Images de page
PDF
ePub

COROLLARY II.

This text, and doctrine thence deduced, discover all false-pretending churches from the true.

Such as lay any other foundation than Christ the Son of God, such as “hold not the Head,” (Col. ï. 19,) such as build not upon the doctrinal foundation of the holy apostles and prophets, cannot be true churches of Christ. Let good Hilary be judge : Quisquis Christum, qualis ab apostolis est prædicatus, negavit, Antichristus est : * "He is the Antichrist, whoever denies Christ," qualis, “such as' he is preached by the apostles.” Then such as are departed from the doctrine of the apostles in fundamental points, are counted by Hilary Antichristian societies. To him we may adjoin holy Austin : Mendax est Antichristus, qui ore profitetur Jesum esse Christum, et factis negat. Opera loquuntur, et verba requirimus ? Ideò mendax quia aliud loquitur, aliud agit. Quis enim malus non benè vult loqui ? + “Antichrist is a liar, who professes Jesus to be the Christ with his mouth, and denies him in deeds ; therefore a liar, because he speaks one thing, and does another. The works speak, and do we require words ? For what evil man will not speak well ?” And again : Quære ab Arianis, Eunomianis, Macedonianis ; confitentur Jesum Christum in carne venisse, &c. Quid ergò facimus ? unde discernimus, &c.? Nec nos negamus, nec illi negant, &c. Invenimus factis negare. “Ask of Arians, Eunomians, Macedonians; they confess Jesus Christ to be come in the flesh, &c. What shall we do then ? how shall we discern him? Neither we nor they deny it. We find that they deny him in deeds.” As the apostle saith of such, “ They profess to know God; but in works they deny him.” (Titus i. 16.) Quæramus in factis, non in linguis : I “Let us seek it in their works, and not in their tongues.” If we examine their Creeds, they profess to believe all the articles, and more too; but yet in all His three offices they evacuate the truth of their pretended credence, as the learned have abundantly evinced. Which being true, then their own rule in the canon-law condemns them : Certum est quòd is committit in legem qui, legis verba complectens, contra legis nititur voluntatem : || “ It is certain that he trespasses against the law who, embracing the words of the law, practises against the mind of the law.” For “ by their traditions they have made the commandments of God of none effect.” (Matt. xv. 6.) So true is that which Ambrose, or some ancient under his name, thunders against such : Quicquid non ab apostolis traditum est, sceleribus plenum est : “Whatever is not delivered by the apostles, is full of wickednesses."

But before we enter the particulars of this inquiry, we must conclude that the question in hand ought not to be determined by particular doctors of this or that communion. It is not what an Erasmus, or a Cassander, or an Espencæus, or ferus, do teach ; nor what a Bellarmine, a Stapleton, a Scioppius, a Pighius ; nor what the Spanish divines in some cases at Trent, or the French divines in point of supremacy and defence of the Pragmatical Sanction; nor wherein the Thomists and Scotists, the Domi

• HILARIOS Contra Auxentium, p. 282. 7 AUGUSTINUS in Ep. Johan. tract, iji. tom. ix. 598.

1 Idem, tract. vi. p. 623. $ RAINOLDS, WHITAKER, SHARP, CRAKANTHORPE, WOTTON, &c. | Regula Juris 88, in vi. Decretal. tit. v.

AMBROSIUS I Cor. iv. col. 1892.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

nicans and Jesuits, do conflict. That were

That were an incongruous method, either to discern their minds by, or to accommodate any syncretisms or fallacious unims [unions]. These are but personal opinions : they will stand to none of their doctors. But what councils and authorized assemblies, what confessions and catechisms, composed by their direction and warrantry, have determined—there lies the rule of inquiry : and therefore I shall here touch upon no authorities or citations but such as are found in the canon-law, the council and Catechism of Trent, their missals, Bulls, and determinations from the chair. As for others, [I shall touch

upon them] but obiter et per transennam [“ by the way and in a cursory manner”]; as collateral proofs, or confirmed by Papal edicts; or such authors as have passed the trial of their Purging Indexes, set out by their own authority. Let us then proceed to some INQUIRIES in this affair.

INQUIRY I. Is that a true church of Christ that determines fundamental doctrines contrary to Christ and his apostles, that builds upon another foundation than Christ ?—That they have assumed Peter for the only head of the militant church, might be abundantly proved : insomuch that if princes and emperors do but perform their duty as keepers of both tables, how greatly are they offended! As when Charles V. took to himself some spiritual jurisdiction, how does Baronius exclaim, as if he set up another head of the church, pro monstro et ostento,* as a portentous monster!” which might with much more truth be retorted upon

themselves in respect to our Lord, whom they rob of his glory, when they ascribe it to Peter. Let but Peter be imprisoned by Agrippa, how does the same Baronius cry out!—Magno sanè terremotu ecclesia Christi tunc concuti visa est, cùm ipsa petra in ecclesia fundamento locata, tanta agitatione quassuri conspiceretur : † “ The church of Christ truly then seemed to be shaken with a great carthquake, when the very rock placed in the foundation of the church, was seen to be so sorely shaken.” It seems, Peter was the rock placed by Christ for the foundation of the church.

But let us look a little further. Clemens, in his first epistle to James the brother of our Lord, written to him after the apostle was dead, (as the learned Crakanthorpe hath proved, I) which is set forth at Basil, and by Turrian and others, and is extant in the first tome of the councils, and ratified by the canon-law; which speaks thus : Simon Petrus, f:c., veræ fidei merito et integræ prædicationis obtentu, fundamentum esse ecclesiæ definitus est : || Simon Peter, by the merit of his true faith, and having obtained it by his sincere preaching, is defined to be the foundation of the church." The divinity transcends the Latin in barbarism. But it seems by the forger, that it was our Lord's doing, consonant to after-popes' asserting the same : “That He committed to Peter, the blessed key-keeper of eternal life, the laws both of the earthly and heavenly empire.”T And again, treating of Peter : Hunc in consortium individuæ unitatis assumptum, id quod ipse erat voluit nominari ; dicendo,

وو

• BARONIUS ad annum 1097, n. 28. † Ad annum 44, n. 3. CRAKANTHORPE's “ Councils," p. 422. Ś Basil. 1626; Turrian. Paris. 1568, fol. 326. Il Dist. 1xxx. cap. 2, fol. 507 ; et caus. vi. quæst. i. cap. 5; et caus. xi. quæst. iii. cap. 12 et 15;

q Dist. xx. cap. 1,

edit. Rom.

p. 130.

Tu es Petrus, &c. ; ut æterni ædificatio templi mirabili munere gratiæ Dei in Petri soliditate consisteret : * “ This person being taken into fellowship of individual unity,” (O fearful !) “He would have him called that which He was ; saying, “Thou art Peter,' &c. : that the building of the eternal temple might consist in the solidity of Peter, by the wonderful gift of the grace of God.” This needs no gloss. But the learned Glossators upon the Common Extravagants,—after they have expounded Cephas to signify “a head,” they proceed : Sicut in corpore materiali est ponere caput unum, in quo sunt omnes sensus, seu plenitudo sentiendi ; sic in ecclesiá militante (ne sit tanquam corpus monstruosum, si duo haberet capita) est tantùm ponere unum caput ; videlicet, Romanum pontificem, in quo est plenitudo potestatis et auctoritatis, &c. † “ As in a material body there is but one head placed, in which are all the senses, or a fulness of sensation ; so in the church militant (lest it should be like a monstrous body; if it have two heads) there is but one head placed, namely, the Roman bishop; in whom is the fulness of power and authority.” And Boniface VIII. (in Extruv. Comm. lib. i. cap. 1. de Majorit.) : Igitur ecclesiæ unius et unice, unum corpus, unum caput ; non duo capita, quasi monstrum ; Christus, videlicet, et Christi ricarius ; Petrus, Petrique successor, &c. : “ Therefore, of the one only church, one body, one head; not two heads, like a monster ; namely, Christ and Peter, Christ's vicar and Peter's successors.”

By these doctrines we are now clearly illuminated, that, as to the influence and government of the militant church, Christ hath excluded himself from headship, lest the body should be monstrous, with two heads. Such fearful and tremendous points are taught south of the mountains ! But the truth is, they speak of themselves, and seek their own glory; (John vii. 18;) and not Christ's, whose commandments they have annulled and evacuated by their many additions to and subtractions from his. They would seem indeed to retain all, only add some; but whosoever adds, as well as detracts, is liable to the curse of God. (Deut. xii. 32 ; Prov. xxx. 6; Rev. xxii. 18; Gal. i. 8.) For hereby they stain the glory of the divine law, as insufficient and imperfect; and more especially when they add fundamental points upon peril of damnation, when they frame new articles of faith, as pope Pius IV. hath done. Articles are principles; and therefore indemonstrable, except by scripture.

1. Now when new ones are added de fide [“ as part of the faith ''], extraneous to the holy scriptures, nay, repugnant in such mighty and weighty matters, can any man alive, that is not deep in the golden cup, sedately believe the true church of Christ to be there? when, (1.) They require firm faith in the traditions, observations, and constitutions of the church of Rome:I and, (2.) Tie all churches to their sense of the scriptures; and, [require] (3.) To hold seven sacraments to be instituted by Christ; and, (4.) The Trent doctrine about justification ; (5.) The propitiatory sacrifice in the Mass ; (6.) Transubstantiation ; (7.) Purgatory; (8.) Invocation of saints; (9.) Adoration of images; (10.) Indulgences; (11.) The Roman church to be mistress of all churches, and the bishop thereof Christ's vicar; (12.) And all things in the canons and councils, but

• Dist. xix. cap. 7, p. 110, edit. Rom. 1582, + Extravagant. lib. v. cap. 1, p. 315, Rom. edit.

Bulla P1 IV. super Formá Juramenti Professionis Fidei, art. i.

of pope

especially of Trent: and in the conclusion, llanc veram catholicam fidem, extra quam nemo salvus esse potest, lic., profiteor et veraciter teneo, &c. ; you must “profess and truly hold this to be the true Catholic faith, without which none can be saved.”

But, for the easing of men's minds in these and the like particulars, they cry up the immensity of their power and privilege to dispense with scripture and apostolical doctrine. Indeed there is great need that should be well proved; and the canon-law has done the deed. For, in the first place, it is pronounced ex cathedrá, “ from the very chair" of Peter : Subesse Romano pontifici omnem humanam creaturam, declaramus, dicimus, diffinimus, et pronuntiamus, omninò esse de necessitate salutis.* Pope Boniface VIII, hath very well expressed it in his definitive sentence : “We declare, affirm, determine, and pronounce, that it is altogether necessary to salvation, that every human creature be subject to the pope of Rome.” Is not this doctrine wonderfully clear in holy scriptures, and obvious in every page ? But lest we should mistake the places, we shall be helped out with some dispensations as to scripture.

The Gloss, upon pope Nicholas's rescript to the bishops of France, expressly says, Contra apostolum dispensat ; t that he may “dispense against the apostle and against natural right :” And again, upon an edict

Martin's : : Sic ergo papa dispensat contra apostolum : I "So, then, the pope dispenses against the apostle.” And Gregory XIII. adds a note out of Aquinas : Non est absurdum quoad jus positivum : “ It is not absurd as to a positive law.” And again : Secundùm plenitudinem potestatis de jure possumus supra jus dispensare : $ where the Gloss adds, Nam contra apostolum dispensat, et contra canones apostolorum, item contra Vetus Testamentum in decimis. According to fulness of power, we can of right dispense above,” or “beyond," “ right.” “ For he dispenses against the apostle, and against the canons of the apostles, and against the Old Testament, in tithes.” Our Lord determines marriage not to be dissolved but in case of whoredom : (Matt. v. 32; xix. 9 :) but Gregory III. orders, “If a wife be infirmad debitum, then jugalis nubat magis, “let her husband marry rather,qui non potest continere. || Our Lord teaches “not to resist evil :” (Matt. v. 39; Rom. xii. 17:) but Innocent IV. teaches, vim vi repellere, et utcunque gladium, &c., alterum altero adjuvare ; "to resist force with force, and help out one sword with another.” I might show it in the case of oaths and vows, and several others ; as, If a priest commit fornication ; though by the canons of the apostles he ought to be deposed, yet by the authority of Sylvester let him do penance for ten years, &c.** But enough of this.

2. Let us proceed to show their power in the point of SUBTRACTIONS, in some particulars.

(1.) As to the holy scriptures.—Let us observe several points.

(i.) They substitute the Vulgar Latin translation to be the authentic word of God, instead of the original Hebrew and Greek. Of which an author of their own attests, that “the Roman church permits not the

[ocr errors]

Extrav. Com. lib. i. cap. 1, De Major. et Obed. p. 212, Romæ ; et Quicquid salvatur est sub summo Pontifice, ibid.; Gloss, col. 205. † Caus. xv. ix. quæst. vi. cap. 2, Romæ, col. 1442. 1 Dist. xxxiv, cap. 18, p.

§ Decretal. lib. iii. tit. viii. cap. 4, col. 1072.

|| Caus. xxxii. quæst. vii. cap. 18, col. 2156. In vi, Decretal. tit. xi. cap. 6, p. 717. “ Dist. Ixxxii. cap. 5, col. 529.

230.

وو

scriptures but in Latin.” * But we need no further witness than the sanction of Trent; which appoints and declares, “that the old Vulgar edition, &c., should be used for the authentical, in public lectures, disputes, preachings, and expositions; and that none dare or presume to reject it upon any pretence." +

(ü.) The common people are not to read them.—Indeed Pius IV., in the fourth rule for the managing of the Purging Indexes of Books prohibited according to the appointment of Trent, grants to read them, if translated by Catholic authors, and leave had from the priest or confessor ; else not : since, as they say, si passim sine discrimine permittantur, plus inde, ob hominum temeritatem, detrimenti quàm utilitatis oriri ; $ “if they be commonly permitted without distinction, more detriment rises than profit, through the rashness of men.” But in Clement VIII's observation on that fourth rule, this faculty or licence of reading or retaining Vulgar Bibles is wholly taken away; and [it] concludes, Quod quidem inviolatè servandum est, $ “Which is to be kept inviolably.”

(iii.) They must be received and understood according to the sense of the Roman church.Cujus est judicare de vero sensu et interpretatione scripturarum sanctarum : || “In whose authority it is to judge of the sense and interpretation of the holy scriptures.” It is said of Averroes, that he anointed Avicenna’s books with poison, in design upon him; and what cause we have to fear the like from their commentaries, let the learned judge. But besides, since the Lateran decree of the pope's superiority to a council, we are in the dark what their church is. But Paul II. expounded it to poor Platina, as himself relates : Torvis oculis me aspiciens, &c., Ac si nescires omnia jura in scrinio pectoris nostri collocata esse, sic stat sententia : loco cedant omnes, eant quo volunt ; nihil eos moror : pontifex sum ; mihique licet, pro arbitrio animi, aliorum acta et rescindere et approbare. Let it be Englished by the abbot's version : “Know ye not that I am infallible, and carry all their judgments and reasons in the cabinet of breast ? I consider no man's person :

I pope ; and it is in my power to null or confirm their acts, as I think good myself.” ** This case is manifest.

(iv.) They equal the canons and traditions to the scriptures.--Pari pietatis affectu ac reverentiá suscipit et veneratur :ft they “receive and reverence the one with equal pious affection as the other." And for this in the canon-law we have ample testimony: “All the sanctions of the apostolical seat are to be received as if confirmed by the voice of holy Peter himself : 11 and although the yoke imposed by that holy seat be scarce tolerable, yet let us bear and endure it with a pious devotion. And if any man sin against them,noverit sibi veniam denegari, “let him know that pardon shall be denied him.”$$ Again : Nulli fas est vel velle vel posse transgredi apostolicæ sedis præcepta : |||| “It is lawful for none 80 much as to will, much less to be able, to transgress the precepts of • “ History of the Cardinals,” p. 4. + Sessio iv.

Index Libr. prohib. reg. iv. $ Obs. in reg. iv. Rhotun. 1640, ad calcem Concil. Trident. || Concil. Trid. sess. iv. ; et Pii IV. Bulla super Form. Juram. Profess. Fidei, art. ii.

PLATINA in Vita Pauli II. fol. 336, A. edit. Paris. 1505.

“ History of the Cardinals,” p. 122. 17 Conc. Trident. sess. iv. 11 Dist. xix. cap. 2 et 3, col. 106. $$ Dist. xix. cap. 1, col. 105.

||| Dist. xix. cap. 5, col. 109; et Ivonis Epist. viii. Paris. 1610 ; el Synod. Rhemensis, p. 47, Francof. 1600.

my

am

[ocr errors]

وو

« PrécédentContinuer »