I.

PART to breed up the youth of that nation, where they have liberty of all the Greekish rites, only acknowledging the supremacy of the Pope "."

No difference about

rightly understood.

b

But though we have not express words for offering of Sacrifice if Sacrifice, nor the tradition of the Patine and the Chalice (no more had their own ancestors for a thousand years), yet we have these words, "Receive the Holy Ghost; . . Whose sins thou dost remit, they are remitted," &c. "Be thou a faithful dispenser of the Word and Sacraments ";" than which the Scriptures and Fathers did never know more; which their own doctors have justified as comprehending all essentials; which, being jointly considered, do include all power necessary for the exercise of the pastoral office. We acknowledge an Eucharistical Sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving; a commemorative Sacrifice, or a memorial of the Sacrifice of the Cross; a representative Sacrifice, or a representation of the Passion of Christ before the eyes of His Heavenly Father ; an impetrative Sacrifice, or an impetration of the fruit and benefit of His Passion, by way of real prayer; and, lastly, an applicative Sacrifice, or an application of His merits unto our souls. Let him, that dare, go one step further than we do; and say that it is a suppletory Sacrifice, to supply the defects of the Sacrifice of the Cross d. Or else let them hold their peace, and speak no more against us in this point of Sacrifice for ever.

Yet in his margin he hath placed a cloud of our doctors, Whitaker, Morton, Chillingworth, Potter", Fulke', Reynolds, Latimer', without citing a syllable of what they say, saving only Latimer and Reynolds-that "the name of Priest importeth Sacrifice" or "hath relation to Sacrificem." In good

b Continuation of the Turk. Hist., [by Knolles,] in the life of Amurath IV. [p. 1485.]

[Ordination Service.]

d [See the Answer to La Millet., (vol. i. pp. 54, 55), Disc. i. Pt. i; and above c. ii. sect. 7. p. 88.]

e

[Controv. ii. Qu. (6.) c. 3. (p. 567); cited by R. C., Surv., ibid. c. ix. sect. 6. p. 132.]

f [De Missâ, lib. iv. c. 1. (nothing to the purpose; and see lib. vi. c. 3. §8); cited by R. C., ibid.]

[(Relig. of Protest.,) c. ii. p. 52. (§ 1); cited by R. C., ibid.]

h [(Answ. to Knott's Charity Mistaken,) p. 72. (not a word to the purpose); cited by R. C., ibid.]

[(Annot. on Rhem. Testam.,) Hebrews, c. v. (v. 1; unfairly cited); cited by R. C., ibid.]

k [Conference with Hart, (c. viii. sect. 4. p. 316. Latin transl. Oxon. 1610); referred to by R. C., ibid.]

III.

time; to do him a courtesy we will suppose that all the rest DISCOURse say as much. Such Sacrifice, such Priest. Let the reader learn not to fear dumb shows. There is nothing which any of these say which will either advantage his cause or prejudice ours.

SECTION THE SEVENTH.

last chapter

256 Here he professeth to "omit the survey of my last [Of the chapter";" yet, because he toucheth some things in it upon in the Vinthe by, I am obliged to attend his motion.

dication.]

First, I wonder why he should term us "fugitives "." If we be "fugitives," what is he himself? No, we are ‘exules’— excluded out of our country, not 'profugi'-fugitives of our own accord from our country. And we hope, that he, who "goeth on his way weeping, and beareth forth good seed, [Ps. cxxvi. shall return with joy and bring his sheaves with him." If.] not, God will provide a resting place for us, either under Heaven or in Heaven. "We praise Thee, O God, we acknowledge Thee to be the Lord."

the means

the unit

Christian

In the conclusion of my treatise I proposed three ready [Of one of means for the uniting of all Christian Churches, which there proseemed to me very reasonable. One of them was, that posed for whereas some sects have contracted the Christian Faith over ing of all much, by reviving some heresies condemned by the primitive Churches.] Church; and, on the other side, the Church of Rome had enlarged the Christian Faith over much, by making or declaring new articles of Faith in this last age of the world;the Creed or Belief of the Church, containing all points of Faith necessary to be known of all Christians, should be reduced to what it was in the time of the first four general Councils (I might add, and many ages after). No man dare say, that the Faith of the primitive Fathers was imperfect or insufficient P.

Against this he maketh three objections,

fundamen

First, that "there are no such fundamental points of Faith There are as Protestants imagine, . . . sufficient to salvation, though tals.

PART other points of Faith sufficiently proposed be not believed 9."

I.

and c. vi.

1, &c.

This objection is compounded of truth and falsehood. That there are such fundamentals, he himself confesseth elsewhere, which are necessary not only necessitate præcepti' but Hebr. v. 12. necessitate medii;' and if he did not confess it, the authority of the Apostle would evince it. That the belief of these alone is sufficient for the salvation of them to whom no more is revealed, he dare not deny. And that the belief of these is sufficient to them who do not believe other truths which are revealed unto them, no Protestants did ever imagine. Observe how cunningly he confounds the state of the question. The question is not, what is necessary for a man to believe for himself, this is as different as the degrees of men's knowledge, but what may lawfully be imposed upon all men, or what may be exacted upon other men to whom it is not revealed, or to whom we do not know whether it be revealed or not. Then if he would have objected any thing material to the purpose, he should have said, that the belief of all fundamentals is not sufficient to salvation, unless other points of Faith be imposed or obtruded upon all men, whether they be revealed or not revealed to them. And this had been directly contrary to the plain decree of the general Council of Ephesus, that no new Creeds nor new points of Faith should be imposed upon Christians, more than the Creed then received". His second objection is this,-"Though there were such to be be- fundamentals, yet, seeing Protestants confess they know not lieved in which they are, one cannot know by them who hold so much salvation as is necessary to a true Church."

How much is necessary

order] to

ordinarily.

I do not blame either Protestants or others, especially private and particular persons, if they be very tender in setting down precisely what points of Faith are absolutely necessary to salvation; the rather, because it is a curious, needless, and unprofitable speculation. Since the blessed Apostles have been so provident for the Church, as to deposit and commit to the custody thereof the Creed, as a perfect rule and canon of Faith, which comprehendeth all doctrinal points which are absolutely necessary for all Chris

257

III.

tians to salvation, it were great folly and ingratitude in us DISCOURSE to wrangle about circumstances, or about some substantial points of lesser concernment, whether they be so necessary as others. This is sufficient to let us know, who hold so much as is necessary to a true Church in point of Faith; even all those Churches which hold the Apostles' Creed as it is expounded in the four first general Councils.

vealed

His third and last objection followeth; "All points of All reFaith sufficiently proposed are essential and fundamental,... truths not nor can any such point be disbelieved without infidelity, and essentials. giving the lie to God, as Protestants sometimes confess "."

If by sufficient proposal' he understand the proposal of the Church of Rome, I deny both parts of his assertion. Many things may be proposed by the Church of Rome, which are neither fundamental truths, nor inferior truths, but errors, which may be disbelieved without either infidelity or sin. Other men are no more satisfied that there is such an infallible proponent, than they satisfy one another what this infallible proponent is. If either a man be not assured that there is an infallible proponent, or be not assured who this infallible proponent is, the proposition may be disbelieved without "giving God the lie." But if by sufficient proposal he understand God's actual revelation of the truth, and the conviction of the conscience, then this third objection is like the first, partly true and partly false. The latter part of it is true, that whosoever is convinced that God hath revealed any thing, and doth not believe it, "giveth God the lie;" and this the Protestants do always affirm. But the former part of it is still false. All truths that are revealed, are not therefore presently fundamentals or essentials of Faith; no more than it is a fundamental point of Faith that St. Paul [2 Tim. iv. 13.] had a cloak. That which was once an essential part of the Christian Faith, is always an essential part of the Christian Faith; that which was once no essential, is never an essential. How is that an essential part of saving Faith, without which Christians may ordinarily be saved? But many inferior truths are revealed to particular persons, without the actual knowledge whereof many others have been saved; and they themselves might have been saved, though those truths had t [Ibid., p. 136.]

I.

PART never been proposed or revealed to them. Those things which may adesse or abesse-be present or absent, known or not known, believed or not believed, without the destruction of saving Faith, are no essentials of saving Faith. In a word, some things are necessary to be believed when they are known, only because they are revealed, otherwise conducing little, or it may be nothing, to salvation; some other things are necessary to be believed, not only because they are revealed, but because belief of them is appointed by God a necessary means of salvation. These are, those are not, essentials or fundamentals of saving Faith.

[Of another means of reunion

there proposed.]

Ancient Popes

challenged not sovereignty jure Divino.

Another means of reunion proposed by me in the Vindication, was the reduction of the Bishop of Rome from his universality of sovereign jurisdiction jure Divino to his ‘exordium unitatis,' and to have his Court regulated by the canons of the Fathers, which was the sense of the Councils of Constance and Basle".

Against this he pleadeth ;

...

First, that "ancient Popes practised or challenged Episcopal or pastoral authority over all Christians, jure Divino, in greater ecclesiastical causes;" and for the proof thereof referreth us to Bellarmine.

To which I answer, first, that the pastors of Apostolical Churches had ever great authority among all Christians, and great influence upon the Church, as honourable arbitrators, and faithful depositaries of the genuine Apostolical Tradition ; but none of them ever exercised sovereign jurisdiction over all Christians. Secondly, I answer, that the Epistles of many of those ancient Popes, upon which their claim of universal sovereignty jure Divino is principally grounded, are confessed by themselves to be counterfeits. Thirdly, I answer, that ancient Popes in their genuine writings do not claim nor did practise monarchical power over the Catholic Church, much less did they claim it jure Divino; but what power they held, they held by prescription, and by the canons of the Fathers, who granted sundry privileges to the Church of Rome in honour to the memory of St. Peter and the imperial city of Rome. And some of those ancient Popes have challenged their