CHAP. I. That in matters of Religion there is little gotten by Disputation, and that for the avoiding this inconve­nience there ought to be an Agree­ment concerning some Principles on both sides.

1. IN Contests which do arise in matters of Religion between the Defenders of Truth and Falsity, and are maintained either by word of [Page 2]mouth, or writing, it falls out much otherwise than it doth in those more bloody Wars which are managed by the Swords of State and State, Prince and Prince. For in these, for the most part, after a Battel or two, the Victory is clear on one side or other, and Peace is again esta­blished by the defeat of him who finds himself in a necessity of yiel­ding to the fate of War, and recei­ving the Law from the Conquering Party. But in that other, the obsti­nate Champion of Errour even after many foils and defeat, does still scorn to yield the victory. Nay, I dare be bold to say, he will not fail to become more violent and in­solent than ever; because he is re­solved never to want the boldness to speak as high and as loud as Truth it self, and to make himself be­leeve he has right to challenge the victory on his side, which perchance may appear, at least, doubtful to the greatest part of the hearers in the heat and noise of Disputation.

I speak not this as disowning that proceeding by way of disputation to have been of great advantage to [Page 3]the Church of God against Hereticks by a mature discussing those passa­ges of Holy Writ which have made against them: The ancient Fa­thers made happy use of it, with such vigour and success, as gained them those noble Victories, of which they have left us glorious Trophies in those great Works of theirs. Yet this I think we may be bold to affirm, that this Method, be it never so excellent in it self, is not apt to produce those happy ef­fects in all persons universally; it being more proper for the Learned only. And as it happens that the learn­ing of the Adversaries of Truth is alwayes accompanied with blindness and obstinacy (the proper effects of that Pride which gives it its pre­tended magnitude) so comes it to pass, that that light which arises from Dispute, proves very uneffe­ctual in order to a reducing of them; and serves, for the most part, onely to make the breach wider, and to maintain the unhappy war, so as to render it more lasting, and in a man­ner endless.

2. Hence it was that Tertullian [Page 4]who, in some of his greatest Works, undertook some certain Hereticks with as much strength of Wit and Reason as is possible; yet at another time, and in another Work of his, he charges the whole body of them together in another way which he esteemed more universally satisfa­ctory, and by which he thought he might with greater ease, and with more quiet and less trouble, reduce the most rebellious spirits that were. According to this Method of his, [...]e will not that you enter into Dis­pute with them, nor that you set upon them with Scripture. l. de prae­sc. c. 1 [...]. For ei­ther they pervert it (sayes he) in­to some sense which may appear more favourable to them; In ipso con­gressu fir­mos quidem fatigant, in­si mos capi­unt, medios cum scrupulo [...]immittunt c. 15. or they add, or take away at their pleasure. Some passages they alledge in a quite contrary sense, and you are obliged to a defence; and yet they will not stick to affirm, with as much confi­dence as you, that they have the true meaning on their side. From hence it is, that you gain little up­on them in these kinds of encoun­ters: wherein after you have tired-out the more learned, they take [Page 5]too frequently, with the weaker sort, and alwayes leave in the minds of the vulgar something of doubt and uncertainty, which causes in them much perplexity.

Nay, it hath fallen our more than once, that that very Person for whose satisfaction a Conference hath been held, or a Treatise written, perceiving no great advantage gotten by the contest, has found himself in a wavering condition, and has thought it not unreasonable to begin to call that now in question, of which before he made no doubt at all.

This is the very reason why this Learned man concludes, Ergo non ad Scripturas provoc an­dum, nec in his constitu­endum est certamen in quibus aut nulla, a ut incerta vi­ctoria est, aut par in­certae. c. 18. that the most compendious, and the most ready way for the reducing such kind of spirits into peace and unity, is not that way which, for the most part, obliges them to a continuance of the war, lest they might seem to be overcome. I mean the way of dis­pute, and even that which is mana­ged with holy Scripture: and that we ought not lightly to ingage in those wayes or matters, where there is little to be gotten, and [Page 6]where the victory appears uncertain and doubtful, at least to those of meaner capacities, even then, when to the wiser sort it appears most evi­dent on the sounder parties side.

3. This is that which makes him lay aside all particular Controversies concerning all those Points which may be made out by Scripture; and in that his excellent Book of Pre­scriptions, to fall upon certain gene­rall Maxims, which are Rules and Principles agreed upon on all sides, and from whence certain necessary Consequences, which do most na­turally flow from them, being well applied, do convince all men of reasonable understandings without either dispute or reply; and by a shorter and more certain way, lead them sweetly to a desired unity.

He calls them Prescriptions, Adversus haereticos, etiam fine retractatu verborum revincendos. l. 1. contra marc. ma­king use, according to his Custom, of a term of Law, in the know­ledge whereof he had arrived to great perfection. And he makes use particularly of this Term, upon this occasion, because it imports in its signification, a total defeat and solid conviction of Falsitie, accor­ding [Page 7]to such certain and undeniable Principles of which there has been a constant Possession in all Ages, by a due application whereof it is easy to discover and overthrow Errour, without being obliged to attacque it with any other weapon, or refu­ting it by particular Arguments.

4. This seems to me the onely means to end this endless war: to bring the business home to some one of those Principles which are re­ceived and allowed of on both sides, and are agreed upon as the chief Rule for deciding all our differences. Without this, we shall hardly ever come to any agreement: if we be still resolved to dispute the business as it is easie to do, when a resolu­tion is already taken never to yield. And after tedious contests, and large Volumes, which almost equally tire the patience of both Authours and Readers, the businesse will be found alwayes in the same posture it was at first in.

As the Better side has reason to take satisfaction in the advantage ob­tained: Haec utique & ipsi ha­bent in nos retorquere, necesse est e­nim & illos dicere à no­bis potiùs a­dulteria Scriptura­rum & ex­positionum mendacia in­ierri, qui pro­inde sibi de­fendant ve­ritatem. c. 18. so the Weaker (sayes Ter­tullian) attributes unto it self the [Page 8]self-same glory and would fain seem Victorious. That which the one does most justly, in exprobating fal­sity and error unto his adversary, the other thinks most unjustly done, and declares against it. Truth, which onely has reason to use such language, finds it self set upon a­fresh, even after Victory. And Falsity, which disguises it self un­der the name of Verity, and usurps her right, begins again to fight her at her own weapon, uttering the same or like reproaches against her.

5. This appears particularly in the proceeding of the Protestant Party, who, upon their separation from us, thought good to accuse us of error and novelty. It is scarce to be be­lieved how many set Disputations and Conferences there have been held both in publick and in private; concerning Points in question be­tween us. The number of those Volumes which have been writ con­cerning those subjects, would serve to fill whole Liberaries. What pas­sages have not Bellarmin, Perron, Coëf­feteau, Richelieu, and those other famous Defenders of the Faith, [Page 9]drawn out of the Holy Scriptures; and Antient Fathers, together with all the Reasons and Arguments which might serve to place Truth again in its proper light, and restore unto it the lustre which Falsity had endeavoured to rob her of? I speak this, because for my own part, I am highly satisfied, that the Proofs which these great men have made use of, are of very great force, and their Discourses very exact and convin­cing; and that the Church of God owes much unto them for their La­bour and industrie in maintaining her just Decrees.

I will add something more yet. I have so good an opinion of the na­tural ingenuity and honesty of ma­ny of the most sincere and witty persons of the Protestant party them­selves (for there are certainly, in other respects, many excellent Wits and Learned men amongst them) that they will not make much diffi­culty to own candidly and plainly, that the Reasons and Places which our Doctors have alledged against their Tenets, have put them very much to it, and that they have [Page 10]need enough of all their Wit, all their shifts, and all their industry to disengage themselves, in some hand­some appearance at least, from such streights as those troublesom passages have brought them into.

And now as I have taken the freedom to desire them to deal can­didly with me, so is it my intenti­on to be plain and sincere with them; and to yield so far unto them, as ingeniously to acknowledge, that in those Answers of theirs, with which, in their turns, they have fil­led large Volumes, they are not without some colourable pretence, and that they carry such an appea­rance of Reason with them, as may easily seduce the understandings of those who are not well versed in dis­putes of this nature. Nay, I will own farther, that some passages out of Scripture, and the Holy Fathers; alledged by them against us, have obliged us to make use of the fa­moufest Wits amongst us, to find a clear and natural sense in the explica­tion of them, which has not been of ef­ficacy to hinder these men from ma­king their Replyes, that they may still [Page 11]still seem to bear up handsomly, in case they remain absolutely resolved not to yield to the known Truth, which may indeed convince their understandings, but not compel nor force their wills.

Thus after so many assaults, and so many repulses; after so many brave Works of those great men, who have: so gallantly maintained the Churches cause, our adversaries will not at all own themselves weak­ned thereby. And as they make them­selves believe they have, by their An­swers, sufficiently guarded themselves from our blows; and that on the other side, they seem to please themselves with those which in their turn, they imagine they have given us; if they do not pretend to the honour of a victory; neither do they hold themselves ob­liged to yield it unto us. And thus the war continues still: since at the con­clusion of all our Disputes, they find themselves still in a condition to rally their forces, to begin the battel again, & resolutely to deny what we main­tain, and to maintain what we deny.

6. This is clearly to be seen in that famous Contest which has late­ly [Page 12]made so much noise in the world by occasion of a Book written con­cerning The perpetuity of the Faith of the Catholick Church, in the mat­ter of the Holy Eucharist. The Au­thor of the said Book, and of in Defence has, in three several Works, proposed his reasons why it seem [...] impossible that that change of Belee [...] in point of the most Blessed Sacra­ment should have happened, as they are pleased to charge us: chiefly be­cause this could not have been done without some remarkable oppositi­on, which notwithstanding we find not at all to have been made in any Age of the Church, until the ap­pearing of the Sacramentaries. On the contrary he makes it appear, that in those very dayes, in which this strange Innovation is pretended to have been brought into the world, this Doctrine of ours was the com­mon belief of the whole Church, which had also received it from for­mer Ages. And this he shews by an exact inquiry into all the Authors of the Greek and Latine Church, who lived from the seventh unto the tenth Age (which is the time they [Page 13]allot for this their pretended altera­tion) and by the general consent of all the Eastern Churches from that time unto this very day.

Mr. Claude, who was the man ingaged himself from the beginning in this quarrel, resolved, in point of honour, to maintain it to the very last. And instead of yielding unto the Truth, as it would have been honourable enough for him to have done, and to have given that glory unto God which is his due, chose ra­ther to keep up that credit which he had gotten amongst his own party, by publishing there other Treatises, in which, to give him his due, he has done as much as Wit could do in pursuit of his Resolution to de­fend a very bad Cause for his own and his parties reputation: For he pretends to prove, by more Reasons than one, which he advances with a great deal of freedome and fair shew (such as is apt enough to sur­prise a man at first sight) that that alteration or change was not at all impossible. Nay, he endeavours to lay down the very manner how this came to pass; at such time as the [Page 14]Church was fallen off from that par­ticular and distinct knowledge of the truth of this great Mystery, into a more confused and general belief o [...] it, which reflected not precisely up­on either Real Presence or Absence it was easy to fall upon the belief o [...] such things as some did add by way of illustrating the matter, and which they were apt to present, and the World insensibly to receive, under the specious pretence of rendring the Mystery more full of Maje­sty.

And being far from giving ground upon the last piece which was set out against him, and upon which a finall Conclusion of the difference was to be hoped, it is commonly reported, that he is already prepa­red to enter again into the List with more earnestness and resolution the [...] ever; to the end to maintain a Dis­pute, in the which being resolved to come to no agreement with his Adversary, he opposes him in every petty matter and circumstance. For making use of all the Art and Subtil­ty humane Wit affords (which is alwayes sufficiently furnished with [Page 15]some ground or other for contradi­ction) and tracing him in all those by-wayes which the nature of dis­putation leads into, he every where opposes him, and, by a necessary se­quel, obliges him to a Contest con­cerning the matters of fact which he alledges, concerning the Authors he cites, concerning their interests, concerning their inclinations, con­cerning their intrigues, concerning the meaning of their expressions, concerning the force of his and their reasons, concerning the Critical and Historical part. In a word, he runs quite counter to him in every thing; denying (as Tertullian has it) what­soever his Adversary maintains, and maintaining whatever he denies. So true it is, that it being once re­solved never to yield in such kind of encounters, there will never be wanting matter for Dispute, even in such things which otherwise appear evident and uncontroulable.

7. I make no doubt but the Au­thor of that Learned Work of the Peertuity, &c. will be able to stand his ground, and to gain yet more, with the same advantage which so good a [Page 16]Cause has hitherto afforded him. The honour which is gotten by the happy mannaging such Disputes is proper for those Great Wits and a­ble Persons, who take such pains, chiefly for the satisfaction of those who have the same abilities. For this cause, as I dare not pretend to make one of that number; having no other aim in this my undertaking but to serve those who hold not themselves obliged to give them­selves the trouble of tedious searches into Greek and Latine Authors, so do I willingly and entirely give up that Honour unto him, and make choice rather of another Method, inferiour indeed in outward shew, but much more easy, and, at the least, full as profitable, if I ob­tain the end of my endeavours, which is, to reduce Protestants by a sweeter way and without contest.

For this end it will be necessary, as we have already infin [...]ated, that we make choice of some Rule which is out of Contest between us, of some fixed settled Points, of some certain Principles which are equally agreed upon by both Parties, and [Page 17]from whence by necessary consequence, clear and certain Conclusions are de­duceable, which may unite all under­standings in the same Belief concerning this great Mystery.

To this end I am resolved to alledge nothing in this little Treatise, but what Monsieur Claude himself is pleased to grant us, and what our Adversaries themselves make use of for the esta­blishing their Pretenses. Although ab­solutely speaking (as I touched before) there is not any thing which is not sub­ject to exceptions, cavils, and conten­tious wranglings even in things them­selves most evident, supposing a resolu­tion obstinately to defend a Party enga­ged for, and that it comes to be accoun­ted a Point of Honour so to do. I cannot, for all that, understand how that can again be questioned, which has once been granted, and of which they have, at another time, endea­voured to make their own advantage. So that I cannot well fear lest the Prin­ciple which I shall advance, should fall under that contest, which I so industri­ously endeavour to eschew. For in the establishing of it, and in applying of it [Page 18]to our present subject, my special care shall be to lay aside all those general Pleas, which may be subject to Con­test, and to make use of none but such as Monsieur Claude himself, and his Friends shall please to furnish me with, and grant me of their own ac­cords.

8. And to oblige my self to perform it with as much clarity and brevity with­al, as may possibly be, I will con­clude the matter in these three Chap­ters following.

In the first I will propose the Max­ime or Principle which I intend to make use of, and I will establish it by the Doctrine and proceedings of Pro­restants themselves.

In the second I will apply it, accor­ding to their own Rules, unto the Subject of the Holy Eucharist.

And in the last I will draw those Consequences, which their own a­greed-upon Principles do afford me.

This seems to me the way to force our Adversaries (but sweetly) to return of themselves, to that True Faith, from which a miserable Schisme has unfortunately separated them, by [Page 19]the revolt of their Fore-fathers.

I am not able to say what success I am like to have in so noble an enter­prise. My endeavours, nevertheless, shall not be wanting to effect it, upon those terms which I have prefixed un­to my self. At least I intend to secure this advantage; that having no litigious quarrel with these Gentlemen, if I prove not so fortunate as to perswade them into, and reduce them to the o­bedience of the Holy Church, I will, not, at least, interrupt that civil peace and sociable tranquillity we all enjoy under the Authority of the Lawes of our Gracious King, by words and ex­pressions which are apt sometimes to sound too loud and bite too sharply. I will not, I say, have my part in those too bitter and violent expressions, which the earnestness of Disputation is natu­rally apt to lead a man [...]to, unless more than ordinary care be used for the checking them. Finally, I will avoid the bitterness of those obstinate Con­tests which are too frequently accom­panied with that sharpness and animo­sity, which is not at all beseeming the civil breeding of this Age; nor this hap­py [Page 20]time of Peace, when all our wor [...] ought to carry a certain sweetness with them, which may inspire and main­tain Union and Charity.

CHAP. II. The settling of this general Maxime: That that Church in which are found the two Parties concern'd has ever had the Power to determine all differences, and to declare that as matter of Faith which before there was no obligation to believe. And that we are bound to acquiesce unto her decisions, under the penalty of being Schismaticks.

1. THere is not any one to be sound among those, who bear the name of Christians, who does not ac­knowledge that there is in the World a True Church, which our Lord Jesus has purchased with the price of his own most pretious Blood. All those [Page 21]who have separated themselves from us into so many several Sects, decla­ring that their Congregation is the Com­pany of the Faithful, and the Church of God, agree at least in this, that they hold for certain, that there is a True Church of Jesus Christ, wheresoever it is to be found.

It is moreover evident, that those who first entred into Dispute concer­ning matters of Faith, were all of the same Church; which Church before it did declare for either side of the Dis­senters, and before one Party made a separation, was the onely then in be­ing, and consequently the True Church.

Now of this Church it is I intend to speak: and I averr, that all general­ly do agree, that She is endowed with Soveraign Authority to define and pro­pose that as matter of Faith, which, ante­cedently to her definition, no body per­chance was obliged to accept under that notion.

2. For proof of this Verity, which is not well to be denied, when understood, this reflexion is to be made out of St. Paul to the Romans, Chap. [Page 22]10: That to be bound to believe a thing as a Point of Faith, it is not suf­ficient that it be contained in the Word of God, which is the onely motive of divine Faith, but it is also necessary that we know it, and that we know it as revealed by God. For to know it, we must hear of it; and for this pur­pose (regularly speaking) it is neces­sary that it be proposed by full Autho­rity, as the formal words of the blessed Apostle do clearly import.

How shall they believe him whom they have not heard? Quomodo credent in quem non audierunt? Quomodo autem audi­ent sine prae­dicante? Quomodo autem prae­dicabunt nisi mittantur? Rom. 10. v. 14, 15. Ergo fides ex auditu, au­ditus autem per verbum Christi. v. 17. and how shall they hear without a Preacher? but how shall they Preach, unless they be sent? There is then no obligation to believe without a previous instruction concerning an A [...]icle of Faith; and this cannot be without the Ministry of those who are appointed by the Church to propose her Doctrine, which Doctrine is grounded upon the Word of God. In regard of this the Apostle concludes in this man­ner; Faith then is by hearing, and hear­ing is by the Word of Christ. Thus for there is no difference betwixt us and Protestants. They do own, that for this end, it is necessary there should be [Page 23]in the Church, Ministers of the Word of God, for the proposing, by her Au­thority, that which is contained in the Divine Word. They profess, that in order to an obligation of believing any particular point, it is necessary that it be distinctly known, and that it be pro­posed by some legal Authority to be believed.

3. This notwithstanding, there are many things which we are now obliged to believe, which were not distinctly known at some other time, nor propo­sed unto the Faithful as Points belong­ing to Faith, and necessarily to be be­lieved by them. It is a verity which no Protestant, I think, will make dif­ficulty in.

For I will now grant them, that all that we are to believe is contained in the Word of God, which we have re­ceived in the Holy Scriptures, and which the blessed Apostles have delivered un­to us, having first received it of their Divine Master Christ Jesus. But I hope also they will not stick to acknowledge, that all that is comprehended in Holy Writ, whether in the sence of the Let­ter, or in the Consequences which are [Page 24]included in those Divine Principles, has not alwayes been clearly and distinct­ly known by all persons, and at all times. It is an admirable sure of Tapistry wrought by the hand of God himself, and framed with a most rare variety of gracefull figures, both for or­nament and instruction of his Church; but it was not, from the beginning, ex­posed all at once to view. These rare lineaments did not appear but by de­grees, as it happened that the pieces were unfolded one after another upon occasions.

It is a most fertile soil which bears a marvellous variety of sweet flowers, of excellent fruit, and all sorts of choice grain in its bowells, as it were inclosed or shut up in the seeds, which are as so many Treasures with which she is in­riched: but you must expect till the Sun disclose and discover them, making them spring and bud forth one after a not her according to their sundry sea­sons, to the end that they may beauti­fie and adorne the Fields and Gardens.

It is a Heaven decked with an infi­nit variety of glittering Stars, which sparkle and make a kind of day in spight [Page 25]of the darkness of night; but their glory does then only appear, when the Moon has by little and little dissipated the vapours and clouds which keep them from our sight.

Even so the Word of God compre­hends all vetities belonging to Faith. But those fair flowers did not appear, those bright Stars did not shine to the eyes of Christians, until the light of the Holy Ghost illuminating his Church, did; by it self, upon occasion, dissipate those clouds which hid those glorious Stars from our eyes: or disclosed and brought to light those rare flowers, by consequences drawn out of certain Prin­ciples, in which they before remained, as it were, shut up or inclosed.

4. Omnia quae audivi a Pa­tre meo, nota feci vobis. Joh. 15. This is manifest in the Apostles themselves. The Son of God, their blessed Master, in the 15th of S. Iohn tells them, that he had made known unto them, whatsoever he had learn'd of his heavenly Father. It is then clear and certain that he instructed them in all those Truths which are of Faith in that his Church, which he intended to raise and establish by their means and Ministry. For it is not to be denied [Page 26]but that he had learned them of his E­ternal Father. And yet notwithstand­ing in the last of St. Luke, Aperuit illis sensum ut in­telligerent Scripturas. Luc. ult. Adhuc mul­ta habe [...] vo­bis dicere, quae non po­testis portare modò. Spiritus San­ctus docebit vos omnem veritatem. John 16. after his Re­surrection, we find him opening their understandings, that they might be ca­pable of the sence of Holy Scriptures, and consequently of the mysteries of Faith which are comprised therein. Nay he further tells them, that he had yet many things to say unto them, of which they were not yet capable. And he adds, for their comfort, that, that Holy Ghost whom he would send shortly un­to them, should instruct them in all mat­ters of Truth. How, I pray, is th [...] made good? That he had told them all, and yet that there remained much to be told; and that the Holy Ghost should tell them for him, teaching and instru­cting them in all matters of Truth▪ How shall we make this out? I think it may be done with a great deal of ease. The meaning is, that he told them all [...] general, and in certain Principles of h [...] Gospel which comprehend all, and the Holy Ghost instructed them clearly and distinctly concerning the sence an [...] meaning of those Principles, and in the Consequences which they were to draw [Page 27]from those Principles, of which they were ignorant before. And for this cause it is that the Holy Ghost is by Holy Fathers' called the Interpreter or Voyce of the Son; Basil, 5. cont. Eunom. Marc Vict. 3. cont. Ari [...] because an Inter­preter speaks nothing of himself, but onely sets forth what is contained in the Text, the sence whereof his taske is to explain, and by a new light to discover those hidden verities which may be drawn from it: So the Holy Ghost taught the Apostles no new things nor spoke of himself, as instructing them in a new Doctrine, but did only make them understand distinctly and in particular such things as our 'blessed Saviour had told them in general terms, Non enim lo­quetur a se­metipso, sed quaecunque audierit lo­quetur. John 16. and laid open unto them those verities which before lay undiscovered under those Principles from whence he de­duced them by such Consequences as he made them capable of, and by an accession of new sight which before was not in them.

We may add yet more; that it can­not be with truth said, that the Apo­s [...]es, even after the coming of the Ho­ly Ghost, had, from the beginning, all that clear and discerning knowledge of [Page 28]all those Truths which they came to know afterwards in their particular cir­cumstances, and upon emergent occur­rences, unto which he deferred their more ample instruction.

For in the Acts of the Apostles we see S. Peter question'd whether the Gos­pel were to be Preached to the Gen­tiles. Ch. 10. In veritate comperi, quia non est perso­narum accep­tor Deus. Visam est spiritui san­ct [...] & nobis. Acts 15. He was instructed from heaven that that favour was for the whole world, and he learn'd that God, who has no re­gard to persons, nor qualities, no [...] Countries, made no distinction, as [...] that Blessing, between Jews and Pagan [...]. We know also how the Apostles met a [...] Hierusalem to deliberate concerning th [...] observation of the Ceremonies of th [...] Law, and that they decreed, by the in­spiration of the Holy Ghost, that the [...] was no farther obligation to observe them, Quis enim integrae men­tis credere potest aliquid eos ignorasse, quos magi­stros Domi­nus dedit. &c. de Prae­script. c. 22. excepting only some very few particulars.

5. Notwithstanding I do frankly [...] ­vouch (what Protestants, with Tertul­lian against some antient Hereticks, [...] maintain) that at what time soeve [...] the Apostles did receive the full perfect on of that knowledge which they had o [...] Christian Verities, it was complete [...] [Page 29]to all things belonging to Faith, and that we know not, nor ever shall know any thing in those matters which they knew not better than we, they being the Masters appointed by our blessed Saviour, State ac te­nete traditio­nes quas di­dicistis five per sermonem five per epi­stolam. 2 Thess. 2. Si in alique nutaverit ve­ritas ad ori­ginem Evan­gelicam & Apostolicam Traditionem revertamur. Cypr. Ep. 74 Edit. Pamel. Item Aug. l. 5. de bapt. cont. Dona­tist. A Castro verbo Apost. heres. 1. through whose means the World was to receive his Celestial Do­ctrine. I do consequently acknowledge that they did leave it to their Disciples either in Writing or by word of Mouth, and that when it happens that men are divided in their opinions, and doubt of the truth of this or that, they ought to have recourse to The Rule, to the Head or Fountain, which is that Word of God which we have in holy Scri­ptures, and which the Apostles have left us by their Disciples, having first received it of Christ Jesus their blessed Master. Our Divines will easily agree with them in all these Points, and they will condemn of Error and temerity, and of folly also if they please, the Abbot Ioachim and that other Visiona­ry, who were so bold as to say, that the Apostles themselves did not com­prehend the Spiritual sense of the Go­spel; the true understanding whereof was reserved for some others in after [Page 30]times. Such extravagancies as these can not be rejected by them with more e [...] ­gerness than they are by our Doctor also.

This notwithstanding, it may ve [...] well be, that the Apostles did not d [...] ­late themselves in the explication o [...] their Doctrine so fully as it was after­wards thought fitting to do; and th [...] they did not judge it necessary to de­scend to all those particulars, which were examined and looked into in afte [...] Ages. It was possible also, that the would not deduce all those particular sequels, which were inclosed or shut up as it were, in those Principles which they established; as our Blessed Saviour himself had formerly dealt with the [...]

It is also very likely, that men, o [...] of neglect, not preserving those Truth in memory, as they ought to have done they came insensibly to [...]e forgotten or, that whilest mens wits were whol­ly taken up in defending some part o [...] them against Hereticks who opposed them, there was not so much heed ta­ken of those others which never came into Controversy. However it be, this i [...] indubitably certain, that a time there [Page 31]was, when many things were not clear­ly and distinctly known▪ nor, at such time, obligatory, as to exercise of faith, which the Church has since placed in the number of such things as are belong­ing to Faith.

For although all those things were comprehended in Holy Scripture, and in the Doctrine of the Apostles, and that there alwayes were the same marks to know them by, yet they were not alwayes taken notice of, with the same reflexion or application. But now, by occasion of Disputes which have been raised at certain times, the Church having set her self to examine them legally and according to form, and making reflexions upon Holy Scripture, and looking back upon the neighbouring times of the Apostles, ma­king up by such means unto the Foun­tain-head of true Apostolical Traditi­on; she has declared them to be of faith; as being exactly conformable to the Rule of Belief.

6. I do not say therefore (what some haply of our Adversaries, who are not so well acquainted with our Tenets, may reproach me with) that the Church [Page 32]has Authority to frame new Articles of Faith. No, I do acknowledge, to­gether with them, that she cannot act but according to Rule, which is the ho­ly Scripture, and Tradition truely and purely Apostolical, from which also we have received the holy Scripture it self. She holds forth nothing new, but she proposes unto us Antiquity which we knew not before. She does not give new birth to Scars which never were before, but she makes them appear in that Instre, which formerly they had done by removing those clouds which did obscure them. She has no new re­velations, she onely publishes those an­tient ones of which we had no forme [...] assurance. Finally, she settles no other Principles, but such as she receive [...] from our Saviour himself, out of which by force of her light, and certain neces­sary sequels, she makes those Veritie [...] appear, which were hidden, and, as [...] were, Quid est De­positum? Id est quod tibi creditum est, non à te inventum: quod accepti­sti, non quod excogitasti [...] rem non in­genii sed do­ctrinae non usurpationi [...] privatae publicae tra­ditionis; rem ad te per­ductam, non a te prola­tam; in quae [...]on author debes esse, sed custos, non institu­ [...]or sed secta­tor, non du­cens sed se­quens Comment. 1. c. 27. shut up in those Principles.

This is that which Vincentius Lirine [...] sis expresses most admirably, applying unto the Church those words of S. Pa [...] to his Disciple Timothy: Depositum c [...] ­stodi, keep well the Depositum which [...] [Page 33]put into your hands. What is the mean­ing of this Depositum (saith he) speak­ing of matters of Faith? It is that which you are intrusted with; and, by no means, that which your self have invented: It is that which you have received; and in no wise that which your self have found out: it is not the result of your own Wit or understanding, but it is what you learn from that Do­ctrine which has been taught you. It is not any thing which you have esta­blished in the World by your own pri­vate Authority; it is a Point of Tradi­tion which you have been trusted with for the publick good. It is a Treasure of which there was no Mine in your own Land. You are not the Author, [...]ut the conserver of this Doctrine. You are not here the Guide, but he that fol­lows the Guide. What Guide? The Word of God, which is this Guide, and the true Rule of Holy Church. Vald. l. 2. Doct. fid. c. 22. Can. l. 2. de Com. 7. à castro, de Lu [...] go valentia & alii. Videte quid dicat, qui fuerunt. non qui sunt, ut exceptis A­postolis quodcunque aliud postèa dicetur, ab­scindatur. Hier. in Ps. 86.

All our Divines agree in this Doctrine, which they have taken from the Holy Fathers. For St. Hierome has it in ex­ [...]ess terms upon the 86. Psalm, where he Psalmist sayes, that Our Lord will de­lare in Scriptures of People and of Prinoes [Page 34]and of those that have been in her. He makes use (sayes St. Hierome) of a word signifying time past, fuerunt, that have been, because we are to hold no­thing for a Point of Faith in the Church, but what we find in the Prophers and in the Apostles, who are the Princes of the Church. And upon this ground it is, that St. Irenaeus, and after him S. Augustine, saith, That the faith of our Ancestors and ours, makes but one and the same Faith; because we believe no­thing at this day, which was not con­tained in the whole Body of their Faith.

The Church therefore never did make, Iren. l. 3. c. 2 & lib. 4. c. 13 Aug. Ep. 51, and undoubtedly never will make any new Articles of Faith, since it is not in her power to define any thing, but according to the Word of God, which she is alwayes to consult with, as with her Oracle, and the Rule she is bound to follow. But there is no question al­so, but upon occasion of Differences, from time to time, in mens judgements and opinions, she has often declared for, and defined some Points, which were, antecedently, by some questioned and that without offence; or at least [Page 35]were not known before, unless in gene­ral and by a confused kind of knowledge. There is nothing more certain nor more common in the History of the Church and Councils; where you shall fre­quently see defined, and proposed, as a Point or Principle of Faith, that which, before Conte [...]s did arise, and before that violent clashing which has been in almost every Age of the Church about some Point or other in Controversy, which was neither defined, nor so much as thought of. For example, concer­ning the authentickness of some Cano­nical Books; concerning the validity of Baptisme conferred by Hereticks: con­cerning one or two Wills and operati­ons in our Blessed Saviour: concerning the Procession of the Holy Ghost, and many such like. All which are now no more to be called in question, although before the definition of the Church, it might have been done without of­fence.

For if it be true, that it belongs un­to her to propose that as matter of Faith, which was not before distin­ctly known or taken under that notion, as we have now made out; it must [Page 36]needs be our duty and obligation to receive it as such, and consequently to believe it, if we intend not to make our selves guilty of infidelity, in recei­ving what appertains to Faith.

7. In this we and the Protestants are well enough agreed. For the force and strength of Mr. Claudes laborious piece lyes chiefly in that ground-work which he has laid with a great deal of Art and skill, where he treats of the change he pretends has been made in our Belief, concerning the most Bles­sed Sacrament. And this he endea­vours to settle upon that distinct and confused knowledge which he will have to have been concerning this Mystery in several and distinct times. He af­firms that the whole Body of the Church did insensibly fall from a di­stinct knowledge of this Verity, into another confused one; and that there was a time, when there was no positive belief either of Real Presence or Real Absence, because no body so much as thought of it: and that there was in the faithful, only a general confused Idaea of the Body of our Lord in the Sacrament it self, and in the receiving of it; with­out [Page 37]troubling themselves to reflect, much less to examine, by what kind of presence, or in what manner he was there. There was then no obligation, in his opinion, to adhere to one side and reject the other; because neither the one nor the other was then distinct­ly known, nor clearly proposed. But when afterwards, some-penetrating fur­ther into this matter had given occasi­on to those hot Disputes, and lasting Contests which divided mens wits into several opposite judgements in the case, it was necessary that the true Church (on which side soever she was) ha­ving brought the matter to the test of Scripture and Apostolical Doctrine, should declare for one side. And then was there an obligation to adhere un­to, and distinctly to believe, that which was confusedly or not certainly known, before the decision of the matter in contest.

This has happened in our dayes more than once, even in their own Church; but particularly in the subject of that famous Controversy between the Ar­minians and the Gomarists, which made so much noise in Holland, the particu­lar [Page 38]flory whereof I think fit to set dow [...] that you may discover this verity b [...] the confession even of those who were in greatest esteem amongst our adversa­ries themselves.

8. Acta Synodi Dordt. typ. Isaaci Ioan­nidis Cani­ninii Dordt. 1620. Mercur. Franc. to 4. to. 5. Arminius, Minister of Amsterdam and afterwards Professor of Divinity at Leyden, held forth a doctrine, which did not at all agree with that of Calvin, Beza, Zanchius, and Peter Martyr, particularly in the matters of Predessi­nation, of Grace, and of Free-will, This Arminius having a very good Wit, and being of great esteem among [...] them, did soon gain a great Party i [...] the University; and his Scholers, wh [...] were zealous for their Masters Opinion being now become Ministers, did not fail to set them out in many Towns of Holland.

The more antient Ministers and se­rior-Professors opposed him with all their power. Gomarus that famous Do­ctor and Professor of Grouning hen ap­peared in the head of them. 1607 The wa [...] grew hot on all fides. The Alar [...] was given to all the Churches, and by their Deputies they demanded of the States of Holland; and West-Friesland, [Page 39]that a Provincial Synod should be cal­led to judge of the business.

But Arminius having found Power­ful Protectors among the States, dealt his business so, that, instead of a Synod, which was not all for his purpose, he proposed, and made them yield to ad­mit of Disputations and Conferences, wherein he had his end, because no­thing was concluded therein. 1608 14 May. He and Gomarus Disputed the businesse before the Council which was appointed for that purpose. 13 Oct. They were heard one after another, in a full Assembly of the States. They had a solemn Conference, each of them being accompanied by four Ministers whom they had made choyce of for their assistance. But all those debates served for nothing else but to raise new difficulties, and to bring poor Arminius the sooner to his end, who so over-heated himself in those Conferences, 5 Oct. that he died soon after.

But his Abettors dyed not with him, but on the contrary, after the death of their Chief, rallyed all their forces to­gether. All the Ministers and Divines who were of his perswasion, especially [Page 40]those of Holland, dtrecht, and Overisl [...] presented a Petition, and offered un [...] the States a Remonstrance, in which they did declare and justify their Do­ctrine, which they had now reduced to five Articles, all which they were rea­dy to make good by the pure Word o [...] God.

And to guard and secure themselves from the sentence of a Synod, which they much apprehended, they adde [...] further in that their Remonstrance, (treading still in the footsteps of their Master) that it did belong properly to the particular States of every Province to judge of differences in matters of Religion; especially in this case, where there was nothing in agitation which could disturb the peace, nor break that union they now enjoyed: And that; for their parts, they desired nothing but a Toleration, and liberty to follow their own Opinion, providing for and preser­ving alwayes the peace and union of the Reformed Church. Being earnest in this manner to have the business ended by th [...] civil Magistrate, it was easie for them to prerend, that whatsoever was thus or­dained, should pass for a meer directi­on [Page 41]by way of Policy, which could not any wayes reach unto the grounds of their Doctrine.

The Gomarists against this Remon­strance, set out a large Treatise, in which they remonstrated also on their part, that the five Articles of the Arminians con­cerning Predestination and Grace, were contrary to the received Doctrine of their Church, ever since the Reformation: that their Divines had never held any thing concerning those matters, but what had been taught by Calvin; Merc. frauc. To. 5.1617 pag. 32. ex­cept some few, who, for that very cause, had been excommunicated, and also banished. And that consequently such novelties as these were not to be tolerated, until by a National Synod, (to which, according to the example of the Apostles, the business ought to be referred) it were otherwise ordain­ed.

All this writing on both sides did but increase the fend, and cause the seve­ral parties to be called by the new names of Remonst [...]ators and Anti-Remonstra­tors. In the interim these first having gotten more credit with the States of Holland and West-Friesland, by the [Page 42]means and Protection of Barnevelt Ad­vocat General of those States, 1614. 25. July. ob­tained of them that Toleration which they so much defired, and by the cun­ing insinuation of Utengobardus, wh [...] had been one of Arminius's chief Col­legues, and the most zealous of the Party, got their Doctrine to be recei­ved as current in many Towns of Hol­land. The others made what opposi­tion they could, and protested highly against it, and particularly the Senat [...] of Amsterdam, notwithstanding the Eloquent Oration which the famou [...] Grotius made in favour of the Rem [...] strators, 1617 to encline them to yield unto a Toleration. Hereupon the two Pat­ties grew into greater heats and Animo­sities than ever. There is nothing b [...] Writing pro and con, for and again [...] the Doctrine of Arminius. Scand alo [...] Libels are cast out against the Magi­strates. They inveigh outragiously one against another in their Pulpits. Each one pretends his doctrine to be the more antient, as being more conformable [...] the Word of God. In private Fami­lies, in Meetings, at Feasts, at the Bourse, in the Shops you should he [...] [Page 43]nothing but discourses of Grace and Predestination. Every where disputing, every where wrangling. From words sometimes they fall to blows, and par­ricular quarrels turn to a kind of civil war. Wheresoever one party finds it self the stronger, At Amster­dam, at Leyden, at Utrecht, &c the other is sure to fare bad enough. Nay, they go so far as even to levy Souldiers to strengthen their Faction, and maintain it where it has got the upper-hand. In one word, an ut­ter Desolation seems to threaten the whole State; and the Union of the U­nited-Provinces is in great danger of being broken, by the division of judge­ments in these points of Controver­fie.

The States General who have the Soveraign Authority in those Provinces, applyed themselves in earnest to find some efficacious remedy for so great a mischief, which so much Writing, so much Disputing, so many Conferences could do no good in. They had, 1607 long before, judged it necessary to call a National Synod for the final deciding of the business. They had caused a Meeting of some Divines and Ministers of every Province, for their Opinions [Page 44]and advise in the case. Arminius him­self, who was one of the Company; had given his consent with the rest. Bu [...] it was not then put in execution; part­ly through the cunning shifts of the A [...] ­minians, partly by the contrivance [...] Barnevelt their Protectour, and partly by reason of some other affairs, [...] which caused a diversion, or rather a suspensi­on of the proceeding at present.

For when the danger grew greater and the Truce which they had been [...] Treaty about with the King of Spain gave them leave to apply themselves more seriously to this business, their fell again upon the same design. The King of England wrote unto them a­bout it, and gave them also his judge­ment, at a publick Audience, by his Embassadour: that for the setling those troubles, and putting an end to those Contests, there was but one onely mea [...] which the Church had ever mad [...] ­nse of, to wit, a Nationall Sy [...] which was to be Iudge in the case, and [...] decide, which of the two opinions was mor [...] conformable to the Word of God: or at lea [...] how, and in what manner the one orthe other might be tolerated in the Church of God.

[Page 45]The States of Zealand, and those of most of the other Provinces moved for the same. The Protestant Princes of Germany and the neighbouring Repub­licks, made the like Remonstrance. It was from all parts solemnly declared, that it was absolutely necessary for them to refer themselves to the Supreme Au­thority of that Church of which the two Parties were members. Merc. To. 5. 1617. pag. 15 In con­clusion the Arminians themselves agreed unto it: they were no longer able to with­sland that torrent of advise & votes which came from all parts, to the same effect, re­commending the Authority of a Synod.

Upon this, the States General put forth a Declaration, in which they made a Protestation, that they prerended not, by the calling a National Synod, to derogate from the Rights and Liberties of the Provinces, and that their inten­tion was no other, but to bring to trial, before the Supreme and legal Authori­ty, those Points which then were in Contest about matters of Religion; that by Judgement therein, Peace might be restored to all the Reformed Churches. This was done in conformity to the Pe­ [...]ition of the Anti-Remonstrators, who [Page 46]demanded a National Synod for the en­ding of Controversies, without preten­ding for all that, Ib. To. 5. p. 35. that new Articles o [...] Faith should be made.

After this, Circular Letters were written to all the Provinces, to the e [...] that every one should send unto the Synod six Deputies chosen out of the [...] Ministers and ablest Divines. The Wallon Churches had the same invita [...] ­on. The States did also beseech the King of Great Brittain, The Electio [...] Pa [...]atine and of Brandebourg, the Land grave of Hesse, the Cantons of Zur [...] of Berne, of Bafile, and of Schaffo [...]se the Counts of Veteravia, the Repub­licks of Geneva, of Bremen, and [...] Emden, to make choice of and dep [...] the ablest Doctors amongst them, to be assistant at this Synod, which thus be­came more than National, and was be­gun at Dort, a Town of Holland, [...] the thirteenth of December in the Yea of our Lord 1618.

The Protestants of France; wh [...] were invited among the first, would no have failed to have been present as we as those of Geneva. But as the King does not permit Ministers of other [Page 47]Countries to come to those Synods which they hold in his Kingdome; so does he not also permit that those of his Kingdome go to those of other Nations. This, notwithstanding, did not hinder the Ministers of France from assisting in the best manner they could. For, not being allowed to go thither in person, the chief of them sent their Opinions; and that of Monsieur Du Moulin, Sess. 1434 which was read publickly at the Synod, and agrees exactly with the Determination of the said Synod, is still to be seen at this day.

It is further remarkable, that the year following, all the Protestant Churches of France, in a National Sy­nod held at Alez, received all those De­crees, obliging all the Ministers and Elders deputed for that Assembly, to take a solemn Oath, and protest in the sight of God, that they did admit of and embrase the Doctrine of the Synod of Dort, as intirely conformable with the Word of God, and that they would maintain the same to the utmost of their power so long as they had breath in their bodies. This is what they so­lemnly swore unto according to the [Page 48]form of the Oath which you may see annexed to the end of this Treatise. By which appears, that these Gentle­men can now, neither in Honour not Conscience, refuse submission to the De­cisions and Authority of the said Sy­nod. 11. Decemb. 1618.

In the twenty seventh Session the Remonstrators, who were not satisfied with, and mistrusted their Judges, made solemn Protestation against the Autho­rity of the Synod, declaring that they could not acknowledge them for law­ful Judges in the case, because the grea­est part of them consisted of Parties, and had already publickly declared against their Doctrine.

All the Deputies of forreign Churches gave their Opinions in Writing concer­ning this Protestation, The Judge­ment of the English Di­vines. and all unani­mously declared, that they judged it null and void, most unreasonable, and against the Custome and practice of the first Council of Nice, of Constantinople, of Ephesus, of Calcedon, where the Bishops, who were, from the first, a­gainst the opinions of Arius, Maced [...] ­nius, Nestorius, and Eutyches, did not cease notwithstanding, to be their law­ful [Page 49]Judges in those sacred Assemblies, which represented the Church, unto which all Parties owed subjection.

That if that Protestation were ad­mitted as reasonable; it never was, The Judge­ment of the Divines of Hesse. nor ever could be possible to assemble a law­ful Council for the deciding of Contro­versies and suppressing of Errors; fince the most zealous Pastors and the ablest Divines were alwayes those, who, ei­ther by Word of Mouth or by Writing, made chief opposition against such Opinions as they esteemed Hereti­cal.

That if one upon such grounds must lose his right of assisting at Councils, The Judge­ment of the Divines of Bremen. all the Heresies imaginable might be e­flablished without refrstance, none op­posing them for fear of bringing so great a prejudice upon themselves.

That it cannot be said upon that score, that a man is judge in his own cause, because in Contests of that nature, when it is in question, Which is Orthodox Do­ctrine, it is not properly the Cause of every or any particular person, but it is in reality, the Cause of God and his Ho­ly Church, which is in agitation.

That for the deciding of this, The Judge­ment of the Divines of the Palati­nat. when [Page 50]Disputes do arise, we are not to apply our selves to the Jews and Gentiles, who may seem nenters in the case, as having no interest in either Opinion; but that it ought to be referred to the Pastors and Brethren of the same Church being met together to decide it accor­ding the Word of God, Optat. Mi­levit l. 5. advers. Par­menian. whatever O­pinion they happened to be of during the time of the Contest.

And finally, that, Sentence being given by the Assembly, submission is to be yielded: and that if the Remon­strators do refuse to conforme, adhe­ring still to their Protestation, they do thereby declare; that they do renounce Communion with the Reformed Churches; and that in that case it belongs to the Soveraign Power to determine what is to be done. In these very words, did the Divines of Geneva declare them­selves.

Upon this the Deputies of the States General declared, against the Protestan­on of the Remonstrators, that the Na­tional Synod was lawful and Soveraig [...] Judge in this Controversy, as the same Synod had formerly declared in the 26. Autoritatem ejus non de­fugerent, sed eandem pro legitimo cau­sae judice ag­noscerent. Session. In pursuance hereof they sum­moned [Page 51]them to renounce their Prote­slation, and to give in Writing what they had to say in defence of their five Articles; which in conclusion they did. After this, all the Reasons of both sides being fully examined in several Sessi­ons, Sess. 138.24. Apr. 1619. the Synod Condemned the five Propositions of the Arminians, as full of Error and contrary to the Word of God, and forbad them to be held or taught in any of the Reformed Churches, as also, to admit any person to the Mi­nislery who had not subscribed the con­trary Doctrine, which was approved as onely True and Orthodox by the De­cree of the Council. 2. Jul. 1619 The States Ge­neral hereupon sent Orders into all the Provinces, forbidding any other Doctrine to be taught, but what did punctually agree with the Judgement of the Sy­nod concerning these five Articles, with express. Command to all Governours and Magistrates, to see the said Decrees exactly observed.

Moreover Barnevelt, who had been the Head and chief Protector of the Remonstrators, and had endeavoured, in their defence, to hinder the convo­cating of the National Synod, was seised [Page 52]upon, 24. Aug. 1618. and taken Prisoner some three months before the beginning of th [...] said Synod, 14 May 1619. and four dayes after th [...] concluding thereof, with a Condemn [...] ­tion of the Arminians, was Condem­ned to dy, Merc. Franc. To. 5. pag. 43 and was beheaded, Because (as is specified in the first and second Article of the Sentence given again [...] him) he had raised troubles in Religi [...] and contristated, as much as in him lay the Church of God, in maintaining, a [...] causing, by his Partisans, to be maintar­xed, and instill'd into the minds of ma [...] people that extravagant and pernicion Maxime: That it belongs to every par­ticular Province, within their Precinct [...] to ordain of matters of Religion, with [...] any obligation of giving notice thereof [...] other Provinces. And for having prete­sted without Commission in the name of th [...] Provinces of Holland, U [...]recht, and Over­isle that the Deputies of the other Province who did press for, and forward the convoca­tion of a National Synod, would be th [...] cause and Authors of much danger [...] mischief.

After this, who can any longer que­stion but the Protestant Churches [...] England, rance, Germany, Swisserland [Page 53]and the Low-Countries, do hold as a Fundamental Maxime: That in such Controversies as do arise, concerning Doctrine in matters of Religion, tho True Church, of which the dissenting Parties are members, has full and Sove­raign Power to declare, according to the Word of God, what is of Faith, and that there is an obligation of stand­ing to her Decrees under pain of be­ing Schismaticks. We know very well also that in conformity with this privi­ledge and practise, the like Synods have been held in France, concerning some other Points, wherein the Mini­sters were [...] some variance, and that it has been absolutely and authorita­tively defined what was to be believed. After which, The Judge ment of the Divines of [...] Geneva. it has not been held law­ful to contest or argue for the contrary, without incurring the penalty of being cut off from the Body of the Church; and this because the Gospel sayes, That he, who does not admit of the decisi­ous of the Church, is to be accounted as an Infidel and Publican.

9. Ordo obfer­vatur qua­lem Deus san­civit, & san­ctificavit exemplo, Apostolorum & omnium aetatum Ec­clesiae confir­mavit redu­etivè ad di­ctum Christi, dic Ecclesiae si Ecclesiam non audierit &c. The Divines of Geneva thought good to make use of this passage in the Judgement they gave against the Pro­testation [Page 54]of the Arminians, to pro [...] that Verity in the Synod of Dort, whi [...] also confirmed it.

Wherefore I do, now before hand humbly befeech Monsieur Claude, th [...] he go not about to tell me, that accor­ding to their Doctrine, even the Tr [...] Church is not infallible, and that sh [...] may have het errors. Whether Mon­sieur Claude (whom I hold to be [...] man of too much Wit and Reason [...] be of that opinion) does for his parti [...] cular, Quare in sententià omninò de­bent stare judicio cor­poris reprae­sentati per Synodum, lo­quentem mandato, ore & ex sensu totius corpo­ris, nec licet ipsis corpus in partes vn­care, vel si­bi adversa­rium fingere, vels sibi jus corporis ar­rogar [...] quod ipsis nullâ lege permi [...]titur. really think so, I cannot tell [...] but in this I am very well satisfied tha [...] there are many Ministers who have he [...] it, and who, for all that I know, [...] at this very day, as much in the [...] mour to maintain it resolutely and po [...] ­tively as ever.

And for this very reason I do declare that as I am resolved to have no de [...] ­ings of this nature, neither with his nor them, so will I not run riot, [...] forsake the quiet path I am already [...] to engage my self in the way of [...] guing and Disputing; which I purpo [...] to avoide. Liv. 1. c. 13. Cardinal Richelicu has [...] [Page 55]ready treated that Controversy with all the vigour imaginable; and has de­monstrated by most convincing Reafons, that the True Church of God being guided by the Spirit of God, as we must suppose her to be, Vel abjiecere debent om­nem Prote­stationem ad versus Syno­dum, & sub­jicere sua dogmata illi­us judicio; vel certè si manent in Protestatione immoti, eo ipso se decla­rant Unio [...]i Ecclesiarum Reformatarū renuntiare; quod si fa­ciant, dispi­ciat postea summa pote­sta [...] quid fa­cto sit opus. cannot be deceived. But that I may not be ob­liged to fight (though with so much advantage under the conduct of so great a Person) I am resolved not to enter into the field. Let that passe then, for the present, untouched, whether the Church can or cannot be deceived; this is not the business now in agitati­on. It is sufficient, for what I would be at, that our Brethren the Protestants do avert, as von have seen in the pro­ceedings of the Council of Dort, that those who are of this Church are obli­ged to hold, that she is not deceived; that what she defines is the pure Truth according to the true meaning of the Word of God; and, consequently, that they must submit to all her Decisions in matters of Faith, under pain of be­ing excommunicated, and declared He­reticks and Schismaticks, notwithstand­ing they still Protest, as the Armini­ans and all other Hereticks have ever [Page 56]done, that they have the Word of God on their side. For of this very poin [...] it was that the Reformed Church gave Judgement in the Synod of Dort.

In reality, as we are agreed on a [...] sides, that, in all Contests, we are [...] stick to that which is conformable to th [...] Word of God, and that we are to re­ject what is not so; the question is fi­nally reduced to this: how that (the Word of God) is to be understood, when it is alledged by both sides for the supporting their Opinions. The Disciples of Arminius had their place [...] of Holy Scripture in defence of the [...] five Articles. The Gomarists maintain­ed a Doctrine contrary to those Arti­cles by other passages which they produ­ced out of the same Holy Scripture. They were at as great odds concerning the sence or meaning of those Places and Passages, each Party challenging the true one on their side. It being then a­vouched that it belongs unto the Synod to end the Debate, it does also, with­out all doubt, belong to the same Sy­nod to determine in what sence the words cited out of Holy Scripture are to be understood.

[Page 57]Now I would gladly desire these Gentlemen, to tell me, whether that Synod, which represented, as they be­lieve, the True Church, was infallible o [...] no. If it was infallible, then Infal­libly the objection they make is of no force; since they agree with us, that the True Church cannot err. But now if it was not infallible, they must, at least, affirm, that this did not hinder but they were obliged to submit to the Decisions made therein, under the pe­nalty of being Schismaticks; the Di­vines Deputed from their several Churches having solemnly declared, that they were to subscribe to the De­crees, and reject as Erroneous, what should be condemned.

But that which the Synod of Delpht does clearly and positively declare upon this occasion, takes away all force from, enervates and quite destroys this obje­ction. The Remonstrators at the first, would not be brought to submit to the National Synod, because (said they amongst other reasons which they al­ledged for their refusal) it may erre as all other, even Oecumenical Councils may, they being not infallible, as the [Page 56]Apostles were, Christus Do­minus qui A­postolis pro­misit Spiri­tum Verita­tis, qui ip­sos ducturus esset in om­nem verita­tatem, Ec­clesiae quoque suae pollicitus est se cum eâ usque ad fi­nem saeculi mansurum. Mart. 28.20 Et ubi duo vel tres, &c. Matt. 18.10. who were guided imme­diately by the Holy Ghost. The States [...] Holland and Westfriesland advised abo [...] this with their Synod which was the [...] held at Delpht. And it was answered: tha [...] that reason did not hinder, but that they were obliged to receive the decisions o [...] the Synod, and to follow the Judge­ment thereof when a doctrine is con­demned; because as Christ our Lord did promise his Spirit unto the Apostles for the instructing them in all Truth, he has also promised his Church to be with her to the end of the world; and that when two or three of them should be assembled together in his Name, he would be in the midst of them. The same Synod adds, that when Quando piiac docti Pastores, ex diversis Ecclesiis, diversisque regionibus or [...] Christiani in timore Domini conveniunt, ut ex Dei verbo just­cent, quid in Ecclesiâ Dei doceri, aut non deceri conveniat, [...] ­nino credendum est Christum juxta promissionem suam ejus [...]a­di conventui interfuturum, at que [...]undum sancto suo Spirit [...] illustraturum ac recturum, ut nihil in eo quod ad veritatis, a [...] regni ejus detrimentum verti possit, decernatur. Nullus ords, nulla pax esse poterit in Eccliâ Dei, si e [...]i­libet quidlibet docere permi [...]tatur, nec ad rationem doctrinae sat reddendam, nec se judicio alicujus Synodici conventus sub­mittendum, obligetur, juxta praeceptum Apostoli, 1 Cor. 14 2. & 31. ut judicetur de his quae Prophetae loquuntur, & Pro­phetarum spiritus Prophetis subjecti sint. Jud Syn Delph Sess 26. Syn. Derdr. many [Page 57]pious and learned Pastours sent from se­veral Churches of Christendome do meet together, to determine according to the Word of God, what is to be taught, or rejected in his Church, it is to be believed with all confidence, that our Blessed Saviour, according to his promise, will be present at such an Assem­bly, and will not fail to enlighten and guide them by his Holy Spirit, that they may not determine any thing pre­judicial to Truth. After which, to­wards the end, follows; that there would be no Order in the Church of God, nor ever could be any hopes of Peace, if every one were permitted to teach what he pleased, and not bound to give any account of his Doctrine, nor submit himself to the judgement of a Synod, according to the Com­mand of the Apostle, who ordains that what is taught by Prophets, should be judged of by the Spirit of Prophets.

This makes it further more manifest, that it cannot be said, that the Decrees of Synods are onely Rules of Policy, which do not reach unto Doctrine; and only serve for exterior order, which is the utmost limit of their authority [Page 60]For it is most evident, that this Assem­bly at Dort did pretend to regulate i [...] self according to the four first Councils whose example they proposed unto themseles. In the mean time these Gentlemen do acknowledge, that those Councils did condemn the doctrine of those Arch heretiques, whom they gave Sentence against, in such manner, that it was not lawful to hold it, not adhere unto their Party, without be­coming, like unto them, Hereticks and Schismaticks. It cannot then be doubt­ed but this Synod pretended to the same thing, and that by declaring that the Doctrine of the Arminians was full of errors and contrary to the Word of God, they intended to say an obligati­on of renouncing the said Doctrine, by subscribing to their Decrees, that they might not become guilty of Schisme and Heresie. But without any great necessity of reasoning the business, it is but hearing how the Synod delivers it self upon this subject. For you must know, that the Arminians refused to ob­serve the Order which was appointed for the discussion and examination of their Articles, Nay, they were so bold [Page 61]as to maintain that they could not in Conscience accommodate themselves to that Method which they apprehend­ed to be so prejudicial to the good Cause. The Synod thereupon declares, Quin potius si conscien­tiae suae quam debent, rationem ha­bereve lint, e [...]s ad obtem­per andum ae­quissimis su­premarum potestarum mandatis, hujúsque Sy­nodi ordini & judicio acquiescen­dum teneri. Seff 42. die 29, Decem­b [...]is. that it belongs to them, as Judges, to prescribe the Order which was to be observed in a Hearing of that nature, and not at all to the Parties, upon whom Sentence was to pass: and that the pre­text of Conscience which was laid hold on upon this occasion, is no wayes ju­f [...]ifiable; because, there being nothing here in concern but the examination of the business, their Consciences in this can suffer nothing. Then they add these decisive words; That if they on the contrary, intend to have any regard to their Consciences, as they ought in du­ty, they are obliged to obey the Com­mands of Higher Powers, to follow Or­ders, and to acquiesce unto the Judge­ment of the Synod.

To this purpose it is that they alledge that passage of the Gospel which com­mands to esteem him as an Infidel, who does not obey the Church. It is pretended then that this Synod which represents their Church, obliges to ano­ther [Page 60]kind of Obedience then meerly Political, and that in matters of Faith, where there is an obligation to believe under pain of damnation, there is a duty incumbent upon Conscience to submit unto her Decrees; Eandem pro legitimo cau­sae Judice agnoscerent. because, as is there expresly determined in the 26. Sess It is The Synod which is Lawful Iudge in this Cause.

11. Certainly the Synod had a great deal of reason to speak in that mannen For in so remarkable a Contest as this between two such Parties, who were in Dispute of matters of such impor­tance, presupposed that they looked upon themselves as the Representative Body of the Church of Christ, the [...] could not in reason discover any other Judge but themselves. For they saw manifestly, in that conjuncture, that the Scripture could not be it; for so much as the two Parties upholding the [...] Opinions by Scripture, as it has always happened in all the Conrests which have risen in the Primitive Church, the Con­troversie between them was concer­ning the true meaning of those passaged which were alledged on both sides. Neither these Passages then, nor those [Page 61]other which were brought for the ex­plication of these, and about which there was as hot a Dispute as about the former, could ever end the difference between them; because indeed, they were the very Subject of the Dispute. And, consequently, they found that there was a necessity of some other Su­preme Authority which should give Sentence about the matter in contest, and appease those troubles which other­wise must prove endlesse in the same Church.

This is the very Reason the Synod gives when they cite the Remonstrators to appear, Sess. 5.16. November. Sess. 23.7. Decembr. Pro certâ ac indubitatâ fidei regulâ adqibiturum. and oblige them to submit to their Decrees. This is that makes them protest so often, and take their solemn Oaths, that they will determine things according to the Word of God: Which they will make use of as a cer­tain and indubitable Rule in matters of Faith. In which proceeding of theirs, they shew excellently well, that there is a great distinction to be made be­tween him that Judges, and the Rule he follows to Judge well by. In all the well govern'd Societies of the world, there may arise differences; yea, even [Page 64]such as may, by the contesting parties be managed bona fide. But for the ending of them, it is requisite there be a Court appointed and authorized from the Highest Power to Judge of them, and by pronouncing Sentence, to give clear notice to the Parties which of them has got the day. Behold here [...] Judge. Behold a Court. But this Judge and this Court are not without Lawes and Orders, according to which Judgement is to be given. Which Laws and Orders are many times the Subject of great Disputes, each Party endea­vouring to make them appear favour [...] ­ble to their side; which Point is to [...] cleared by the Sentence of the Judg [...]. Here is the Rule he is to follow. It [...] not the Law it self, the meaning where­of is actually in dispute, that is Judge. Were it otherwise, it were impossible ever to determine any thing. For the Law it self cannot explicate nor declare it self for either side: but it is He that has received Authority, who is to en [...] the strife according to Law, the mean­ing whereof he determines and ap­plyes to the present case.

The Assembly of Dort knew very [Page 65]well, that this was the very state and con­dition of things in the Church of God, which is without doubt, the most holy and best ordered Community in the world. In this Community, notwith­standing, there have happened great differences in matters of great impor­tance, and where the Contest has also been managed, many times, with a great deal of good meaning on all sides, every one believing they had the Scri­ptures on their sides. Witness S. Hie­r [...]me, and S. Augustine in that difference between St. Peter and St. Paul: wit­ness S. Cyprian who was so earnest a­gainst the validity of the Baptisme of Hereticks, and a thousand others of the same nature.

It is necessary there be a Judge, Synodi man­dato morem gerant, quo praesentem hanc Syno­dum pro le­gitimo causae Judice agno­scere juben­tur. Sess. 25. who has received power and Authority from our Blessed Lord, to decide all these differences, and that this Judge have a Rule and a Law which he is to follow in giving Judgement, that his Sen­tence may be just and secure. This Rule is the Word of God, which right­ly applyed, renders Judgement highly equitable. Now the Synod of Dort acknowledges, that an Assembly of [Page 66]lawful Pastors representing the Body of the true Church is this Judge, to whom it appertains to judge of the true sence of the Word of God; and afterwards to resolve, according to this Rule, any cause depending.

12. I do now earnestly beseech our Brethren of the Reformed Churches to reflect seriously upon these two Propo­sitions I am now about to make.

The first is: That as the Word of God is infallible in it self, so certainly the Judgement of him, who truely judges according to this Rule, is also Infallible: and consequently, they are obliged to believe, that the Church, when she Judges according to this Rule or the Word of God, does not onely not err, but that she also cannot err.

The second is: that they are bound (as well as we) to believe that the Church of God, deciding controversies of Faith, does judge according to the true sence of the Word of God: be­cause, upon the matter, it is concer­ning this very sence that she gives Judge­ment between the Parties who give it a different sence, and who are oblig [...] in Conscience to submit to her Judge­ment, [Page 67]under pain of being Schismaticks, and Hereticks; as their Synod of Dort has positively declared.

From hence follows, by necessary consequence, according to their own Principles, that they are bound to be­lieve, with us, that the True Church of Jesus; Christ is infallible in the Judge­ment she judicially pronounces touch­ing matters of Faith.

13. I think there can now be no [...] but they are obliged according to their own grounds, to acknowledge the infallibility of the Church of Christ. But I am contented for the present not to press them so far, nor to make use of that right which I might justly chal­lange. It is sufficient, that the Synod, which, in these Gentlemens opinion, represents the True Church, is lawful judge in this case, as the Synod is self declares, obliging them in Confidence to adhere to and obey the Decisions made therein. It is not then law­ful for them who are of that Church, and are at Difference amongst them­selves, to condeman the Synod of Error, then judgement [...]s given in order to the clearing Points of Faith confessed a­mong [Page 68]them. They have no power to frame a different Judgement from that of the Synod, and adhering to it, to se­por [...]are themselves from communion with the rest. They are bound to ac­knowledge the Authority of the Synod, which is lawfull Judge, and submit un­to it, believing that what is there desi­ned [...] Truth it self stand this without any necessity of entring upon the que­stion of its Infallibility.

I demand nothing more for the prese [...]s, I will content my [...] with what them­selves do grant. That Church, of which the Partins Contesting are mem­bers (be she fallible or infallible) has full Power to Debide differentes, and [...] oblige under the pen [...] ­ry of being Schismaticks. And now having (as I make my self believe) give Monsient Claude all the satisfacti­on he can in [...] require concerning this Point. I [...] on my course per­ceably and quietly, and make bold to give him notice, that.

14. Here is that the Prescription, that [...] Point, an [...] [...]oisputable P [...] ­ciple, to which a receisary adhfione required, when there arise Disputes be­tween [Page 69]Parties, for the discovering whe­ther an Opinion be or be not contrary to the true Rule of Faith, which is the Word of God, and whether we, stand bound to believe it as a Point of Faith. Were it antecedently distinctly believed as such or no. Disputation will only serve to render the Debate eternal. Both Parties will go on challenging the true sence of Scripture and Tradi­uon on their sides: Books shall be written without number for the assert­ing of it; and that without any hopes or appearance of any end of these, learned indeed, but redious Contests; which prove many times so intricate and confused, that every one standing his ground, and being strongly and willfully resolved not to yield, reproa­ches his Adversary with affected Obsti­nacy against known Truth. We must then make up to that unquestionable Point, in which both Parties meet, and which Tertullian so boldly establishes, as the principal Rule or Prescription for the ending all differences which may arise about the agreeing or conformity with the Word of God, which every one is so ready to challenge to him­self.

[Page 70]This Learned Father having said in his twentieth Chapter, A quibus traducem fi­dei & semi­na doctrinae, caeterae dein­de Ecclesiae mutuatae sunt, & quo­tidie mutu­ontur ut Ec­clesiae fiant. Ataque tot ac tantae Ec­clesiae una est illa ab Apo­stolis prima ex qua om­mes. Quid autem praedicave­vint, id est, quid eis Christus re­velaverit, & híc praescri­ham, non ali­te p [...]obari debere nisi per easdem Ecclesias quas ipsi con­diderunt, ipsi eis praedican­do tam vivâ qu [...]d [...]iunt voce, quàm per epistolas postea, de Praes. c. 21. that the Apo­stles, who were sent by our Blessed Sa­viour, Founded many Churches in se­veral places, and that many others came from these by communication of the same Doctrine, and that they all of them together make but one true Ca­tholick and Apostolick Church; he adde in the next Chapter, that true Prescri­ption is; that nothing be received but what he revealed unto his Apostles, whom he sent to Preach his Doctrine unto the world. But in case there does arise any Contest concerning any parti­cular Point, and that we be in some trouble or doubt whether they Preac [...] ­ed it or no; and by consequence, whe­ther they learned it of their Master or no; (behold here his solid Rule or Prescription, in this great maxime) that this is not to be made out or clear­ed by any other means, but by those Churches which they founded either by Preaching or by Writing, and which, as we lately touched, all of them make [Page 71]but one only Church. To this Church then it does belong to determine what our Blessed Saviour did reveale in his Holy Word, whensoever there is any cause of doubt, in such Contests as do arise; and what she defines, what she declares in the case, whatever former times did believe, it now to be held as matter of Faith.

15. As Protestants do acknowledge this Verity, as I have made it appear, so do we also most willingly submit un­to it, and intirely profess that the holy Church is lawful Judge of Controver­sies, and that (as Tertullian sayes) addresses are to be made to her, upon difference of Opinions, that we may learn what the Son of God revealed unto his Apostles; that is, what is the true meaning of Holy Scripture, and what Consequences are to be drawn from those Principles. We have a ve­ry pregnant example of this in that fa­mous Contest, which has been, for some Ages past, between Catholicks, concerning the Immaculate Concepti­on of our Blessed Lady. It is certain, that in former times men did not set themselves to search into that particu­lar [Page 72]subject, because they did not so much as reflect upon it. There was onely a confused kind of knowledge and a gene­ral Id [...] of the priviledges and Prero­gatives of the Blessed Virgin above the rest of Mankind, without descending to particulars. People were wholly taken up with opposing those Hereticks who drew up against the Honour of the Blessed Virgin, who would have depri­ved her of the glory of her admirable and perpetual Virginity, even after Child-bearing; and above all, those who so violently pleaded against th [...] glorious title of Mother of God, which is the ground of all her other Priviledges. They were satisfied to ascertain that true source or fountain of all her greatness fortifying it by Scripture and Apostolick Tradition, without regarding to pene­trate further into that suite or train of other priviledges which did accompany that one great prerogative; or examining particularly, whether it were to be con­cluded, by a legall ensequence flow­ing from that Principle, that she was preserved at the first instant of her being, from Original sin. It was not at that time positively believed that she was [Page 73]exempt from that stain; neither was the contrary in their Creed. And this be­cause it was not so much as thought upon.

At another time it has been thought good to employ many serious-thoughts upon this subject, and to search more narrowly into the business. Great Con­tests have risen about it. Whole Vo­lames have been written by Learned men, who have produced strong and clear testimonies out of the Holy Scri­prures for it, and have endeavoured to derive it from the very Fountain of A­postolical Doctrine, by the way of Tradi­tion. Whole Universities, and especi­ally that of Sorbon have spoken loud in favour of that Opinion, and engaged themselves by solemn Oath to maintain it. And yet notwithstanding the Church has not thought fit absolutely to deter­mine any thing concerning this matter of so great importance: But leaves us at liberty to believe what we please, concerning it.

She has not proceeded in the same manner concerning her exemption from all guilt, even of venial sin. For this she has decided and resolved upon as a [Page 74]matter of Faith: not that she had any new revelation thereof since the time of the Apostles; but that before, the proposing this verity to the world [...] be believed, she consulted with the ho­ly Scriptures, Apostolical Tradition, and the opinions of holy Fathers, co [...] ­cerning the preeminence and qualition of the Mother of God, for the finding out the whole extent of them. An having discovered by this means, th [...] her being exempted from venial sin w [...] comprehended in that Supreme Dign­ty, as a necessary consequence is [...] ­cluded in its Principle, she has defined as a Point of faith revealed in the We of God, in which it is contained. Th [...] is the reflexion of the most eminent as Learned Cardinal de Lugo in his exc [...] ­lent. Treatise of Faith. Disp. 3. Sect. 5. n. 7.

Let us now imagine the Churd should do the same concerning the [...] emption of the Blessed Virgin from O­riginal sin. Let us suppose that she h [...] ­ving examined the passages of Host Writ, and the Testimonies of Trad [...] on which are alledged upon this subject should find this also included, as in necestary consequence, as she did the [Page 75]other (as it is not unlikely she would, If she should think fit to proceed to a further examin of the business) then all we who are Catholicks, and agreed in this, that the Church is Judge of Controversies, and that we are bound to submit to her Decrees, should quick­ly lay aside all difference of opinions, [...]d, although we had not hitherto held seas matter of Faith, should then be­lieve it to be so; not because there had been any new Revelation concerning it, [...]t because the Church should have de­clared it to have been alwayes revealed, although there was not a general A­greement concerning that Revelation.

16. Behold then us and Protestants agreed, as I take it, upon this Principle; that the true Church of Christ has pow­er to decide and propose that as an Ar­ticle of Faith, which antecedently to that decision and proposal was not of obligation to be believed. From whence is easily concluded, that, for the fra­ning an exact rational discourse in mat­ters of Faith, it is necessary to avoid these two extremes, which a loose kind of reasoning is apt enough to fall into. The first is; That this has not alwayes [Page 76]been believed, therefore it is not now to be believed. The second: This is [...] believed; ergo, it has alwayes and in a [...] Ages of the Church been distinctly be­lieved. It is evident by our Principle [...] that this way of reasoning is very salk and erroneous.

Here then is the reason why, when there happens a Contest between two Parties of the same Church (suppo­sed alwayes the true Church, as we shall by and by shew) it is not alwayes ne­cessary that we search narrowly into the doctrine of Antiquity, for the dis­covering what was held in those dayes concerning the matter in Dispute: It suffices for ending all debates, that we know what the Church (having taken full cognisance of the matter) shall have determined by a solemn judge­ment and Sentence according to the u­suall form and method. What she re­solves in such occurrences according to the Word of God, the true meaning whereof she faithfully gives us, is to be received as matter of Faith, whe­ther it were beforehand known, or not known to be so. And the contrary is an Error, which we are obliged, with [Page 77]her, to condemn and anathematise, unless we intend to become Infidel; and Schismaticks. Here is the Princi­ple we are agreed upon on all sides, as I have made appear both by the Do­ctrine and proceedings of our Adversa­nes themselves. It imports now very much to apply this to the particular subject we have in hand, and it shall be my endeavour to effect it.

CHAP. III. The applying this agreed-on Prin­ciple to the Subject of the Ho­ly Eucharist.

TO make a due Application of this general Principle to the subject of the Holy Eucharist, with the same [Page 78]peaceableness and quiet, we have hither to endeavoured to maintain, and to­gether with the consent of Parties, we must needs step a little aside, but still in such order and measure, that we may go friendly on in the same path hand in hand together, without justling one another, still laying all Disputes aside.

The first step therefore, that I make of this kind, is, to produce what is a­greed upon on all sides to have been in all Ages believed concerning the Holy Eucharist: to wit, that it is a Sacra­ment which is a Memorial of the Death of our Lord Jesus Christ, who is there present, and wherein his blessed Body and precious Blood are truely received by the Faithful according to the ex­press words of the Son of God him­self, who says: Take and eat, this is my Body; do this in memory of me. This is what Protestants themselves (in the self-same terms) do own and professe. For they will not have the Sacrament to be a meer figure or empty sign with­out efficacy, but they do maint a [...] that it does communicate unto us, in a most reall and most effectual man men; [Page 79]the Body of Jesus Christ to be the food of our Souls. pag. 232. And Monsieur Claude acknowledges, that before this preten­ded novelty of Local presence and Transubstantion was introduced, by way of illustrating or explaining the matter; Every one believed that Iesus Christ is present in the Sacrament; that his Body and Blood are there truly recei­ved by the Faithful, and that the Sacra­ment is a Sign and a memorial of the death of Iesus Christ.

Behold here, I think, the same words I my self made use of.

We also all say the very fame in the self-same terms. For we believe that this Sacrament is a Sign and a Memo­rial of the Death of Jesus Christ; that he is there present, and that his Body and Blood are there truely received by the Faithful; and we maintain that this has alwayes been held in the Church. We are hitherto agreed. No­thing of all this is questioned or dispu­ted between Monsieur Arnaud and Monsieur Claude. What then? These two things which follow.

2. The first is; pag. 295. that Monsieur Claude will have it, that in those Primitive [Page 80]times, which he calls the good dayes of the Church, Pastors being careful to express themselves clearly unto the People, and to prevent ertors in their understandings. Christians were per­fectly instructed how the Body and Blood of our blessed Saviour are pre­sent in the Sacrament, not locally and substantially but mystically; and that they are received by us, not with the mouth of flesh, but by the operation of faith, so that in those times they had a clear and distinct knowledge of the Re­al Absence. Monsieur Arnaud, on the contrary, maintain'd stifly in his chiee Tracts, and gives us hopes to make is appear in a fourth, by an inquiry into the Fathers of the six first Ages, that they had a knowledge and a clear di­stinct belief of the Real Presence.

The second is, pag 162.240 and 290. that Monsient Cla [...]ds will have it, that there was a certain time, when by the negligence and ig­notance of Pastors. Christians had only a confused knowledge of this Mystery, without positively believing or rejecting a Real Presence or Real Absence, and that because they did not so much as enter into any apprehension of either. [Page 81]And now again Monsieur Arnaud evers, and positively proves in the whole sixth Book of his last Work, that that time never was, and that there alwayes ought to have been in the Church a di­slinct belief either of Real Presence or Absence.

I have already told you, that I pre­tended and intended, throughout all this my little Treatise, to hold off from all Disputes, and that my meaning was only to step quietly aside, that I might not be stopt upon the way by meeting some body who might be resolv'd to Dispute the passage with me. This be­ing so, it is decreed that I will not thrust my self into the quarrel, but will be contented with what I think cannot, in reason, be refused me.

3. As to the first then of those two Points in contest, I say: That it is the Subject of those great Works, which will give immortal fame to Bellarmin, Petron, and so many others who have accompanyed them in that glorious de­sign of setting forth the Antiquity of our. Belief by the testimony of the first Fathers of the Church. It must be granted that the success has been hap­py [Page 82]to admiration: and I do here pro­test, for mine own particular, that ha­ving seen their Discourses and Learn [...] observations upon so many rare passage as they produce, I am fully satis [...] that the Antient Fathers were of the same positive Belief we now are of concerning the Real Presence, and of that which some ages past, has been call'd by the name of Transubstan [...] ­tion; and that they could hardly have expressed themselves more clearly and more pithily for that verity than they have done. It is to be hoped also that Mr. Arnaud, who, I presume, has be­stowed much of his time, in that his lare retirement, upon a distinct and [...] ­rious perusal of the Holy Fathers, and is now preparing an entire Volume up­on this Subject, will afford us something more effectual and more express, if it be possible, by making some new dis­co [...]eries in that rich Countrey, and i [...] those happy times, which have after­dy been so often viewed and traver­sed.

This, notwithstanding, we must gr [...]t that though so much has been said and written to prove this matter of [...], [Page 83]et our Adversaries are not satisfied; or at least make as if they were not. It is to be owned, that they still main­tan the Dispute concerning those Passa­ges: that they explicate them, at least, colourably, to reduce them to their own sence: that they alledge other places against us, which, as they imagin, have, a first sight, something of intricacy in them, and serve to dazle our eyes, and [...]ye us some trouble: These they force us to qualify with some modera­tion, to explicate and distinguish so to reduce them to their true sence and natural meaning. We cannot deny but they have composed, and are still composing great Volumes for drawing unto their Party, and the apposing against us those very Fathers whom we alledge against them; and that what we say of their Objections and Authors, they pretend, at least, a right to say against ours. For my part I am resolved to bring no action in the case. But I must desire them, notwith­standing, to deal like honest men, and such as would not forfeit common sense, for that ingenuity and fair dealing which becomes persons of Honour, even [Page 84]in treating with an enemy; and to tell me candidly whether it be not true: that what I have just now alledged for them against our selves, may with as little difficulty and as much equity be said for us against themselves. I am very confident they shall need but inter­change persons to make the same Dis­course, in the self same terms, on out behalf. In a word, let them reflect, that we do answer the places by them alledged, and that they find themselves often enough in some trouble and per­plexity to give a satisfactory answer to ours. Let it then be left uncertain, for the present, to which side the Fathers of the Primitive times do incline. I am contented, at present, to endure patiently that you be not of my opini­on concerning the sence and meaning which I really think ought to be given to the words of these Holy Fathers. But I beseech you Gentlemen, be not then displeased, if I be not of you minds in the application and explication you make of those places which seem so evidently to favour us. Let the bu­siness remain uncertain, in expectation of some greater evidence, and let [...] [Page 85]also say of them (since you will needs have it so) what one of the Learnedst Ministers of the Church of Paris said pleasantly enough: Mr. Dialle in his Book of the true use of the Fa­thers. that as by force of imagination (which modells the sound, and determines it to the expression it fancies) we make the Bells speak what we list; even so in citing and alledging the Fathers, we make them say what­ever we have a mind they should have said: and it is the resolution of drawing them to our side, which determines their sayings to a particular pretended sense or meaning. I require then of you, for the present, that you rest upon what was said, on this subject, by that Mi­nister who was so long and so faithful a Servant to the Party. This has so much reason and equity in it, that I make my self believe you will never have the heart to refuse it.

And now, in case the Fathers by you cited, should not be found to have so positively mentioned the Real Ab­sence, as you pretend they have done, and we deny, you would not be upon much worse terms, as to the main bu­siness: Because, according to you, the Fathers are not the R [...]le of Faith. So [Page 86]likewise, if it should happen that those, whom we make use of in opposition to you, should not have declared them­selves so clearly and distinctly for a Re­al Presence, as we suppose they have done, and you deny it; for the same rea­son we should not be much inconveni­enced by it; seeing especially, that the true Church, in which resides the pow­er (when Contests do arise) of defi­ning what is of Faith (in such manner as we have already mentioned) has yet determined nothing in the case, nor declared in particular what is the meaning of this or that passage of St. Cyprian, St. Cyrill, or St. Augustine &c, Let this then, for the present, remain undecided; and let us proceed as if these Fathers, who are the occasion of this dispute, had said nothing clearly and distinctly concerning this matte [...] ­y think there can be nothing more [...] and reasonable then this. And I can not apprehend that either Monsie [...] Claude, or any of his Party, will think fit to Dispute this Point with us. For if they object Fathers against us, it is nor than (according to their Principle [...]) they pretend they are infal [...]ible, and [Page 87]that what is to be believed is to be de­cided by their Authority; but it is to shew us, that they can fight us at the same weapon we sometimes make use of against them.

4. As to the second thing in Contest, to wit: Whether there ever was a time in the Church, wherein there was but a confused kind of knowledge touching this Mystery, without reflexion upon either Real Presence or Real Absence; Monsieur Arnaud proves in one whole Book, that this could not be. And for mine own part, I confess unto him, that if he had none else to deal with besides my self, he should not at all [...]eed to give himself any further trouble of arguing the business, for I am abso­lutely of his perswasion: Nay, (I'll add further) should make a scruple in Conscience to refuse my consent to so rational and well-grounded an asserti­on. But (by misfortune) Monsieur Claude is not of my humour, and will not yield the least in a point where he imagins he has some advan­tage: and which he seems resolved to make good to the very last. Behold why I am more than half perswaded to [Page 88]ield up something of that right which I might so justly claim; and this for peace and quietness sake, and that I may not be engaged in a Dispute, which I have resolved to decline as much as may be. Let us then frankly grant what he demands, although we are far enough from agreeing with him upon the matter. Let us not contest with him about a Point, which we may dis­pense with, without any great difficul­ty. Let him have full scope to fancy to himself such an obscure dark season of confused knowledge. Let that in­vention of his own brain pass for a re­ality; and that Christians actually (as he will have it) were, at that time, in a state of ignorance and obscurity. I am contented to yield so far for his sa­tisfaction.

And now, by way of one little peaceable digression more.

5. I will grant moreoever, that this great Mystery has not at all times been examined to the bottom; and that men did not employ themselves so much in the discussion of this, as of many o­ther Points. The Fathers indeed have not written such large Treatises of it [...] [Page 89]as afterwards were written, and as themselves have written concerning o­ther Mysteries, which they were obli­ged to maintain against those who oppo­sed them.

All the Heresies of those dayes, which interrupted the peace of the Church, were chiefly concerning the most Blessed Trinity, concerning the Divinity and Incarnation the Word E­ternal. They were at peace and quiet concerning the most Holy Eucharist. It was not at all questioned by the He­reticks of those dayes. The hour for that was not yet come. Here you have the reason why the Holy Fathers in­sisted chiefly upon the defence of such Mysteries as were then questioned or opposed. It was upon those occasions they compiled those great Works of theirs, with so much exactness, ex­plaining and clearing many particular Points, which were not much looked upon before those Contests were raised in the Church upon different occasi­ons.

Without question, there can be no great difficulty to agree, that the same has happened in the subject of the Ho­ly [Page 90]Eucharist. That there was a time; when men did not set themselves to Write purposely of the depth of the great Mystery, as they did of some others about which mens wits were at work by occasion of some Propositions which had caused some disturbance. There has been another time, when men did upon design, fall a writing more at large, for the explicating, not only the nature of this Sacrament, but also of the Mysteries contained therein. It is most certain, that about the beginning of the ninth Age, Anno 818. Bell. Sermon. Defence of the Perpet. l. 8. c. 10. pag. 840. Pascasius Radber [...] writ a Treatise of this nature, in the Book he made concerning the Body and Blood of our Saviour. Whether he were the first or no that treated of this subject in that manner, discussing the particulars more-minutely, with method and at large, uniting together all the parts belonging to this glorio [...] Mystery: Whether there were at the beginning many adversaries who shew­ed themselves in opposition to his Do­ctrine, Pag. 227. Pag. 629. l. 8. c. 8. as is pretended by Mr. Claud [...], or very few, and those who durst not publickly shew themselves, as Monsi­eur Aenand evidences very learnedly [Page 91]and clearly: concerns me not at all. It is sufficient for me, that it is most true, as both agree, that that Book, in fine, Ibid. was cause of some trouble, and (as is said of it in the Defence of the Perpetu­ity) had this effect in some, Pag. 813. that ha­ving given them occasion to look more particularly into the Difficulties of this Holy Sacrament, they were struck at them, and did accordingly seek to les­sen the weight of this Mystery by hu­mane wayes and Philosophical explica­tions and to qualify them with cer­tain solutions which drew near to those of the Calvinists.

Moreover whether Ioannes Scotus, and Bertramus be two several Authors, or but one and the same. Whether he or they did directly oppose the Doctrine of Posc [...]sius; or whether they onely gave him a hit indirectly, by teaching a Doctrine contrary to his, in the ninth Age: Whether his or their Schollers did, or did not follow the blow in the tenth Age: Whether their Disputes grew cold or hot at the beginning of the eleventh Age: And whether Leu­therilus Arch-Bishop of Sens did, or did not engage in the quarrel for a Real [Page 92]Absence: (all which is matter of Con­test between Monsieur Arnaud and Monsient Claude) it is enough for me that after opposition was made against the Doctrine of Pascasius, at such time as his Book was come to be publick and common, there were occasioned again very frequent and most earnest Di­sputes concerning the same Subject, during the life of Berengarius, and after his death. For although we should grant unto Mr. Claude, what we may with reason enough refuse him, we shall still find ways enough to come handsomly and quietly off, and we find our selves still in that very posture & condition, where we should just be for the ending this difference without violating that peace we endeavour to pre­serve.

For, in fine, Monsieur Claude will have it, that people had for some time, only a coufused kind of knowledge, without positively believing or reject­ing a Real Presence or Real Absence; That Pascasius was the first who took upon him to propose distinctly the Do­ctrine of Real Presence, by way of ad­dition, explication, and confirmation of the Mystery: that notwithstanding [Page 93]the opposition which was made, this Doctrine insensibly got the upper hand by the care which his disciples took for the spreading of it abroad and estab­lishing it in the world. He is obli­ged also to acknowledge, that in the time of Berergarius, those who stood for a Real Absence taking courage from the number of their Partisans, renew­ed the Contest with a great deal of heat and earnestness, even to the making a great noise in the Church, which con­tinued many years after the decease of Berengarius. The Controversie was concerning Scripture, and the meaning of those Places which were alledged on both sides, out of the Holy Fathers. Every one pretended to have them on their sides, and boasted of Antiquity, which they would needs have to stand for them. Each Party maintained that their Opinion had the true marks there­of and that such had been the Belief of former Ages. Behold here the ve­ry state of affairs between the Armini­ans and the Gomarists, before the Na­tional Synod. Here are just the circum­stances, in which (as we have seen) the Church had power to make use of [Page 94]her legal Right in deciding and propo­sing Points of Faith, and obliging the Faithful to a belief of them, even al­though they were not clearly and di­stinctly known for suczh, before the rai­sing of the Contest. And consequent­ly, laying all other Disputes aside, for the present, I think we have now ou­thing else to do, but to see whether the Church did, in those dayes, de­fine any thing concerning this matter that we may stick to this, as to the setled and resolv'd of Point, which [...] never to be forsaken. And this is what re­mains to be done in this last undertaking.

6. It is not my intention here to [...] ­course the matter concerning the ma [...] and qualities of the True Church. This is already done to my hand by the Learned Cardinal Bellarmin, and C [...] ­dinal Richelieu, with exceeding great strength of wit and clearness of reas [...] in those great Works of theirs, in which they have also apprepriated them to the Church of Rome. Should I take [...] road, I know I should be stopped more than once by those Gentlemen, who will not at all allow of what they [...] of this kind in those Works, although [Page 95]those Great men say nothing upon this subject (as I must needs think) but what they prove most evidently and convincingly. But since it does not please these Gentlemen to think so, and I for my part, profess not to intermed­dle, in this small Treatise, with things of that nature, and to reliuquish some part of my right, rather than come to Dispute it, I am willing to take another more peaceable way, and propose no­thing as yet, which themselves are not [...]liged to grant me, if they be not re­ [...]ved to condemn their own proceed­ings. I have, therefore, only this little short Discourse to make by way of cer­ [...]in Corollaries which follow, out of what seems already agreed upon.

First, When we are of a Communi­ty or Church, which is presupposed to be the True one, we are bound to ac­knowledge, that an Assembly of the Pa­ssors of that Church, which is made by publick Authority according to Rule and Custome, does represent the said Church.

Secondly, That that Church, of which the first Contestors were Members (be­fore one Party separated themselves, [Page 96]upon their condemnation) was the true Church; because she was the onely Church, before separation made. It cannot then be questioned, both Patties must of necessity be agreed upon it, but that she being the onely Church owned by both Parties, was also, with­out all doubt, at that time, even in their own opinions, the True Church and the Spouse of Christ.

Thirdly, That it belongs to this As­sembly representing this Church, to de­termine all Differences and Contests which may arise in any matter of Re­ligion whatsoever.

Fourthly, That particular persons who argue pro or con concerning the Point in Contest of what quality soever they be, and those who take part with one or other side for the upholding either, are the Parties Contesting; and as such, and under that notion, cannot repre­sent the Church, which is Judge in the case.

Fifthly, That they, as all others, are bound to submit to the Decisions of the said Assemblies.

Sixthly, That if they refuse obedi­ence, and separate themselves from her, [Page 97]framing another independent Body and Community by themselves, they are declared rebells and Schismaticks.

And finally, That those who adhere unto them, whether presently, or a long time after, are guilty of the same crime.

I think there is nothing more evi­dent and certain, than what I have now proposed. Otherwise the Church, which Jesus Christ, who is the God of Order, has established with so much Wisdom (He who is Wisdom it self) would prove a meer Babylon, and a fear­full Confusion of all things, where there never were any distinction to be made between good and bad, true and false; since it would be in the power of every one, with the assistance of a Party, to make himself at his pleasure, Judge and Church, and any thing, for the ma­king that pass for Truth, which was re­jected as a notorious falshood.

7. In Civil Communities there are alwayes Courts of Justice, which have received full Authority to Judge of Causes and Actions between particular persons. When there happens a Sure at Law between two, be they of what [Page 98]quality and condition they will, (even members of the Court it self) they are no other than Parties Contesting; Plain­tiff and Defendant. They must also have their Solicitors, their Attournies, and their Counsil to Plead for them; but it is the Judge's business to give Sentence. And when Sentence is once given, if he who was cast should slight the Decree of the Court, and be so bold as to say, that he owns it not as legal, nor the Court as lawful Judges; and that it is He and his Solicitors, and Council, and those who are his Abet­tors who constitute a true Court and Seat of Justice: I think he would be taken for no better than a Rebel and as Out-law, or one that were not in his right wits. And those who, an hun­dred years after, should dare to say, that he had reason to do as he did, would be thought to have as little judge­ment and reason as he.

Now can it be imagined, that God would permit such an irregularity, such a fearful disorder in the Government of his Church? He has been pleased to give Power and Authority to an As­sembly of Pastors, who are the Repre­sentative [Page 99]of his Church, to end all Contests in matters of Faith, in such manner as we have already seen. It is one, this or that may be held or de­nyed, before Judgement given, as any one with his Party may think fit. But when the Decree is once passed, and it comes to be defined by this Church, or Representative of the Church, what is to be believed concerning the Point controverted, he who has lost the cause (be he who he will) having, antece­dently to such definition, owned that Church to be the True one, must not, nor cannot now say, that it is not the As­sembly, but that it is he himsef, his followers and Disciples who do repre­sent, and in reality constitute the True Church. He who uses this language, and those who take part with him, in, and at what time soever it does happen, can be held for no other than true Schis­maticks.

8. This is clearly to be seen in the Acts of the Apostles, and in the Ec­clesiastical History; and Protestants themselves will, without difficulty, grant it, as they have already acknowledged it, and solemnly professed it in the Sy­nod [Page 100]of Dort. The Primitive Church was made up of Jews and Gentile who had, received the Holy Gospel. It happened, as it is recounted in the 15. of the Acts, that some of those, who had been converted from Judaisme, coming to Antioch taught this Doctrine: That if those who were of Gentils be­come Christians were not Circumcised, according to the Custome of Moses his Law, they could not be saved. There fell to be a great Contest, and a great disturbance in the Church about the matter; St. Paul and St. Barnaby strong­ly, opposing that Opinion: and others maintaining it with a great deal of ear­nestness. For the composing the busi­ness it was thought fit to send these two Saints, and some of those of the con­trary perswasion, to the Apostles and Priests at Hierusalem, to propose unto them the difficulty. They failed not in the performance of their charge, S. Paul and S. Barnabas relating unto them the favours which it had pleased God to, shew to the Gentils by help of their Ministery, without the assistance of the Law of Moses; and those others (especially some of the Pharisees who [Page 101]had been Convertedo) urging very hot­ly, Surrexerunt quidam de heresi Phari­saeorum qui crediderunt, dicentes, quia oportet circuncidi eos, &c. that it was necessary to oblige them to be Circumcised; and to observe the Law of Moses in its full [...] Upon this the Apostles assembled a Council, at which all those of chiefest note were summoned to be present, for the serious examination of the busi­ness.

And having weighed the Reasons on both sides at a large Conference, Convenerunt Apostoli & Seniores &c. Cum autem magna con­quisitio fie­ret, &c. and St. Peter having first declared himself upon the Point, and being seconded by St. Iames, with the general consent of the Holy Assembly, there passed a Decree, which was received by the whole Church, in which was defined and declared (with the assistance of the Holy Ghost who inspired them for the understanding Scripture) that Circum­cision was not at all necessary for sal­vation, Visum est Spiritui san­cto & nobis &c. as it had formerly been during the Law of Moses, which was now to give place to the Law of Jesus Christ. The business being thus concluded, this Doctrine became a Point of Faith, and those of the Pharisees who remained still obstinate in their opinion, and those others who took part with them, still [Page 102]pressing for a conformity with the Jews, were now indeed true Pharisees in Chri­stianity; that is to say, people cut of from the True Church, however they pretended that she was onely in them and their Party.

9. The same may be said of other Councils, which have been afterwards held according to the example of that one, which is the Model of all the rest.

Before the Heresie of Arius there was no speech of Consubstantiation. That wicked Priest having dared to teach, that The Blessed Word, though Son of God, was not of the same sub­stance with the Father, but onely like unto him; found many passionate fol­lowers of his doctrine even among the Bishops, who grounded themselves up­on some passages of Holy Writ. A­bout which there arose a most desperate Dispute in the Church, which caused a general disturbance to the peace there­of. For the setling whereof, and rea­niting mens Spirits in one and the same Doctrine, the great Council of Nice was called, which did define: that The Word was Consubstantial with the Father; [Page 103]which was also inserted in the Symbol or Creed. When this was done, not­withstanding that many Bishops, even of those who had assisted at the Coun­cil, remained still of the Opinion of Arius, and had made a strong and nu­merous Party, who stiled themselves the True Church, and called Councils amongst themselves: they are still held, and Protestants (generally) do even at this day, hold them for Hereticks, and all those who, after so many Ages, have followed that Sect, are treated with the same stile by them.

The same is to be said of the Mace­donians, of the Nestorians, Syn. Const. Syn. Ephes. Sy. Chalced. VI. Synod. of the Eu­tychians, of the Monothelites, and the like, who stand condemned in other Councils. For although after their condemnations, they protested that they were the True Church, slighting the Councils which had Condemned their Opinions, yet have they alwayes been accounted Hereticks, and are so at this time by Protestants themselves. And now, if after they had rejected and condemned the Articles of the Armi­nians in their Synod of Dort, those con­demned persons should have made a [Page 104]wilful separation from them, and de­clared themselves new Protestants, by a new Protestation: that according to, and in conformity with Holy Scripture, which they onely relyed upon, their Doctrine was purely Orthodox, and that they were the true Church: it is cer­tain they would have either heartily contemned their rashness, or commise­rated their extreme folly. And if they had continued refractory and obstinate in their resolution, they would have cut them off as corrupt members from the Body of their pretended Reformed Church.

And this is not to be wondered at; because in this they are agreed, as well as we; That an Assembly of Pa­stors convocated by Authority repre­sents that Church of which those per­sons, who were at Debate, are mem­bers and is acknowledged by them to be the True Church, because the only Church before Separation; and that it belongs to her to end all Differences: it not being in the power of the conte­stors to refuse submission to her Decrees, or to fall off from her, calling them­selves the true Church, at a less rate [Page 105]then being esteemed Schismaticks, and people that proceed very irrational­ly.

This being so solidly grounded and setled by mutual consent it seems to me we are now in a very ready way to end all our quarrells, and reunite our under­standings, by an application of this un­dubitable maxime unto the matter in hand, according to the Principles of Monsieur Claude himself. For he will needs have it, as we have already taken notice (and in this very knack it is that consists the great Secret of the change he so strongly fancies) that there was a time, when the True Church had but a confused knowledge of this My­sterie, without so much as dreaming of a Real Presence or Real Absence.

Those who first took upon them, as he sayes, to maintain a Real Presence, were of that Church, and those who op­posed it, were also of the same Church; because before Sentence given in the case, the Church, which was fallen into that confused knowledg, had not yet resolved which, distinctly and positively, Presence or Absence, was of obligation to be believed; and consequently, of [Page 106]what belief soever any one, for his par­ticular, was, there was no separation from her made or intended.

Afterwards Debates and Disputes increased confiderably, and broke out at length into very great heats and vio­lence, which forced the said Church to call an Assembly of her Pastors, who were her Representatives, for the clear­ing and deciding a Point of so great im­portance. Behold us now in the very same conjuncture of things, and upon the self-same terms with the Synod of Dort.

And it is very certain, that that Church in which the followers of Pas­casius were, and those, who, according to Monsieur Claude, opposed his Do­ctrine, held no Council in the ninth or tenth Age, wherein this difference was decided in favour of a Real Ab­sence. There is not any one of our ad­versaries, who so much as pretends to this advantage against us. I am also satisfi­ed, that there was none during that time, which did conclude the business, by set­ling the Doctrine of Real Presence. We can onely infer from hence, that the Church having not, as yet, declared for [Page 107]either side, was in the same state and condition, she then was in, when both Parties acknowledged her for the True Church. And even this gives us suffi­ciently to understand, that those dis­putes (if there were any) concerning the Doctrine of Pascasius, were not then come to any great height or heat; since the Church in which the Parties were, did not, as yet, take any notice of them. And certainly it is no easie matter to make it out, that there was any considerable Contest concerning this subject during the time of the tenth Age. But when, in the eleventh Age those who appeared in opposition to this Doctrine, made so much stir and noise, as to oblige the Church to prevent the mischief by a seasonable and solemn Judgement; then was it, that this same Church, which, before she declared her self, was owned for, and in reality was lawful Judge in the case, did not omit to call a Canonical Council for de­ciding the matter. And (which is ve­ry remarkable) never did hold a more solemn one, nor ever did she expresse her self more clearly and more effectu­ally concerning any subject.

[Page 108]For when Berringarius: Arch-Deacon of Angiers, (who had also wrought up­on, and gained Bruno Bishop of the same Church unto his Party) began to take up, and engage for the Doctrine of Iohn Scotus or Bertram (which at the first had made no great noise) and to main­tain it, with a great deal of vapouring and busle, against the Real Presence, two Councils were held in one year, Anno 1050. the one at Rome, and the other at Ver­celles, where the Opinion of Berenga­rius was declared heretical, as being contrary to the Word of God; and the Book of Iohn Scotus from whence he had taken it, (raising it a strain higher against the Real Presence) was also con­demned.

About some five years after, 1056 another Council was held at Tours, where be­rengarius himself appeared, to give an account of his Doctrine, which was examined in his presence, and condem­ned by a Decree made against it, to which he subscribed with his own hand, abjuring his Error, and promising un­der oath never to defend it more.

But, he breaking his oath, and falling again to broach his old Principles, ano­ther [Page 109]Council of an hundred and thir­teen Bishops, was solemnly held at Rome, where this Arch-deacon was a­gain heard speak for himself also, 1059 and his Doctrine again condemned; not onely by the Council, but by himself; who publickly renounced and anathematised it, according to that famous Formula: Ego Berengarius, &c. de consecr. dist. 2. which was com­posed and approved by the whole Coun­cil, himself having desired it should so be done, after he had burnt the Books of Iohn Scotus in full and open Coun­cil.

But he being of a most unsetled spirit, and finding much difficulty to quit the honour of being Head of a Party, which was highly agreeable to his ambitious humour, quickly began again to instruct his Schollers in the old way, and that he might make them the more sure to him, had the boldness to write against that very Formula which himself had signed with his own hand.

This was the cause, that, 1079 twenty years after, another Council was called at Rome, where this poor Relapsed creature, being now about fourscore years old, did again ask pardon for that [Page 110]miserable relapse he had made into that Error, which he now the third time retracted, and abjur'd, signing a new For­mula, which did contain, in more clear and express terms, the Real Presence, and the changing of Bread and Wine into the Body and Blood of our Lord. And he signed it purposely in that man­ner, because his Disciples, following his example, had perverted the words of the other Formula, into quite another sence.

This last time he shewed himself by his constancy to be more man than for­merly. For he persevered in repen­tance untill his death, which happened ten years after upon the Feast of the Epiphany of our Lord, when (as is re­lated by William of Malmsbury) he said: On this day it is that we Celebrate the Feast of the Apparition of our blessed Saviour, and on this day it is, that h [...] will appear to me, either to receive me into his glory, as I have some hopes he will, in regard of that Pennance I have done: or (which I have too much reason to fear) to punish me, for having sedu­ced so many poor souls.

The truth is, he left many disciples [Page 111]after him, who proved more obstinate in Error than himself had been, and who, from time to time, had the luck to make such Proselites, as our Pro­testants perchance, would make some difficulty to admit into their Communi­on. For this cause, six years after his decease, his Error was condemned a­fresh in the Council of Plaisance, 1095 where they were forced to meet in the open fields, by reason of the prodigious mul­titude of Prelates and Divines, who came thither from Italy, France, Ger­many and other parts of Europe, even from the Empire of Constantinople, with the Embassadors of Alexis, who there demanded succour against the Infidels. The Historian who was contemporary with this Council, Berthol. Con­stantiens. and gives us an A­bridgement of it, having been himself there present in the company of nigh four thousand Ecclesiastical persons, and above thirty thousand of the Laity, who were as Spectators of it, has these very words: Moreover the Heresy of Berenga­rius, which long ago had been anathema­tis'd, was here again Condemned, and the contrary, Catholick Doctrine confirmed, to wit: that the Bread and Wine when they [Page 112]are Consecrated at the Altar, are truely and essentially, not figuratively onely, changed into the Body and Blood of o [...] Lord.

After this, Item haeresis. Berengaria­na, jam ab antiquo sae­pissimè ana­thematifata, iterum, dam­nata est, & sententia Ca­tholicae Fides contra can­dem firmata, videlicet quod panis & vinum cum in Alta­ri consecran­tur, non so­lùm figuratè, sed verè & essentialiter in Corpus & Sanguinem Domini con­vertuntur. 1215. some time passed in the Church without hearing any more of this business. But the Albigenses un­dertaking it again about the twelfth Age, the fourth Council of Lateran renewed the condemnation of it about the beginning of the thirteenth. There was also to be seen one of the goodliest and most numerous Assamblies of the Clergy, that ever had been, known. For it consisted of four hundred and twelve Bishops Greek and Latin; of above eight hundred other Prelates and Doctors from all parts of the Christian world, with the Embassadors of both the Em­perours, and of all the Kings. There was solemnly confirmed the Doctrine of the Real Presence, and the substan­tial change made in the Holy Eucharist. And as in the great Council of Nice, they made use of the word Consubstan­tiality, for expressing what the Word of God teaches concerning the Divinity of the word Eternal: So in that of Lateran, they applyed the word Tran­substantiation, [Page 113]for the expressing that admirable change, which the Church, Transub­stantiatis pa­ne & vino in Corpus, &c. t. 4. Conc. Extrav. de sum. Trin. [...] firmiter. by a necessary sequel, has deduced out of the words of Christ himself.

11. Our Brethren of the Reformed Church, will here, peradventure, tell me, that they do, by no means, ac­knowledge the Church of Rome to be the True Church, as Berengarius did, and that they have no intention to follow him in obeying her Decrees, as that Arch-deacon did. I did foresee well enough that this might be objected by them, to give me occasion to fall into Dispute. But this snare is easily avoi­ded, by telling them, that this is not our business for the present. It is not now our question, whether the Church of Rome have yet at this day all the Marks of the True Church: whether she be the Holy City of God, or be­come a Babylon, being fallen into an horrid confusion and corruption of Do­ctrine. They may, if they please, find wherewithal to satisfie themselves in this Point, in those Doctors who have treated of Controversies, and particu­larly in that great Work of the great Cardinal Richelieu who has scarce o­mitted [Page 114]any thing which might be said upon this Subject. And, consequently, I think it were not hard, by very good reasons and motives, to shew these Gentlemen, that they have done them­selves no great right in separating them­selves from her. But this being a Point which may afford matter of Dispute for all such as are in the humour to quar­rel with any thing which is not accor­ding their fancy: I have taken spe­cial care to avoid it, and to say nothing of the Church of Rome. We speak here onely of that Church, of which, those, who first began the debate, were mem­bers, before she had determined any thing on either side. Whether this Church were the Church of Rome, of not the Church of Rome, concerns us not at all; so we be agreed in this, that it was the True Church at that time. I have need of no more. I will have nothing at present, but what Monsieur Claude pleases to afford me.

I will enter, with him, upon the ninth Age, when the True Church, after her good dayes, which lasted eight hundred years, found her self, I know not how, in a confusion of knowledge. After [Page 115]which, some there were, who monti­oned a Real Presence; others opposed it, still remaining joyntly together in the same Church, before they separa­ted by a refusal of obedience to her Decrees. Hereupon the Dispute grow­ing hotter and hotter, the Church gives Sentence. That Church, I mean, whereof the two Parties contesting are members: which Church is the True one, because the onely one before se­paration made for the constituting ano­ther Church apart; and which Church also has full power to end all Diffe­rences, so as to oblige to a submission to her Decrees. Behold here what is precisely required, for the concluding all I pretend to, which I shall now endeavour to make out.

12. Let us then now come to reunite all the parts of this Discourse, that we may make it up with the consent and agreement of Monsieur Claude. Be­hold here, people who are of the same Church with us, which Church, even according to himself, is the true Church there being but one in the world for them and us too at such time as all, according to him, were yet in that [Page 116]confusion of knowledge.

Some, as he tells us, think good to propose a Real Presence: Others op­pose it; and stand for an Absence. Here you have the Parties contest­ing.

When the Dispute grows hot and makes too much noise, a general Coun­cil is held, which represents this Church, and which upon the emergency of con­cestors, as we are agreed, has power to determine what is to be believed as mat­ter of Faith, even although there was a general ignorance of it before.

When the Decree is passed, those who are cast, and who before their con­demnation were of the same Church, must not say that she is unchurched, and that it is they themselves who now make up the Church, under pain of be­ing held, not onely Schismaticks, but also very extravagant fantastical persons. And those who follow them after this, and declare for them, at what time so­ever it be, become fully as criminal as those who first separated themselves from the Church in so unreasonable and so unjustifiable a manner.

This Assembly or Representative, [Page 117]having examined the proofs and reasons on both sides, and consulted with the Holy Scriptures, which are the Rule of Faith, has often declared, that the Re­a Presence and a substantial Change are to be believed; and has condem­ned as an Heresie, that opinion which stands for Real Absence.

Of all that I have now said, I cannot imagin any one Point, which can be call'd in question, as I have stated the business. And I think I have made it appear by the very words and Princi­ples of Monsieur Claude himself, that he is bound to agree with me in every particular; since by following his own conduct, we find our selves exactly and precisely in the state and condition of the Synod of Dort. In the mean time those who first stood for a Real Absence, against those who proposed a Real Pre­sence, when they saw themselves con­demned by that Church of which they were, and which before their condem­nation, was to all intents and purposes, the real True Church, as we are agreed, undertake to say, that she is not so, and that they onely, who maintain what she condemns, do constitute the True Church.

[Page 118]Now, according to the Principles a greed upon, I cannot discover how they can avoid being held Schismaticks. And, by unavoidable consequence, all those who have taken part with them these five hundred years, must needs be subject to the same censure. It being certain that they joyn with those, who separated themselves from the True Church of Christ, for no other reason, but because they found themselves con­demned by her.

It is true that that Church which is acknowledged to have been at that time the True Church, was indeed the Church of Rome or Roman Church. But what follows from thence, according to the Principles agreed upon, but that we must conclude for Her, all that has been said in behalf of the True Church, even by the consent of our adversaries themselves. And that those who were of that Church, before they withdrew themselves, upon that Judgement she gave against them, could not in reason and suffice, say, that she did now cease to be the True Church, and that she misunderstood the meaning of Holy Scripture▪ For she being the True [Page 119]Church, as themselves grant, before this happened 'twas she that was Judge thereof, according to the Decree of the Synod of Dort, and not they, who (according to the same Synod) were bound to submit to her Judgement, and to hold that for the true sence of Scri­pture, which she followed in her de­cisions.

All this is so clearly proved, with­out mixture of any proofs by way of Di­sputation, that I think I shall do well to stop here, without pretending any further, that I may peaceably draw those consequences which this great Principle affords us.

CHAP. IV. The Consequences which natural­ly flow from this Principle, by a due application thereof.

1. IN the second Chapter you may have seen, how the True Church when contests do arise, has power to decide them according to the Word of God, and to propose that unto Christians as matter of Faith, which, antecedently to such decision, they were not obliged to believe, because it was not clearly and distinctly known, but remained as yet involved in a gene­ral and confused knowledge.

In the third Chapter we did apply that uncontroulable Principle unto the subject of the Holy Eucharist, and have clearly shewed, that the Church of which the first contestors then were, and which being the onely Church, before separation made by one of the Parties, [Page 121]was also the True Church, did decide this matter, according to method and Rule, in favour of the Real Pre­sence.

From these two Verities thus esta­blished, even without Dispute, and by-wayes, we were all the way agreed upon (taking along with us the thoughts of Monsieur Claude, and allowing him whatsoever he was pleased to ask) it will not be hard (in this Chapter) to to draw some consequences which of­fer themselves unto us, and which it is impossible not to discover, how little soever we desire to reflect upon what we have fairly and candidly acknowledg­ed to be true.

2. For first, who does not see, that it is necessarily inferred from thence, that although the Real Presence had not been believed before the tenth Age, (which notwithstanding is a great mi­stake) yet we are now obliged to be­lieve it: Because the True Church of which the first Contesting Parties were members, and before their being con­demned, acknowledged her for such, has put an end to the quarrel, giving Sen­tence for, and proposing as matter of [Page 122]Faith, the said Real Presence.

Moreover that those first Abettors of a Real Absence, by refusing to submit to her Judgement, became Schismaticks; and that all those who declared after­wards for that Faction, are as faulty, and in the same crime with them. I do absolutely believe, with the Authour of The Perpetuity, &c. that, consider­ing some circumstances and certain matters of fact, which cannot be denied, it was morally impossible that such an insensible change should have been made, by passing imperce­ptibly from a belief, which is preten­ded to have been of a Real Absence to that which we now have of a Real Pre­sence. But in case such a change was made, not by way of negation, but of Addition, passing, from an obscure con­fused kind of knowledge, to a distinct positive Belief of the Real Presence, proposed for the lucidation or clearing this great Mysterie (in such manner as Monsieur Claude is pleased subtily e­nough to imagin) yet the obligation of believing it would still subsist and stand in force. Because the same Church, of which the Parties, who were first in [Page 123]Dispute about this matter, were lawful subjects, having heard and examined their Reasons, did judge, according to Rule, that it was of Faith.

It is not therefore now lawful to fol­low those who revolted against their Mother Church: for the same cause that Monsieur Claude will, without que­stion, freely grant, that it was not law­ful in Conscience, to side and take part with the Monothelites, who would by no means receive the Decree and deci­sion of the Church they lived in, touch­ing two wills and operations in Christ. On the contrary I am sure he does re­teive and reverence that Doctrine as an apputtenance of faith, although here was also a change in the same manner (by way of Addition) in the belief of the Church; and that this distincti­on of wills and operations was not, be­fore, clearly and distinctly known.

Some body, perchance, may here tell me, that, for this very reason, the Pro­testants of these dayes ought to stick to the decisions of their Church, in matters contested between them and us, because they own her for the True Church.

[Page 124]But I think it is not at all hard to discover a great difference. For making up to the head or source of the decisi­on, we shall find those who first raised the doubt, and brought these Points in­to debate, were of the same Church, which was accordingly the True, be­cause the onely Church, and owned for such by both Parties, before she de­clared her self upon the matter in dispute, which without trouble, we are agreed upon with Monsieur Claude.

The case is not here so. Because we who are at Dispute with Protestants, are not of the same Church with them, and so are not within the limits of thy maxime, which has with mutual cor­sent, been established and received. A­gain, they having taken part with those who at that time revolted from the True Church, because they would not obey her Decrees made by Canonical Judgement; it is manifest that their Community, is but a false and Schisma­tical Church according to the Princi­ples received from them in the Synod of Dort.

3. Secondly, the Church, before she gives Sentence upon any Point proposed [Page 125]examining it by Scripture and real Tra­dition, and for the better understanding them, searching into the Sentences of the Ancient Holy Fathers, endeavouring thus to reascend unto the Apostles themselves; we are from hence to con­clude, that, she being inspir'd by the Holy Ghost, who has promised to teach her all Truths, as occasions require, what she defines is alwayes conforma­ble both to Scripture and Tradition.

Thus it is that we are to learn, by her definitions, what is the true meaning or sence of Scripture, when there is place for doubting thereof.

Before the Council of Nice, there were most desperate Disputes concern­ing certain passages of Scripture, which the followers of Arius alledged for the upholding their upstart doctrine. As for example, about that in the fifth of St. Iohn, where our Blessed Saviour says that his Father is greater than he: Quia Pater major me est, Joh. 5. from whence they inferred, that he was not of the same Substance. The others, on the contrary, maintained, that this passage was to be understood, of the Son of God considered according to Humane nature, which places him in­finitely [Page 126]below the Father, and makes him submit even to the death of the Cross; but not according to his Divine nature, which renders him equal, and makes them both to be of one and the same Substance. These two sence were hotly maintained by the two Par­ries, each of them challenging the true sence or meaning of Scripture on their side. But when the Council, having throughly examined this important que­stion, had defined the Consubstantiality of The Word, making use of a terme, which is not found in Holy Writ, for the clearer expressing that Truth which she discovered there; then was there no more time nor place to doubt what was the lawful sence thereof, and there arose an obligation (through this defi­nition) of believing that that was the true one, which was given by the Di­vines vvho opposed the faction of the Arians.

The same is certainly to be said upon this occasion; especially our present cause being upon much better termy, and more strongly provided for by the evidence of the Texts alledged for it. When at first the poposition vvas made con­cerning [Page 127]the Real Presence, in the time of Pascasius (as Mr. Claude pretends) and presently opposition was made, as he is pleased to say (for at present we will assume nothing but of his free gift) there happened a great Contest, which grew yet much greater, after some time, concerning the true sence of those words: This is my Body: One side maintaining, that they did express a Real Presence; and the other pretend­ing that they onely signified, that that which our Blessed Saviour gave unto his Apostles, represented his Body. Both parties, as we have often taken notice, were of the same Church, which they acknowledged and owned to be the True Church. This Church having throughly examined the business in her General Councils, defines a Real Pre­sence, and substantial change, even to the making use of the word Transub­stantiation, which is not literally found in the Gospel, for the expressing more clearly that verity which she discove­red therein, and for the efficacious ob­structing any other sence which might be given to those words, This is my Bo­dy. From that time forward it was [Page 128]no longer lawful to doubt of the sence of them.

And by this definition, men stood obliged to believe, that they were to be understood plainly and literally, not metaphorically. When there is really place of doubt, it is not for particular persons, who are at strife, to determine the sence of the Text in Dispute, but this belongs properly to the Church, which is Judge in the case. For else there could never be any end of Di­sputes, and God should not have fur­nished us with any certain means for the finding out Truth, when doubts do arise concerning Holy Scripture, nor, consequently, for the clearing those de­bates which may arise in matters of Religion. Which certainly would be the same, as to say, that he had not provided for the Government, quiet and peace of his Church. Non quia Canon solus non sibi ad universa suf­ficiat: sed quia verba divina pro suo quique arbitratu in­terpretantes, varias opini­ones errorès­que concipi­ant. Atque ideo necesse fit ut ad u­nam Ecclesi­astici sensus regulam, scriptueae caelestis in­telligentiae dirigatur. Common. 2. c. antep. Cap. Penul. It is not (as Vincentius Lirientius sayes) that the Word of God does not contain all the Verities which we believe, but because many presuming to interpret the Holy Text according to their fancy, mishape their errors accordingly. Thus it be­comes necessary upon such occurences, [Page 129]to regulate the sence we are to give to Holy Scripture, by that mean­ing which the holy Church gives it. And from hence it was that he took oc­casion, some three years after the Coun­cil of Ephesus, to enveigh so sharply a­gainst that desperate presumption of wicked Nestorius, who had the impudence to maintain, that he alone had the gift of Understanding those Texts of Scripture which he alledged for the authorising his impious blasphemies, and that the whole Church represented in that Coun­cil, had erred grosly for want of un­derstanding them. Thus when Disputes arise, we ought not to judge of the Doctrine of the Church, by that sence which our selves give of Holy Scripture, but we must iudge of the true sence of Holy Scripture, by the Doctrine of the Church.

The same, in proportion, is to be said of the passages of Holy Fathers. For it being the custome and order of the Church to advise with them con­cerning the Judgement she is to give; regularly speaking, we ought to un­derstand them according to her Do­ctrine, whenever these arises a contro­versy [Page 130]concerning the meaning of their words, which do not alwayes prove so very intelligible, even to the Learneder sort of men. There is, notwithstand­ing, this difference, that as no one of those Fathers in particular, is the Rule of her belief, so does she not so abse­lutely determin by her Decrees, what is the meaning of such or such a passage of theirs (leaving it many times to our discussion) as she does that of ho­ly Scripture, which she permits not to be call'd in question.

4. And from hence we draw a third Conclusion; that, when in any Province or Kingdome, a difficulty does arise in matter of Religion, it is very uneffectu­al and preposto us to undertake to com­pose it by way of Disputation or Con­ference. Experience has often shewed, that such proceedings serve onely to increase the Division and render it end­less; provoking high spirits, and put­ting them upon a pike of Honour, which permits them not to be much moved with any reasons of an Adver­sary.

We must come quickly to that fixed and setled Point (I mean the Soveraign [Page 131]undeclinable Judgement of the Church) in which there are two several times or seasons which are, of necessity, to be distinguished: that which goes before, and that which followes after.

In the first of these, writing on both sides, so it be without bitterness, with a good intent and design to make Truth appear, is very lawful. And then the Reasons alledged in such Writings, the Fathers who happen to be cited pro and con, do make (as it were) Plaintiff and Defendant, Counsil and Plea in the Court. They are the Bills and An­swers. The Replyes and Reparties are the difficulties proposed on both sides. But what the Church definitively pro­nounces, having taken cognisance of, and examined things according to the Rules and proceedings of the Court, this becomes a Decree, this is Truth, this is the fixed Point we must stick to and rely upon, whether the Fathers ci­ted did distinctly believe it or no.

In the second of these times or sea­sons, in case those whose doctrine stands condemned, will not acquiesce and sub­mit to Judgement, Princes and Ma­gistrates, who are as Protectors of the [Page 132]Canons and Definitions of the Church, have a duty incumbent upon them, to procure and exact that obedience which is due, and to endeavour the quieting and reducing such turbulent spirits by such means as they shall judge most ef­ficacious. And, in the mean time it shall be lawful for the Learned to Write more vigourously against them, and to bring Scripture and Fathers (as has been practised by many knowing Con­trovertists) not by way of discussing a matter which is yet within the bounds of incertitude; but to make the weak­ness of Falsity appear, and to shew the force of Truth, and the conformity of the Judgement of the Church with the Doctrine of Antiquity.

For all other Persons, it is much more to their purpose, not to meddle with, not hearken to any thing of this kind, but to satisfie themselves, saying: This the Church has desined, this I as­cept, this I will stick close unto. In my opinion this is all which ought to be proposed to the Faithful, without ma­king them Judges of Controversies is Faith, and without giving them occa­sion to enter into Dispute concerning [Page 133]this place of Scripture and that of Ho­ly Fathers, which for the most part, are things beyond their reach and capa­city. Si quid tibi videtur vel ambiguitate pendere, vel obscuritate obumbrari. Tertull. de praesc. c. 14. Curiosity does frequently come in for a part: and that serves only to beget troubles and perplexities, when they are not able to penetrate to the secret meaning or bo [...]tom o [...] such passages; or to raise a p [...]esumption in them, when they imagin they comprehend the mat­ter: and so come to fancy themselves no mean persons searching curiously in­to every thing, with a great deal of hazard and danger to light at length upon something that may give them a check, and make them begin to waver for want of understanding, Ignorare me­lius est▪ ne quod non de­beas noris. Ibid. together with an excess of rashness and boldness. It is much better (sayes Tertullian) to be ignorant in that kind, lest by some gross mistake or ill-understanding you come at length unfortunately to know what you had better been igno­rant of. Fides tua, inquit, te salvum fecit, non exerci­tatio Scri­pturarum. Fides in re­gulâ posita est, exercita­tio autem in curiositate consistit, ha­bens gloriam solam de peritiae studio. Cedat curio­sitas Fidei, cedat gloria saluti. 'Tis Faith a Christian is to be saved by, not by discussing Texts of Scripture and passages of Holy Fathers. For the having faith, it suffices to stick to The Rule, learning the true sence of Scripture from the Doctrine of the [Page 134]Church. But the Spirit of arguing and disculling, which I here point at, comes very ordinarily from an excesse of cu­riosity, and is onely subservient to va­nity, for the gaining a little glory, by making a vain ostentation of the know­ledge one has got by his own industry and study. 'Tis but reason that Curi­osity should give place to Faith; and and vain-glory to serious thoughts and care of our Salvation. To this end it is necessary we stick close to that Rule, to that setled Principle, which is the true Science of a Christian, I mean, we ought to learn of the Church what the Word of God teaches us, and what is the meaning thereof. Non obstre­pant adver­sus regulam, nihil ultra scire, omnia scire est. Let no m [...] oppose this rare Maxime. To know no­thing more then this, is, in reality, to know all things.

5. From what has been now said, we may yet draw a fourth Sequel: That this general Rule and universal Prind­ple received and allowed of by all, [...] such manner as it has been propounded may and ought to be applyed to every particular Point controverted, that we may come to have a ready and certain solution thereof. For those who first [Page 135]opposed the Doctrine we now make profession of, in any Article debated, either were at that time of the fame Church with those whom they opposed▪ which Church they owned for the True Church, there being as yet no separation made; or they were already dismissed from her. If they were of the same, it is but seeing what that Church, by her Representative, has de­clated concerning the matter in debate. For we are agred that they were ob­liged to submit to her Judgement; so far as that, in case of contempt, it could not be lawful to take part with them, without falling, after their ex­ample, into open and direct Schism. But if they were already divorced from her, upon any other ground, or for a­ny other precedent cause, it is evident from the same reason, that they were, upon the whole matter, already true Schismaticks, because, either they them­selves, or their Predecessors having for­merly been of that Church, they ought not, after legal Sentence given, to have made a Separation; and conse­quently, that it is not lawful at this day to joyn with them, without be­coming [Page 136]complices with them, and guilty of their revolt.

This is that we call a true, solid and general Prescription against all those who contend with us. Behold here an end of the war, a conclusion of all Disputes the bond of peace, the union of hearts and understandings, the certain Rule, the immovable Point, the unquestion­able Principle, and sole abridgement of all Controversies. What we are to believe concerning the Invocation of Saints, the veneration of holy Images, of the number of Sacraments, of Pur­gatory, of Grace, of Free-will, and of Justification. Let us not now re­new those old quarrels, which have set the Christian World at odds, con­cerning these points. Let us not a­gain fall a questioning and discussing all those Texts and passages which have been a thousand times mentioned, a thousand times brought on one side, and as often returned on the other in a quite contrary sence. Let us not engage our selves in those quarrels, where the victory never appears cer­tain, because such Champions are al­wayes in a readiness to charge the ene­my [Page 137]afresh, being never out of breath, and resolved never to quit the field, nor lay down their arms.

Behold what will set us all right and bring us to an agreement in a moment, putting a period to all our troubles even before they begin.

Let us see what that Church, which was common Mother and commander of both Parties, when the war first be­gan, has resolv'd in each of these par­ticulars. Here you shall be able to dis­cover wherein true Faith consists. Be­cause the True Church, which in all mens opinions, has power (when the question is moved) to declare what is to be believed, has judged thus and thus according to those Rules, which (she never failing to apply them in due manner and just proportion) can never be deficient. He, whosoever he was, who refused obedience to that Decree, became ipso facto a Schismatick. And it is no less evident, that all who joyn with him are in the same Predicament. This is that one Fundamental and all­resolving Point, which alone can end the quarrel: and that in the most peace­able manner imaginable, without being [Page 138]obliged to enter into further debate or discussion of the matter.

And this is the reason, why, speak­ing all this while of a True Church, (which certainly is somewhere or other, as all the world acknowledges) I have purposely omitted to say any thing of the Church of Rome or of the Authori­ty of the Pope, or of his quality or prerogatives as Head thereof. For, in­fallibly I should have met with some rub or other, this being a Point highly contested between us: whereas, for my part, I was resolved to enter into no quarrel, but to be at perfect agreement, and go on my way hand in hand with those of the Protestant Church. For, I conceive, we have nothing else to do but to apply this our Rule and agreed upon Principle unto the present mat­ter, and to allow unto St. Peter and his Successors that which the Gospel gives him, as it is understood by that Church, of which we all were, when Disputes first arose concerning that subject, and according to what that Church has set forth in those great and holy Assem­blies of the first Oecumenical Councils, which are, and ought to be reverenced [Page 139]and respected by all who call themselves Christians.

I ask but this, which I think cannot be denyed me, and this alone is an as­sured means to bring us speedily to an agreement, and to cause a cessation of that lamentable division which is a­mongst us, and is so unfortunate to the Church; so pernicious to the publick good; so injurious to the peace and quiet of the People, and so fatally pre­judicial to the safety and Salvation of so many Persons.

Wherefore (for a conclusion) I humbly, and with my whole heart and foul beseech our Brethren of the Re­formed Church, in the fight and pre­sence of God, to lay aside that invete­rate prejudice they have against us, [...] which obstructs their peaceable treat­ing with us, as if we were people who refused the Word of God for the Rule of our Faith and actions.

I beseech you, Gentlemen, do not eternally use that language to us: Templum Domini, Templum Domini. Jer. 7. The Temple of the Lord the pure Word of God, the pure Word of God without any mix­ture of humane inventions and Traditi­ons. This was, and is, at this day, the [Page 140]custome and practice of the Ariant; the Sabellians, the Nestorians, the M [...] ­nothelites; the Anabaptists the Socini­ans, the Independents and Quakers, whose language this ever was, and to this hour, is; and yet I do not find, you have any great correspondence with, or kindness for that gang of peo­ple, whom, we suppose, you have as great dislike of as we our selves. Have you not taken notice, that the Enemy of Mankind himself, when 'twas to his purpose, made use of Scripture? That father of lyes said it as boldly, as some of his children afterwards, that the true sence of the Word of God made for him. 'Tis a Reflexion of Vincenti­us Lirinensis, who was much esteemed in the fifth Age of the Church, and is highly extolled even by the Magdebar­gian Centuriatores themselves. Cent. 5. c. 10. That wicked fiend (sayes he) that teaches and Master of Hereticks would needs perswade the Son of God, that, if he was the true Messias, he must cast him­self down from the Pinacle of the Tem­ple to make himself known to the world. There is nothing more false. And yet, for proof, he produced that [Page 141]passage of the 90 Psalm, Psal. 90. v. 11, 22. Sicut tunc. caput capiti, ita nune membra membris l [...] ­quuatur, membra sci­licet Diaboli membris Christi, per­fidi fideli­bus, sacrile­gi religiosis, Haeretici postremò Ca­tholicis. Common. [...]. c. 37. where it is said, He has given his Angels charge of thee, that they keep thee in all thy wayes. In their hands they shall bear thee; lest perhaps thou knock thy foot against a stone. What the Chief of Hereticks said at that time to the Chief of Chri­stians, the same do the members of that wicked one say at this time to the mem­bers of Jesus Christ, the Infidels to the Faithful, Hereticks to Catholicks, ever alledging Scripture for themselves. The question therefore is not; whether the Word of God be that Rule which we are bound to follow. There is not, not ever was any Heretick upon the face of the earth, who did not affirm this as stoutly and resolutely as any Ca­tholick can do. As the debate never arose about this, so shall the decision of this Point never end the quarrel, nor bring peace among us. There is no body questions it: neither you nor we doubt the least of it. And yet the feud for all that still increases. That then which is of true importance or concern, is, to know, whether that which we call the Word of God be really so, or no: and whe­ther the interpretation which I give or [Page 142]that which you give for the holding or renouncing an Article, be the true one. The first of these you can no more know or be secur'd of then we, Aug. cont. Ep. Man. qu. voc. fund. unless by means of the Church, to whom it is derived by certain Tradition. Learn the second then by the same way, since there is no other, by which you can come to any light thereof. This is what Vincentius Lirinensir shews in that ex­cellent Work of his.

All is not done when we have got the Rule, it must also be rightly applyed and according to art. For, when in the heat of those earnest and tedious con­tests, which do arise about some subject or other, every one will confidently affirm that he applies it right and that it is in his sence that Scripture is to be un­derstood, who can end the quarrel, or who has so much power and authority with the parties, as that his Opinion or judgement shall be regarded and bear the sway with them? Is it not absolutely necessary that it be some Judge, who has received both authority and light from God himself for the performing this office? And who can be that Judge but the True Church, in which the [Page 143]Parties were before separation, and her lawful Representative a Canonical As­sembly, which alone has full power and Soveraign Authority to say [...]uridically: It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and us? Visum est Spiritui san­cto, & nobis. Act. 15. Whatever else you can alledge, may as well be alledged by another, who may make his advantage of it in as good measure and proportion as your self can possibly do. The gift of Understand­ing, the interiour Unction, the revela­tion of the Father, the private Spirit, and a hundred other pretty inventions, which have been, and are at this day made use of, contain nothing of regu­lar, general or certain in them, or which an adversary may not affirm he has as much right to challenge as you. Who then is able to free us from uncertain­ties, in such encounters as these? who can restore us a calm after such a Tem­pest? who will bring back day to us af­ter so dark a night? who will bless us with peace after war? who can bring such spirits together again into the same Sheep-fold under one and the same Shepherd? Can this be done but by the Church of Jesus Christ? That Church which is The pillar and ground of 1 Tim. 3.1. [Page 144]Truth. That House of God, which is built upon a living Rock, Mat. 16.18. and when all the powers of Hell shall never shake, which most certainly they had done be­fore this, had she once erred in defining matters of Faith. Finally that Spouse of Jesus Christ which he has endowed and quickened with his own Spirit for the instruction and education of the Children of his Family.

7. I know you will approve of this. Nay I know it is to her you pretend to resort and make your addresses in your Assemblies or Synods for the cleering your doubts, and determining matters of difficulty and differences which often arise among you. I ask but this one thing at your hands. Do but proceed faithfully and sincerely therein. Omnes nos necesse est apud Christi tribunal ad­stare, reden­tes rationem, imprimis ip­fius Fidei. Tertull. de praescr. c. 44. And to this end, I beg of you in the Name of that Great God whom we adore, and who is to be our Judge, demand­ing of us principally an account of our Faith, that returning back to the source of our divisions, you will be pleased to reflect, that those who first questi­oned and disputed the Points which made the breach, were, even in their own judgements, of the same Church, [Page 145]which before the breach, was the only, and by necessary consequence, the True Church: That, consequently, that Church, during the contest, had full power to judge according to Rule and Order, and to define what was to be believed, and that the Parties were bound to submit to her Decrees: That those who stood condemned by her Canons, having separated themselves from her, became Schismaticks, as well as Hereticks. Because not adhering to the Doctrine of the True Church, of which they were members before their condemnation, they made a Party a­gainst her, and withdrew themselves into a society apart, which was cut off from Communion with her. And that finally all those who follow or take part with them, though a thousand years after, are no other then disci­ples and followers of Schismaticks and Hereticks.

This is the Totall of what in this linde Treatise (principally in the mat­ter of the Blessed Sacrament) I have endeavoured to evince (without con­ [...]ing or Disputing the matter) out of such Principles, or the necessary [Page 146]consequences drawn from them, as we have been perfectly agreed upon.

8. Now I beseech you, Gentlemen, give me leave to tell you with as real a desire of your eternal Salvation, as the Prophet Nathan had for that of David, when he spoke those moving words to him, which pearc'd his heart: Tu es ille vir. Alas! Gentlemen, it is you who unfortunately are engaged in the party of those first rebells, who forsook the Church, to revenge them­selves of those Decrees which condem­ned their Opinions. As the Laws both Humane and Divine, right reason, na­tural understanding, and the order and method which your selves do observe, oblige you to acknowledge, that they were bound to submit to the Judge­ment of that Church which themselves owned to be the True one, and that they could not separate from her, but by evident Schisme: so is it certain, that you (after so many ages which have passed since their Condemnation) cannot joyn with them, following their Doctrine and proceedings, without bearing a part with them in their crime, and becoming guilty of their defecti­on. [Page 147]Rather quit their company, wihose origin your selves condemn. Return into the bosom of that Church, from which you find the first Authors of that Sect could not, in Conscience and na­tural equity, withdraw themselves, as they did, upon that score onely, that the Decree was not in favour of their cause. Do not any longer trouble your selves, as they do, with Disputing, pleading, and excepting, after Sentence is once pass'd. Allow me to speak unto you in the language of that wor­thy Martyr of Christ, and great Bishop of Lyons, St. Irenaeus: Why do you, Non op [...]rte [...] adhuc quae­rere apud alios verita­tem quam facile est a [...] Ecclesiâ su­mere, cum Apostoli quasi in de­positorium dives plenis­simè in eam contulerint omnia quae sunt verita­tis, ut omni [...] quicunque velit sumat ex eâ potum vitae. Haec est enim vi­tae introïtus, omnes autem reliqui fures sunt & la­trones, pro­pter quod o­portet devi­t [...] quidem ilios: quae aut [...]m sunt Ecclesiae tum summa diligentia deligere, & apprehendere vertatis t [...]tionem. [...]ren. lib. 3. adv. haer. c. 4 C [...]ucirc;m [...]sta quae [...]in flu­ [...] & var [...] habe­ret i [...]ter se collega um, sal [...]â un [...]ta [...] hoc per uni­versam Catholicam observari placuit quod tenemus. [...] con. Crescon. c. 32. Scripturarum etiam à nobis tene [...] veritas, cum hoc facimus, quod universae placuit. Ecclesie, quam ipsarum Scripturatum commendat auctoritas. Ib. c. 33 with such pains, seek for Truth else­where, since it is so very easie to find it in the Church? for the Apostles ha­ving received it from Christ himself, have placed it there in trust, as in a rich Treasury, or in a great and stately Vessel, to the end that all those who thirst after that living water, may draw it from thence. For 'tis she which gives entry to life. Those who first separa­ted themselves from her are but theeves and robbers, who are by all means to be avoided, that we may joyn closely and solely with what comes from her, [Page 148]and learn from her the Tradition of Truth.

To conclude, That we may all be of one Soul, and one heart, being all of one and the same judgement in the u­nity of true Faith let us end all Di­sputes by the Authority of the Church, as many great Prelates have done, who were before of different opinions concerning the Baptisme of Hereticks, alwayes notwithstanding, providing for unity, as St. Augustine witnesses. And without entering into further Di­sputes concerning Texts of Holy Scri­pture, to which every one is apt to give their own meaning, let us hold it (as a thing unquestionable) with that great Saint; that we alwayes act according to Scripture, when we do what the Church ordains, and submit to what she defines, she being fully authorised to that purpose by Scripture it self. Ut quoniam sancta Scriptura fallere non potest quisquis falli metuit huj [...] obscuritate quaestionis, eandem Ecclesia [...] de illa consulat, quam sine ulla ambi­guitate [Page 149]Sancta Scriptura demonstrat. To the end that, as the Holy Scri­pture cannot deceive us, if any, through the obscurity of the question in agita­tion, fears to be deceived, he may take advice and counfil therein of that very Church which the Scripture it self, in clear terms, recommends unto us.