossa , Quia enim . Dist. 40. cap. 1. (c) Ib. pag. 2113. Ed. Par. 1612. (d) Par. 1612. Greg. 13. jussie editum , & ad exemplar Romanum diligentèr recognitum . (e) Vid. Conc. per. Pet. Crab Tom. 3. p. 717. col . 1. (f) Ib. p. 718. col . 1. (g) See the Jesuits printed Theses defended in their Colledge of Clermont , Decem. 12. 1662. Thes. 19 , 20. (h) See the Declaration of the French Clergy , Mar. 23. 1662. Art. 4. (i) Vid. Concil . Basil. apud Pet. Crab. Tom. 3. p. 146. col . 1. & 148. col . 1. ● . The Pope not Infallible . Vid. Nic. Lyranum in Matth. 16. & Jo. Launoium Epist. part . 8. Ep. 13. pag. 387. & alibi passim , * In the Declaration of the French Clergy Mar. 23. 1662. before cited . ‖ Nonnulli summi Pontifices in Hareses & Errores lapsi leguntur . P. Crab. Concil . Tom. 3. p. 146. col . 1. * Sape contingit . & contingere potest . Papam errare . Ib. p. 148. col . 1. ‖ Notorium Schismaticum , incorrigibilem & pertinacem Haereticum , à fide devium , Concil . Constant. Sess. 14. * In his Book de Vigilio Dormitante . ‖ Synodus 6. in Trullo , Act. 4. & Act. 13. the words in the Council are , Anathema Honorio , &c. He being a Monothelite , and for that Heresie condemn'd . * Vid. Ed. Ricberium in Historia Concil . Generalium , cap. 10. per tot●m : praecipue Num 15 , &c. & Num. 25. Vbi objectionibus Bellarmini & Baronii respondet . * Extat apud Jov ▪ rium Conc. part . 1. p. 84 col . 4. in sine Synodi 6. In editione Conciliorum Romana & Surianae . ‖ In festo Leonie Papae Junii 28. Lection . 3. Sanctus Leo probavit Acta 6. Synodi : Ergo damnationem Honorii baeretici . * Brev. Rom. ex Decreto Concilii Trident. restitutum , à Pio 5. editum , à Clemente 8. & Vrbano 8 recognitum , Antwerp . 1660. ‖ Pradicamus quemadmodum sexta Synodus definivis , detestamurque cum ea , Sergium , Honorium , &c. impios istos Pietatis impugnatores Anathematizamus , Synodus Nicena 2. apud Joverium de Conciliis part . 1. pag. 106. * Conc. Const. in forma professionis fidei à Papa facienda , sess . 39. Ego N. juro me credere & tenerefidem cath . Sanctorum 8. Conc. Niceni , Constant. &c. quinti & sexti , &c. & illam fidem usque ad unum apicem immutilatam servare . Decretum hoc , de Professione fidei à Papa facienda condium est Anno 1417. 2. A General Council not Infallible . * Acts 15.28 . * Acts 15.28 . * Deus ad Ecclesiae suae directionem Sanctis Patribus inspirare dignatus est , &c. Ita Pius 4. in Bulla super forma Juramenti Professionis fidei in Concil . Trident. Ed. Antw. 1633. p. 450. and elsewhere , Synodus à Deo edocta statuit , &c. Vid. Conc. Trident ▪ sess . 13. de eucharistia in decreto , p. 121 , 122. dictae editionis , & sess . 21. de Communione , cap. 1. p. 203. * Luke 2.1 . ‖ This is confess'd , & learnedly proved by a Roman Catholick and Sorbon Doctor , Edmund . Richerius in Hist. Conc. Gen. Ed. Coloniae 1680. cap. 1. Sect. 7. p. 6. And what he says there , he afterwards particularly proves . * Vid Bellarm. de Concil . &c. lib. 1. cap. 6 , 7. ‖ Vid. Longum à Coriolano in compendio Conciliorum Rom. 1624. p. 290 , 291. They will not approve it , because it condemn'd and depos'd 2 Popes , as Schismaticks and Hereticks , and they dare not condemn it , because it made Alexander the 5 th Pope , whom they reckon in the Series of their true Popes ; which he could not be , if that Council had not a just power to make him so . * In their Declaration of March 23. 1662. * Sacramentum tribusperficitur , Materia , Forma , & Intentione Ministri . Quorum si aliquod desit , non perficitur Sacramentum . Apud Binium Concil . Tom. 8. p. 865. col . 1. Ded. Paris . 1636. ‖ Vid. D. Crakanthorp . contr Spalateus . cap. 72. p. 530 , 531. & Christoph. à capite Fontium de neces . correct . Theol. Scholasticae , p. 51.56 . * Concil . Trident. Sess. 7. de Sacramentis , can . 11. ‖ Rituale Rom. Antw. 1652. p. 6. Missale Romanum Antw. 1619. in principio , de defectibus circa Missam . 7. * Si in Eucharistia , Verum Corpus Christi noncontineatur , Adoratio ejus talis erit Idololatria , qualis in orbe terrarum nunquam audita erat . Tolerabilior enim erit eorum error , qui pro Deo colunt statuam auream , vel pannum rubrum in hasta elevatum , quod de Lappis narratur , &c. Ita Costerus in Enchiridio controversiarum , Colon. Agrip. 1587. cap. 8. pag. 301. * Luke 24.48 . Act. 1.8.22 . ‖ Luk. 24.39 . Joh. 20.27 . * Mar. 16.14 . ‖ Act. 1.3 . * 1 John 1.1 . * Rom. 10.17 . * 1 Cor. 1.10 . where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 refers to the mind , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the will , ( for the word does properly and usually signifie the will ) and so , some Learned Papists render the words ; In eadem sententia , & eadem voluntate So Hen. Holden , a Sorbon Dr. on this place , 1 Cor. 1.10 . in his Notes . * Vid Rev 18.4 ‖ Sine Schismate decedere possumus ab iis , qui à veritate deviant — vid. Joverium de Conc. part . 1. p. 203. col . 2. * 1. Reason , From their vilifying and prohibiting the Scripture in any vulgar tongue . ‖ Vid. Fighium , controver . 3 de Ecclesia , p. 71. col . 2. ed. 1542. And there his impious Blaspheming of the Holy Scriptures . * Vid. Indicem Librorum prohibitorum ex Cone . Trident. praescript . &c. & ibi Regul . 4. Si Sacra Biblia vulgari lingua passim sine discrimine permittantur , plus inde ob hominum temeritatem Detrimenti quam Vtilitatis oriri . ‖ The Authors , and their words and Books where they are to be found , are punctually ( and truly ) quoted to my hand , by D. Crakanthorp cont . Archiep. Spalat . c. 13. S. 13. p 61. vid. Azor . Inst. moral . Tom. 1. lib. 8. cap. 26. p. 83. * vid. Regulam 4. Indicis dicti , supra citatam , & observationem ad dictam Regulam , & Bullam Clem. 8. datam Tusc. 17. Oct. 1595. ‖ V. Bull. Greg. 15. dat . Rom. dec . 30. A. 1622. * Libros quomodolibet prohibitos ; So the title of that Bull , and the Bull it self . * Rom 15.4 . 1. The Jewish Church . ‖ Mal. 4.4 . * Deut. 31.11 . ‖ vers . 12.13 . * Neb. 8.2 , 3. ‖ Act. 13.15.27 . * Rom. 3.1 , ● . ‖ Psal. 1.1 , 2. Joshua 1.8 See that signal place to this purpose . Hosea 8.12 . condemning their neglect of reading Scriptures , which God gave them for that end , that they should read and consider them . 2. The Christian Church . * Vid. Brerewood's Inquiries , cap. 26. p. 190 , 191. &c. ed. Lond. 1633. ‖ 2 Tim. 3.15 . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , statim ab Infantia . * James 1.21 . * Acts. 7.11 , 12. ‖ vers . 12. * Joh. 20.31 . ‖ 1 Pet. 2.2 . & Vide Occumenium , Pareum , Estium , Gagnaeium in Locum . * Joh. 5.39 . Joh. 10.25 , 26 , 28. ‖ Col. 4.16 . The Epist. to the Coloss . was writ , An. Christ. 60. * The 1. Epist. to Timothy was writ from Laodicea ( A. Chr. 52. ) Vide subscriptionem , 1. Ep. ad Timoth. * Matth. 28.18 . Phil. 2.8 , 9 , 10. * See that signal Bull of Pope Clement the 9th dated at Rome , An. 1668. in which we have these words , — Debitum Pastoralis Officii , quo Ecclesiae Catholicae per Universum orbem diffusae regimini , divina dispositione presidemus , exigit , ut Sacras Scripturas in puritate illibatas custodire satagamus ▪ &c. In which Bull be condemus the Translation of the vulgar Latin into French , because the differences of the vulgar Latin from the Greek are noted . * See the Bull of Clement the 9 th . cited a little before , where the Pope says — Librum Versionis Gallicanae N. Testamenti , ubicunque impressum , vel imprimendum , tanquam temerarium , damnosum , à vulgata editione deformem , & offendicula simplicium continentem , authoritate Apostolicâ damnamus , & prohibemus : ita ut nemo deinceps , cujuscunque gradûs aut conditionis existat , sub poena Excommunicationis latae sententiae ipso facto incurrendae illum legere , retinere , vendere , aut imprimere , vel imprimi facere audeat vel praesumat ; sed sub eadem poena , quicunque illum habeat , locorum ordinariis , seu inquisitoribus , statim exhibere teneatur : In contrarium facientibus non obstantibus quibuscunque . Bulla data est Romae 20 April . 1668. ‖ Even Kings and Princes are forbid ( under pain of Excommunication ) to have , or read the Scriptures in any vulgar Tongue : contrary to the express command of God , Deut. 17.18 , 19. * Azorius Institutionum moral . Tom. 1. lib. 8. c. 26. quaest . 4. pag. 830 , 831. ‖ And much more in many others , especially in Alphonsus à castro adversus Haereses , lib. 1. c 13. à p. 78. ad p. 83. inclusivè , edit . Paris . 1571. & vide Hosium de Expos Dei verbi , p 640. Where he says , that to permit the people to read the Scripture , est margaritas orcis conculcandas projicere — But tho' Hosius ( and the Pope too ) be of that opinion , that the people are Hogs and Swine — yet S. Peter was of another opinion , 1 Pet. 2.9 . * Rom. 15.4 . * Job . 20.31 . ‖ 2 Tim 3.15 . * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Ib. ‖ In Sacris Scripturis omnis fidei veritas aut plane explicata est , aut Iarcus , sine difficultate exui potest , vid. Joverium , Conciliorum Part. 1 ▪ p. 203. col . 3. * Eusebius Hist. Eccl. i. 8. c. 2. p. 293. edit . Vales. ‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Ib. p. 294. See Nicepborus , lib. 7. cap. 3. * Vid. Indicem librorum prohibitorum Alexandri 7. Romae , 1664. verbo Biblia . Ubi prohibentur Bibliaquocunque vulgari idiomate scripta . ‖ Vide Regulas Indici librorum Prohibitorum Tridentino praesixas , in observatione ad Reg. 4. * Vide dictum Indicem Alexandri 7. Romae , 1664. verbo Alchoran ' ( ubi sic habetur — Alchoranus Mahometis Lingua vulgari ex concessione Inquisitorum liaberi possit . * Vid. Azorium Iust Moralium . Tom. 1. l. 8. c. 26 Quaest. 4. p. 830. Ed. Lugd. 1625. ‖ Pope Innocent the third was made Pope , An. 1198. * Variae haeresium & errorum causae nascerentur , ac infinita propemodum alia incommoda ac mala provenirent , Azorius before cited , p. 830 , 831. ‖ Joh. 20.31 . 2 Tim. 3.15 , 16. Jam. 1.21 . Act. 17.11 , 12. * Quares , quid nomine Fidei catholicae veniat ? Respondeo , Quicquid est in Ecclesia propositum tanquam fide credendum , quales sunt Articuli fidei . & quae sacrae lite●ae tradiderunt ; aut quae generalis Ecclesiae consensus definivit . Azorius Iustit . Moralium . Tom. 1. lib. 8. cap. 26. pag. 828. D. * This new Trent . Creed in most editions of that Council , is placed at the end of that Council ; But in the Edition at Antw. 1633. 't is placed ( and most properly ) Sess. 24. de Reformatione cap. 12. at the end of the chap. pag. 450 , 451. ‖ Haec est Fides Catholica , extra quam non est salus ; contraria omnia & haereses ab Ecclesia damnatus , pariter damno . Ibid. pag. 452. * Which evidently appears by this , that now of later times , the words in their Missals and Breviaries are accented , that their Priests might pronounce the words right , which otherwise , it seems , they could not . So they print Hominis , lest the Priest should call it Hominis . * 1 Cor. 14 16. ‖ 1 Cor. 14. * Vid. Azorium Iust. Moralium Tom. 1. lib. 8. c. 26. p. 830. A B. Sure I am ( to say nothing of Erasmus , Cassander , &c. ) Card. Contarenus in Catechis . Interrogat . ultima , operum , p. 545. and Card. Cajetan on this Chap. confess , that to have publick Prayers in a known tongue ▪ is more for the edification of the People : and after the year 1215 , Innocent the 3 d. is of the same opinion , vid. Concil . Lateran . sub Innocentio 3. Can. 9. * Vid. Concil . Const. Sess. 13. p 65. edit . per Job . Petit. Paris . 1514. ‖ Matt. 26.27 . * Mark 14.23 . ‖ Concil . Const. Sess. 13. Junii 15. 1415. * Licet Christus tost coenam instituerit , & Discipulis sub utraque specie administraverit , hoc tamen non obstante , &c. Where the giving it after Supper is only an indifferent circumstance , no part of the Institution which consists in these words — Drink Ye All of This. ‖ Non dubitandum integrum Christi corpus & sanguinem , tam sub specie vini , veracitèr contineri . Ibid. * Vid. Missale Romanum in Canone missae , & Catechis . Trident. part . 2. cap. 4. de Eucharistia Sect. 19. where the Consecrating of the Bread , is in these words , Hoc est Corpus meum . But the Consecration of the Blood is in many more , and other words ( Sect. 21. ) To wit in these , Hic est calix Sanguinis mei , novi & aeterni Testamenti , mysterium fidei , qui pro vobis . & pro multis effunditur in Remissionem Peccatorum . * 1 Cor. 11.23 . ‖ 1 Cor. 10.16 , 17. and 1 Cor. 11.26 , 27 , 28. * 1 Cor. 10.16 ‖ 1 Cor. 10.2 , 3. * Joh. 6.31 , 32. ‖ 1 Cor. 10.16 , 17 , 21. and 1 Cor. 11.26 , 27 , 28. Vide Lyraenum in dictum ver . 28. * Certum est omnes Clericos & Laicos , viros & mulieres , sub utraque specie Sacra mysteria antiquitus sumpsisse , cum solenni corum celebrationi aderant , & offerebant , & de oblatis participabant : nec hoc negare potest , qui vel levissima rerum Ecclesiasticarum notitia imbutus sit ▪ semper enim & ubique ab Ecclesiae primordiis usque ad ●eculum 12. sub specie Panis & Vini communicarunt fideles . Card. Bona rerum Liturgicarum . lib. 2. c. 18. p. 491 ▪ 492 ▪ Ed. Paris . 1672. vid. ib. in Append. p. 555. in Liturgia Romana Antiqua . * Vid Ordinem Romanum de Officiis Misse apud Cassandrum , operum p. 106. ‖ Ibid. pag. 107. * Ibid. pag. 112 , 113 , 124.132 . vid. G. Watsii adversaria ad Matth. Parisiensem , ad Hist. pag. 9. lin . 6. * Apud Pet. Craeb . Conciliorum , Tom. 2. pag. 843. ‖ Apud Binium Conc. Tom. 7. part . 1. p 507. col . 2. * Consuetudo communicandi sub Altera tantum specie , in Ecclesia Latina coepit esse generalis , non multo ante tempora Concilii Constantiensis . ‖ Et vid. Synodicon Ecclesiae Parisiensis . Paris 1674. p. 6. inter decreta Odonis de Soliaco qui floruit circa An. 1208. quo tempore Laici calicem habebant . * Hoc non obstante , Canonum Authorit●s laudabilis , & approbata consuetudo Ecclesiae , servat & servavit , &c. Sess. 13. ‖ Vnde cum bujusmodi consuetudo ab Ecclesia & Sanctis Patribus rationabilitèr introducta , & diutissimè observata sit , habenda est pro Lege , &c. Concilium Constan. Ibid. Sess. 13. * See the History of the Council of Trent , by Father Paul of Venice , sub Pio 4. ad An. 1561. p. 458. of the Translation , ( if you have not the Original ) and pag. 459. * Matt. 26.27 . ‖ Mark 14.23 . * Vid. Concil . Trident. S●ss . 22. de Reformat . cap. 11. Where the Council refers it to the Pope , to consider of the restitution of the Cup to the Laity ; who has been considering above 120. years , and as yet nothing done , to give satisfaction to the Church . ‖ Act. 4.19 . à Matrimonio Clericis prohibito . * Matth. Par. ad An. 1074. p. 9. in edit . Watsii , Iste Papa ( Gregorius 7. ) in Synodo Generali Sacerdotes Uxoratos à divino officio removit , & Laicis missas eorum audire interdixit . Novo exemplo , & ut multis visum est . Inconsiderato judicio , contra Sanctorum Patrum sententiam . Ex qua re , tam grave oritur scandalum , ut nullius haeresis tempore Sancta Ecclesia graviori schismate sit discissa . ‖ Vid. Tho. Walsingham Hypodig . Neustria ad An. 1074. p. 439. * V. Hist. Conc. Trid. sub Plo 4. versionis Angl. p. 677. ad Ann. 1563. ‖ Conc. Triden . Sess. 24. de Sacramento Matrimonti , in Initio can . 9. * Is qui non habet uxorem , & pro uxore Concubinam habet , à communione non repellatur ; si una concubina sit contentus , Can. Is qui 4. Diss. 34. ‖ Sacerdos si fornicetur , aut domi concubinam foveat , tametsi gravi Sacrilegio se obstringat , gravius tamen peccat , si contrabat matrimonium . Cost . in Euch. c. 15. propos . 9. p. 459. * 1 Cor. 7.2 , 9. ‖ 1 Cor. 9.5 . * Antiquissimis Ecclesiae temporibus , viventibus adhuc Apostolis , & post Apostoles aliquot adbuc annis admissi sunt ad sacros ordines viri conjugati . Costerus Jesuita in Euch. c. 15. propos . 2. p. 448. ed. Col. 1587. * Per Sacramenta omnis vera justitia vel incipit , vel coepta augetur , vel amissa reparatur . Conc. Trid. Sess 7. de Sacramentis in Prooemio , & Can. 6.7 . ‖ Si quis dixerit Matrimonium non esse verè Sacramentum à Christo institutum , neque gratiam conferre , Anathema sit . Conc. Trid. Sess. 24. de Matrim . Can. 1. * Sacramenta novae legis gratiam quam significant omnibus , obicem non ponentibus conserunt . Conc. Trid. Sess. 7. in Decreto de Sacram . Can. 6. ‖ See the Hist. of the Council of Trent . ad An. 1563. * See the said Hist. ad dictum An. 1563. pag. 680. * The Popish Bishops take an oath of absolute Allegiance to the Pope . Vide Pontif. Rom ▪ de Consec . Episc. p. 57. edit . Romae Anno 1611. ‖ So the Spanish and Portugal Indices Librorum prohibit ▪ command this Proposition to be blotted out of the Index of Chrysostome . * Their own sober Authors sadly complain of the impure lives of their unmarried Clergy ; Hanis . Orichovius in oratione de coelibatu pag. 108 , 110 , 189. hath these words — Scorta Romae quotannis tributa conferunt ; earum censum cum anno abhinc sexto ageret Praefectus Lictorum urbis , censa sunt merotricum capitae 55000. and Honorius Augustodunensis , Dialogo de praedestinat . & libero arbitrio , ait , Verte te ad Clerum , videbis in eis bestiae tentorium , Sacerdotium per Immunditiam polluunt . Contemplare Monachorum conciliabula , immunditiae sordibus computrescunt , Aspice habitacula monialium : hae à tenera aetate impudicitiam discant , &c. But you may see this , and much more in Dr. Crakanthorp's Logick , de Syllogismo probabili , cap. 12. Sect. 18 p. 414 , 415. edit . London , Anno 1641. * 1 Tim. 3.2 . 4.12 . Titus 1.5 , 6. ‖ 1 Cor. 9.5 . * 1 Cor. 7.2 , 9. ‖ 1 Cor. 7.9 . ‖ 1 Cor. 7.9 . * 1 Tim. 4.13 . ‖ Rev. 18.4 .