"fl^^i" 
 
 >?r^ 
 
 "If 
 
 "^ 
 
 «Ei 
 
 rt 
 
 \"y 
 
 ^4 
 
 ---s^' 
 
 y 
 
 :^"%. 
 
 ^^ 
 
 i^asd:sm ;4.^ *.i^*^ 
 
 1*:. 
 
 i^^ 
 
 
 %i' 
 
^ . i S , j^ 
 
 LIBRARY OF THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY 
 
 PRINCETON, N. J. 
 
 Division 
 
 Section. 
 
 
 M 
 
If-IS 
 
 l-^'A- 
 
 
 ■-« :tv-^- 
 
 V 
 
 k^ 
 
'r- 
 
 iffii. 
 
^c^ /l4^*^/f ^V^ut^w .Jk^C^'~^ ,i^ '^r^r><X^ /^■^''^^^'^^^^^ ^^ 
 
 
 
 r\ 
 
 •f ;^ CU^^s^ ^ ^ (^..ZjCS^ Vv,rt^ ^' Py^i^-e^ ^ 
 

 J^^^-%'^'^ 
 
 ^^^^:f/^/'-/r'^'^^^^ 
 
 

THE 
 
 L A Y M A N's A P O L O Gi% 
 
 For returning to Primitive 
 
 CHRISTIANITT, 
 
 Shewing 
 
 From theTeftimonies of Ancient, and the Conceflions of Modern 
 Writers, that the Greeks Roman, and ii^-^///^ Churches, as well 
 
 as the Pretended Churches of the Anti-Epi/copal ReforpwfioiJTof {"•,•.'•/ 
 have each, in fome degree, departed from the Do^W^tf'^nd ' '' - .^, . 
 
 Pradice of the Catholick Church : / ^ "'^ 
 
 MAY 18 1929" 
 
 And Pointing out \^ <i^ 
 
 A PureEpifcopal Church in EnglanW^h\ch teaches and>|^ft§;[J,^[_ StVj^^ 
 
 ALL the Ordinances of Chriil ai^his Church in their £v?n gg ' J ■ 
 
 lical PerfeilioH. 
 
 Written, in the Year 1745, by THOMAS PODMORE, 
 at that time Barber and Peruke-Maker in Manchester. 
 
 From the begimiing it vjas not fo. S. Matth. xix. 8. 
 
 Pro've all things : holdfaji that <zvhich is good. I Thefl'. v. 2 I . 
 
 Be ready airways to ginje an anjKver to every one^ nx)ho ajketh you cs. 
 reafonof the hope 'which is in you, •ivith meeknefi and fear, i Pec. 
 iii. 15. 
 
 " Meeknefs permits me to feek out for fome purer Church, if 
 
 *' that may conveniently be had for me— r my endeavour fo to 
 
 ** do is extremely commendable.'* Dr, Hammond' sPra8 leal C a- 
 techijm^ hook 2. § 4. 
 
 ** What I propofe to myfelf, is to fearch into the Ancients, to 
 ** prove all things, to hold to thofe which are good, and never to* 
 ** recede from the Faith of the Catholick Church." 5. Jerotn. 
 ipiji. 1 5 9 . «^ Minsr. 
 
 L E E D E S : 
 
 printed by James Lister ; and fold by the Bookfellers at Manchefler ; ar^ 
 by M. Cooper, at the Goldtn Ball, in Fater'nojier-Ronv , LO ^ D Q l'^ 
 MDCCXLVII. 
 
 [ Price ftiicht Two Shillipss and Six p^nce. ] 
 
[ i'i ] 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 Ittki^T'"'nf^'""""^^'''^''''^ "^^^'^ this 
 httle book wdhave ta itruggU with ; butbeim fuU 
 
 1 cmnot doubt of its meeting witbfime Succefs ^ ' 
 t lole that are at eafe, and with the contempt of the 
 n^rf ^-^'i God remembreth them, and for< ettetii 
 
 P-L/.r°v P^^ ''^ '' "^'"-e half dead among the 
 
 co^eied Huh Silver, and ^er feathers like yelW Gold, 
 GOZ) J word abounds wiib tromites of the yet f;>Ll 
 
 ;r hts proper Mion. Blejfed be the sLlrds, wM 
 
 % ::fff^"^'.^'PPy 'he People, ^hoJhdlha^/S 
 Sle^ads to provide them their meat t„ die feafin < 
 
 \J\nt\r" ''■^fA^/'^^.^ «;..«., either of hT\n<^. 
 
 1 te:"^'""^ '\?' '^^'"^ -"'> '^-^ --1 
 
 /aJv. , vS )'"'' "^ <^f enabling any of my Lay-br-- 
 '^''"',^fefendagain,Uhe attacks of the eien^ti^^^^^ 
 once delivered :o the Saints, together ^ith't^l^rlh^ 
 
 which 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 Tvhkh they pra5fifed through the heft and pur eft ages \ 1 
 (hall think my poor labour well he-rowed, ^ And why may 
 we not hope t '' No inftrument is infiifficient in GOD's 
 «' hand : and he often choofes the meanefl, that we may 
 ^'perceive it is his work •, that thepraije may he to GODy 
 *•• and not to man" ( a ) 
 
 For my own part^ who am the weaked of allin^ru- 
 'mails ^ Ihope 1 (hall patiently hear the reprr^ach^ which 1 
 mttil expeU to meet with for the truth's fake. For tho* 
 we floould grants /^^./ all men love the truth, and con fe- 
 quently might expe^^ that they would notperfecute us for 
 it ', yet ( as S, Jugi^ftin ob(erves) " thc(e who love any 
 ^' thing e!(e,would have what they fo love^ to he the truth : 
 «' and foraj?mich as the[e would not he deceived., they are 
 '-'■ unwilling to he convinced that they are fo, 1 hey lev e 
 '-'■ the truth, when ftje fhews her beauty •, hut hate her^^ 
 '' when floe fljews their departure from her. For., being 
 '' unwilling to he deceived., and yet defirous to deceive ; 
 " they love her., when fhe di(c overs her f elf -, and hate 
 *' her., when foe does fo hy them f b ).'* 
 
 Jnd hy the fame rule, for the fame rea(on, will this 
 fort of men hate iheirftrument, wJoich hy her brings their 
 Sin to reme?nhrance. 
 
 But this muft be endured., with hopes of Better things 
 from niany others., who will follow after Truth., when 
 once they have difcovered her. And that the number of 
 thefe may he daily encreafed, and that Every Reader of 
 this (hort treatife may be of that number^ is the earneft 
 prayer of 
 
 Fits well-wi(her and humble Servant., 
 
 THOMAS PODMORE. 
 
 J;'Jaru-he.1er,.All 
 Saints, 1745. 
 
 r^] Preface to the Cafe of the Rafale and Pontificate : London, 1702. 
 h ]■ S. Augvul, ConfeC B. X. C. 23* 
 
 T H B 
 
THE 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 ' Pag:. 
 
 OUR Religions in the world. ■ , i 
 
 The evidence for the Chrifiian by far the moft bright, ib^ 
 
 But theChrillian Ciiurch is divided, and fubdividud. z 
 
 The great Divilion is into Eajlern and Wejlern. ibid. 
 
 Eaflern confifts of feveral Churt:hes, of which the | .,., 
 
 Greeh is the moft numerous and the moft pure. — \ 
 
 The Weilern of Romanijls and Frotejlants j and of the ") 
 
 Proteftants the Church , of England is (at prefent fuppofed > ihid, 
 
 to be) the pureft. 3 
 
 It is certain, that tiiefe difagreeing Churches cannot -^// | .r.^ 
 
 be right. — -— ^-^ \ 
 
 However, there is a Golden Rule to try them by, Antiqui- \ ., . , 
 
 ty, Univerfality, and L'onfent. ' 3 
 
 The Greek Church declares for this Rule. " ihid. 
 
 As does the Roman Church. ■ ' 5" 
 
 And the Church of England. _. ihid^ 
 
 And alfo many of the Anti-Epifcopalians. ■ ibid. 
 
 This Golden Rule proved and applied. — ■ 4 
 
 Firp, to the Doclrine and Pradice of the Greek Church., 
 
 CHAP. I. 
 
 Of Tranfubilantiation and the Adoration of the Hoft, — 9- 
 
 C H A P. 11. 
 
 Of praying to Saints and Angels. ■ * 14 
 
 CHAP. III. 
 
 Of the Worftiip of Images. — 16 
 
 In all thefe fhe has departed from the Rule laid down. 
 Secondly i to the Dodrine and Pradiice of the Roman Church. 
 
 CHAP. IV. 
 Of the Boman Church, with regard to the fubje£ls of the 1 
 foregoing Chapters. ■ ■ ■ ■ ■■ 3 
 
 She alfo has departed from the Rule in each of the Three, > 
 and in Twelve other Particulars, as — 3 
 
 C PI A P. V. 
 Of the Supremacy of the Pope or Biihop of Rome* — ^ ^tj 
 C H A P. VI. 
 
 Of Purgatory. ' — — Z^ 
 
 C H A P. VII. 
 Of taking the Apocrypha into ths Canoji'of Scripture. 3T 
 
 C H A F« 
 
E R R A T A. 
 
 ^g « .1 ,1,^ 4 ■ ■ contrar. contrary 
 
 6o - I 21 i perceive receive 
 
 8o ■ ' 20, 21, 2 2. deleatlhetiuEen written to aftdand thlt 
 
 Sg I ■ 1 1 I Sabboth — Sabbath 
 
 gz « 1 1 ■ ■ himfelves himfelf 
 
 J 04. ■ 23 ■ Father — Farther 
 
 1 1 1 ■ 4 • Euchariftical Ecclefianical 
 
 137 ■ 10 — — — fpeaking of her; her fpeaking of 
 
 i^j ■ ■ ■■ 6 ' ufe Ure 
 
 J 65 ■! . 1 1 i iw 9 wii I Calvinift's Calvinift 
 
[ 1 1 
 
 The Layman's Apology 
 
 For returning to 
 
 Primithe Chrifltanity. 
 
 The IlSirROBUCriO N. 
 
 RELIGION, or the facred band by which Man is en- 
 gaged to love and ferve God in expeftation of eternal 
 happinefs, fhould be the main concern of every perfon 
 who is cnlifled into that fervice, which is indeed perfcft 
 freedom. 
 
 Whether there be any people deftitute of all notions of a God and 
 a world to come, let others diipute. Religion, thank God, in- 
 fluences the world in general ; and can any Man be in earneft about 
 it, and not wifh that all the world was of his mind ? that all were 
 brought into the way, which he believes right ? 
 
 There are at this day four principal fe£ls, which do each of 
 them claim the venerable charafteriftick of being the true religion^ 
 And thefe are Chrillianity, Judaifm, Heathenifm, and Mahometifm. 
 Indeed, properly fpeaking, Judaifm was but Chriftianity in Type, 
 though in time greatly corrupted; Heathenifm was a greater cor- 
 ruption ; and Mahometifm may be called an herefy of Chriftianity. 
 And in this view there neither is, nor ever was, but one religion 
 in the world. 
 
 Chriftianity, with refpeft to Judaifm, Heathenifm, and Maho- 
 metifm, ftands upon evidence peculiar to itfclf alone. Mofes and 
 the Law have no Prophecies nor Types of them, as the Mcffiab 
 has ; yet there was evidence enough to demonftratc the truth of 
 thatdifpenlation, beyond all difpute. 
 
 But the evidence for the Chriftian difpenfation Ihines far more 
 bright. A late ingenious writer (a) has demonftrated the truth 
 of Chriftianity hy four marks, incompatible with any impofture, 
 that ever yet has been, or that can poffibly be ; and by four additi- 
 onal marks has, as himfelf moft truly cxprefles it, (h) *' fhewM the 
 ** ghryoin ; which, as the fun, not only difpels the darkncfs of 
 ** error, but obfcures all inferior truths, that, like the leffer light* 
 
 A •* of 
 
 (a) Mr. Leflie'i fhort and eafy method with the Jews. Method witl 
 Deifts. ViHdication" j an4 Tru^b ef Chjifliiinity ^fycr^ltr»:;\J, /^ l^« 
 
 with the 
 
2 ' The L AT MAN'S APOLOGT. 
 
 " of moon nnd ftsrs, difappear at the approach of thisfuperior 
 ** light, and have no giory by reafon of the glory that excelleth. " 
 
 Bat then, alas ! the Chriftian Church is divided, yea, and fub- 
 diviued. 
 
 leg 
 
 reat Divifion is into Eafiern and Weflern. 
 
 The Eaftern confifts of feveral Churches, of which the Greek is ^ 
 the moft numerous and the moll pure. 
 
 The Weftern is fub divided into Romanics and Proteftants ; and 
 of thole commonly called Proiellants, 1 beg leave to fay for the pre- 
 fent, that the Church of England is the purell. 
 
 This, however, is certain ; they cannot ^//be right. Whether 
 /;«>• of thera be quite fo, or whether they have noi afl erred in fome 
 point or oiher/even of great conftquence, is what I do not fay at 
 prcfcnt ; hut I will lay "down a Rule, which the Greek, Roman, 
 ?.r.d En'.;lifli Churches, yea many of the Anti-epifcopal Protcllant 
 profefiors, have publickly declared for ; and by that fame Rule I 
 wilt try, Avhere I can find the moft pure Church upon Earth, and 
 repofingmyfclf in her bofom, I will pray that all nations may flow 
 in unto her. 
 
 Now the Rule is this : ^he Holy Scripture, as interpreted by the 
 Soarim andpraBice of the Cat ho lick Church for the firft four ages : 
 The Golden Rule nf V incentius Lirinenfts \ Antiquity, Vnlverfality^ 
 end Confent : What has been taught andpraBijed by the Church at 
 nil times', in all plates, and by all the faithful For, " Whatever 
 «' was anciently held by the Univerfal Church, and did not receive 
 ** its inftitution from any council, is moll certainly an Apoftolical 
 *' IVadition:" as it is expreffcd in the well-known words of S. 
 Augullin. 
 
 The Greek Church declares for this Rule in the following words : 
 " We believe the divine and holy fcripture to be given by God, 
 *' and for that reafon we ought to believe it without any doubt, but 
 •' no otherwile than according to the interpretation and tradition of 
 «' the Catholick Church (a)r And in the fame book flie had be- 
 fore faid, (h) " Nor does the oriental Church hold any thing but 
 *' the divine word rightly believed, and pioufly explained by the 
 «* Holy Fathers, and the Traditions received from the Apollles by 
 <• word of mouth, and prefervcd by the fame Holy Fathers to our 
 •» own time." Now, 
 
 (a) Synodus Jcrofolj'raitan.j; p. ?i6^ P^r'.s E-iiticr/, (^) Id. p. 2.3. 
 
The INTRODUCTION. . 
 
 Now. as it happens I am able to give a corrobonting evidence 
 to the authen.,c.ty of this Paris Edition of the book jull quoted. Th; 
 Gemleman, to whom I am indebted for the pall, ges now cited 
 ana wHo„, ,„,, Igotto confultthe book fo' me') infom ' S 
 
 at Conltananople in the month of September A. D. 172, by fere- 
 in.as Patnarch of Conllantinople, Athanaf.us Pattiarch'o/'Ant och 
 Chryfanthus Patriarch of Jerufalem. and ten other Biftops. This 
 paper was ,ent mto England upon occafton of an attempt, which was 
 
 Which m 1717 had rellored divers pr mitive ufaaes which u..^,>. 
 litovifepraftifed by the Greek Church. ^ ' '""^'' """= 
 
 " ^J"^^^"'" Church decrees, (.)_■■ That no man (ha!! dare to put 
 
 " tlZX i'^T"T I'P? ^°^^ '"'" ^8^'"" '"<' unanimous con- 
 to Z\ !f"'; ^""^ "'''^ PrIelUf that Church isobli.ed 
 to declare and fay ■ (b) ■• I do receive the holy fcriptures in fht 
 ., fame lenfe that holy mother Church doth, and alsvays hath--: 
 
 neither will 1 receive and interpret then, otherways, thin accoid- 
 
 mg to the unanimous confent of the Fathers." 
 
 pl„ce take heed that they never teach any thing in a fermon 
 
 which they would h,ivc to be reli.iouny oblerved and be" "d bv 
 
 the people, but what is agreeable to the doflrine of the oid and new 
 
 Tellament, and which the Cathoiicli Fatliers and Ancient Doito^ 
 
 ;; have colleaed from that very dodrine." And againfeirvst;; 
 
 But before all things this we mull be fure of efpecially, that this 
 
 ;_ bupper be m luch wife done and minillred, as our Lord and " 
 
 viour did and commanded to be done, as his holy Apoilles uf-d 
 
 It. and the good Fathers in t.hc Primitive Church; frequented it;- 
 
 TheConfeffion of Faith made with common confent bv th- 
 French i Reformed] who defire to live according to the purity of 
 tnegolpdofourLord Jefus Chrill, after having triveaan'^^cZnt 
 of aieir orthodoxy in the Faith with refpefl to th^'e Trini V add" 
 
 Mary paffages might be brought from particular Ami-Epifco^^^ 
 
 wricfrs 
 
 }-\^P^T'''''^^ '^'n' ^^■'^' (^) ^«"<^^ «' P^F Pius IV. art i^ 
 ■ ■''■■ ■■' • . '-' vo-^rs^ ^v Fwv, a'n.-Vi;.'- 
 
 .1 .P- 
 
4 The L ATM J N's JPO LOG 1. 
 
 writers in favour of our Rule, but then I fhould exceed my intended 
 bounds ; but for ample teflimonies in favour of it, fee the Appendix 
 to J Comp/eat Collet ion of De-vat ionsy of which Colledion more in 
 the cloie. 
 
 Yet before I apply this Rule to the feveral contending Churches 
 and pretended Churches of Chriftians, ( for I (hall not entirely neg- 
 lefl the Anti-Epifcopaliansl I muft fay a little more in favour of it- 
 2 fhall do it in words, which I find ready to my hand in the feveral 
 Trails, which 1 (hall once for all here refer to in the Margin (a), 
 
 *' Traditio7i is the only Method we now have, whereby we can 
 come to the underlbnding of the Scriptures. It is by Tradi- 
 tion aloJief that we do or can underftand any language : the fignifi- 
 cation of words, together with the words themfelves, are handt:! 
 down from Father to Son, and from one generation to another. 
 Whiift the languages, in which the fcriptures were written, were 
 living languages, they were learned by oral tradition ; and now 
 they are dead languages, they muft be learned by ^written tradition. 
 Por a man may pore his eyes out upon an hebreiv Bible and a^r^f^ 
 Telbment, and pray moft heartily to underftand them, and yet Ihall 
 be never the wifer, if he get not a mafter to in(lru<5l him, or have 
 not recourfe to thofe authors, who have expounded thofe languages 
 into Vv'hat he doth underftand. No man can at this day tell whaS 
 books are facred fcripture, and what are apocryphal, but by Tra- 
 dition. The apocryphal Efdras tells us, that he w^as divinely in- 
 fpired, which is more than the authors of the booksofjofhua, Judges, 
 Ruth, or Kings tell us of any of thofe books. There is nothing in 
 the three iirft gofpels, the ails of the apoftles, nor the epiftle to the 
 Hebrews to certify us, that they were written by the apofUcs and 
 cvangelifls, to whom they are attributed : It can only be learned by 
 Tradition. S. Mark and S. Luke who were no apoftles, arc receiv- 
 ed as infpired writers, and yet S. Barnabas ( whofe epiflle is r.ever- 
 ihelefs allowed by many to be genuine) is not allovvcd to have 
 written by divine infpiration, tho' he is exprelly called an apoiUe in 
 fcripfure. If then it is by Tradition, that we muft know the xcry 
 language of the fcripture, and cannot otherwife underltand one word 
 of il; if it is by Tradition, that we muftknow what is fcripture, 
 and what is not fo ; if it is by Tradition, that we judge that even an 
 cpiflle concerning our religion, tho' allowed by many to be written 
 hy an apoftle, yet wa? not by divine infpiration ; fhall we fay never, 
 
 thelefs 
 
 (a) Bpv Brett*» Tradition necefTary to explain and interpret the Koiy Scrip- 
 tures. Poftfcript to the fame. Vindication of the Poftfcripr. Bp. CollJcrB 
 Vindication of Reafons and Defence, Sec. in Reply to No fnfficient Reafon for 
 refboring fome Prayers anrt Direaions in K. Hdsv. VI's firi^ Liturgy, London 
 X717. 1718. Mr, Peck's Prgfics to Bp . Brett** Differtatioa on the Liturgies, 
 London, 17^0, 
 
The INTRODUCTION. 5 
 
 thelcfs, that Tradition is not neceflary for the underftanding of tJie 
 
 fcripturcs ? By no means. God has appointed Tradition, as 
 
 the beft and fafell guide todireft us how to underltand the Scrip- 
 tures, even in matters neccffaryto thefalvation of all. 
 
 For, even the Scripture itfelf fends us to Tradition. " Remem- 
 ber the days of old ^ /ays Mojes (a)^ confider the years of many 
 generations ; alk thy Father and he will Ihew thee, thy Elders and 
 they will tell thee.'* So alfo Jeremiah exhorts in God's name fay- 
 ing (b), *' Thus faith the Lord, (land ye in the ways, and fee, 
 and afk for the o/^ paths, where is the good way, and walk therein ; 
 and ye fhall find reft for your fouls." So alfo Ifaiah calls the peo- 
 ple not only to the Law, but to the Teftimony or the Tradition of 
 their fathers alfo (c), Likewife in the New Teftament, S. Paul 
 fays, " Now I praife you brethren, that you remember me in all 
 things, and keep the Ordinances ( or Traditions^ for fo it is in the 
 original, as the margin of our Englifh bibles has it) as I delivered 
 them to you (^)." And again he fays, " Therefore brethren, 
 iland faft, and hold the Traditions which ye have been taught, whe- 
 ther by it-or^ or our epiftle( ^)." And foon afcer he fays ; *' Now 
 we command you, that ye withdraw yourfelves from every brother 
 that walketh diforderly, and not according to the Tradition which 
 he received of us ( /*)/' Here we fee plain mention of S. Paul's 
 Traditions, and confequently of Apoftolical Traditions, delivered 
 by word of mouth, as well as by epilUes or in writing, and 3 condem- 
 nation of thofe who do not equally obferve both. Thus the Scrip" 
 tares them {^ves, both of the Oldand New Teftament, are fo far 
 from condemning true and primitive Tradition, that they plainly 
 recommend it to us, as the beft and fureft Rule, by which we can be 
 direded in our Chriliian Fradice. , 
 
 In a word, if the teftimony of thofe, who lived ( tho' a \zty 
 little while ) after the apoftles death, cannot fufficienily inform us 
 what the ApoIUes praftifed in the moft material parts of religion ; 
 it will not be an eafy tafx: to Ihew, how fuch teftimony can afiurc 
 us what the apoftles have written- For the ground of our believing 
 the Old and Nev^ Teftament to be inftived writings, ftands upon 
 Traditionary evidence : and were it poflible to dcftroy the ci^dit of 
 fuch authority, the facred records muft fuffer with it. It is Evident 
 from the Scriptures themfelves, that the whole of Chriftianity was 
 at lirft delivered to the biiliops fucceeding the apoftles by Oral Tra- 
 
 dllion^ 
 
 f'tfy Deut. xvx'u. 7. ^ij Jer. vl. i5. A-; If. viii, zo, (d) XZ^-i 
 
6 The LATMAirs JPOLOGT, 
 
 dition, and that they were alfo commanded to keep it, and dellvt 
 it to their facceflbrs in the fame manner. Nor is it any where faia 
 in fcripture by any of the apollles, that they would either jointly oi 
 feparately write down all that they had taught as neceffary to falva- 
 tion, or make fach a compleat Canon, as that nothing fhould be 
 neceflary to falvation, bat what fliould be found in thofe writings , 
 yet it is mod certain, that they taught them all things neceflary to 
 falvation ; for, fo S. Paul exprefly tells the elders of Ephefus, § fay- 
 ing, " I kept back nothing that was profitable to you but have 
 ihewed you, and have taught you publickly, and from hoafe to 
 houfe." And yet it is certain, that many books of the New Teira- 
 ment were written after this, after S. Paul had taught them what- 
 ever was requifite for them to know. S. John was the longeil 
 
 liver of all the Apofiles ; and it does not appear, that even he faw 
 all the books of the fcripture, or eilablifhed them as the only Rule, 
 by which Chriftians are to bs directed in their faith and prat^ice. 
 
 It is true indeed, the Prophet Ifaiah fays, *' To the Law and to 
 the Telliraony, if they fpeak net according to this word, it is be- 
 caufe there is no light in them ( c)." And again ; " Seek ye out 
 of the book of the Lord and read (d)y And fo in the New Teila- 
 ment '* Search the Scriptures," fays our Saviour (e). And in the 
 Ads of the Apollles, the Jews at Bera^a are comn-iended as more 
 noble, of a milder and better temper, than thofe of Theflalonica ; 
 and for this reafon, becaufe they received the ^Mord -lu'^h all readincfs 
 of mind, andfearchedthsfcripturesdaih {/). But all this does not 
 prove, that the fcripture contains the ^tc/^c/? of our duty ; it does 
 not prove, that we may from it <7/(?/;^ learn -«// that we arc to be- 
 lieve AND DO, in order to obtain the benefits purchafed for us by 
 the precious blood of our Redeemer. So that when the author of 
 'No-fufficient Reajon^ having cited thefe texts, lay'd down this pro- 
 pofition, viz. " Scripture ^?;^?.'i7/ Tradition is prefcribed by our 
 Saviour to his difciples as the Rule for them to walk by, and which 
 we are all necefTarily to adhere to, for the guidance of our id^ixWand 
 ivorjl/ip, and our behaviour in ^//refpedls ;" I fay when that author 
 lay'd down this proportion, he couched a fallacy. For, tho' Scrip- 
 ture be prefcrib'd by thefe texts. Tradition is not excluded by them. 
 Nay, the Koly Prophet Ifaiah fends us ?23t only to the La^.v^ but 
 alfo to the Tejlimonyy in the firfl of thefe texts, as was before noted. 
 Again; if Scripture be prefcribed by our Saviour in thefe itxis^ 
 IVadition is alfo prefcribed by his Apodles in othe}- texts, as hath 
 been flicw'd above. Befides, when our blefled Lord bid the Jevvs 
 
 fearch 
 
 ^ A^sxx. 20. (r) If. viii, 20^ [d] Id, Kxxiv, x6, (0 Johj.' 
 y, 39* (/J Adsxvii, a, 
 
The INTRODUCTION. y 
 
 isarch the Scriptures, he cou!d only mean the OM Teftament, be- 
 cauie i\\z New was not then written." 
 
 If then, neither our blefled Lord, nor his ApoQIes, did prefcribc 
 
 the icnptures as a fufficient rule of faith «;/^ pradice ; how can 
 thoie, who pretend to be governed in thcfe things by Scripture only 
 charge tnofe who by exprefs authority offcripture make Tradicion 
 a;r- necellary, as perfons who fet up Tradition in oppoftthn to Scrip* 
 ture, and derogate from the honour thereof? When I confider that 
 this charge has been brought by fo great and fo good a man as the 
 author of No fuficient Reafon had always been, I am furprized be- 
 yond meafure. For, as another eminent writer § in anfwer to him 
 demands ; ** Does he derogate from the honour of the ftatute book 
 who fhall fay that there are fevera! laws of the land, which are ob- 
 ligatory by Ufe and Cuftom, that we can fliew no ad of Parliament 
 iox ? E;^i'ery Englilh man knows, if there be a Cuftom that does not 
 contradift an ad of Parliament, tho' the ftatute-book have direded 
 or faid nothing at all relating to that cullom, tho' there be nothing 
 of It to be found in any n.vritten lanv ; yet that cuftom, if it appear 
 to have been lo time out of mind, that is, if the original of it cannot 
 be traced, nor any time afTigned when it may appear not to have 
 been a cuftom, it fhall bind the fubjea as much as if it had been 
 
 written. And as he, that fhouid give an interpretation of an 
 
 ad of Parliament contrary tocuilom, and to adjudged cafes founded 
 upon that ad. N|ould not be heard, tho' he might make the words 
 of the ad bear the fenfe he puts upon them ; fo neither ought he to 
 be heard, who fhall put a fenfe upon any part of Scripture contrary 
 to what die Tradition of the Church has underrtood its meaning to 
 be, tho' he might make the words bear that fenfe." 
 
 Upon the whole, it mufl be allowed, that the Fathers do declare 
 for the lufficiency of Scripture ; but then they alfo prefs the necef- 
 fity of adhermg to Tradition, even tho' it be in matters which the 
 Scriptures have not taught at all : And this is done by the very 
 
 fame Fathers. And they are thus to be reconciled. When 
 
 they fpeak of Scripture as the only fure rule, they fpeak with regard 
 to articles of Faith: when they fpeak of the obedience due to Tra- 
 dition, and declare it to be of the fame obligation with the Scrip- 
 tures, they fpeak of the forms of adminiflring the Eucharill and o- 
 ther divine Ordinances. 
 
 Thefe Forms were kept fecret from all that were not adm'tt^d 
 topnrtntceoftheHo!yEucharif>, that they might not fall into the 
 hands of the Heathens or others, from whom the Chriftian Gover- 
 nors t.iougnt It proper to have them concealed. Hence celebrating 
 
 the 
 
 ^ Bp. Bret:. 
 
8 The LATMAN's APOLOGY. 
 
 the Eucharift is defigned by hreathg ofhreadm S. Paul's, S. Luke's, 
 and other divine writings : And hence that hint fo frequent in the 
 next aees, Ue Initiated km^'j : Again, hence in the.r devotions be- 
 fore the Eucharill, I-ivi/l ,wtdi/c,-ver themyjhrytothmeenemu,. 
 neither -^ili I give thee a Judas kifi: and the officiating Bjihop 
 or Prieft's procUiming, Holy thing, fir Holy ferfim. And all this 
 is agreeable to oar Saviour's injunflion, not to caft pearls befort 
 fiwine, mrgi-ve holy things unto dogs. 
 
 In a word it is evident to a dcmonftration, that Tradition is ne- 
 ceffarv to enable us to underttand the Scriptures, and many of the 
 .leceiTary duties of chriftian praaice. Now. as it required fome 
 time to adjull and fettle the canon of Holy Scripture, 1° time has 
 been ncceffary ( feme dark ages having intervend ) to di(lingui(h 
 other venerabe remains of Antiquity from pretended and fpurioas 
 ones : and this having been done, and greatlight given by the joint 
 labours of learned men of various countries and even of d'fagreeing 
 Churches fyet agreeing m this], many books having beentranflated. 
 rnterpolations difcover'd, and true readings reftored ; even common 
 perfons may judge, when contending partiesproperly or improperly 
 aUedgepaffages from the writings of particular Fathers, as vvell a. 
 when texts of Scripture are truly or falfely apply'd or conftrued. 
 And let the courteous reader accept that, as an apology for this un- 
 dertaking. 
 
 I will now apply this Rule to the doftrines and praffices of the 
 fever! CbuchrsVnd pretended Churches of Chrillians and try to 
 d'fcove^ wherein they agree with the Cathol^ck Church to which 
 all the precious promifes of the Gofpel are made ; and wherein they 
 depart from her, and break that bond ot Chanty, without which 
 even Ma tyrdom for the Faith will not be available to oalvation. m 
 Sinafy way, pointed out by '■^-JT^^ ' dZTuT' 
 poration, », 'whom all the promifes cf God are Tea and Amen (aj . 
 
 (a ) 11 Cor.i. ;c. 
 
 OF 
 
f9] 
 
 Of the Greek Church. 
 CHAP. L 
 
 Of Tranfahflanttattdn and the Adoration 
 of the Host. 
 
 H E Greeks have certainly departed from tho 
 Primitive Catholick Church, by teaching and 
 impofing the doflrine of Tranfubftantiation and 
 Adoration of the Hoft. The' that Church is 
 much oppreiTed by the cruelty of the temporal 
 fovereign, in whofe territory a large part of her 
 Communion refides ; yet being of great exten^r, 
 and poflefied of fome glaring accidental Honours, (as for infiance^ 
 a clearer hillory of her fucceflion than fome lefler churches caa 
 claim;) fome Prote-lants have endeavoured to reprefcnt her as 
 agreeing with them in rejedling this Latin or Roman do^lrine, whiles 
 the Romans more truly claim her as maintaining oi it. Not buc 
 that Confefiions have been publiilied by, or at leaft under the hannc 
 of,^ iom^ particular Greeks, which have rejeded this do^rine ; but 
 then, thofe Confefiions have not been confonant to the dodrine of 
 the Greek Church, nor were they publi(hed but to ferve private 
 advantages {a). 
 
 But a Manufcript, which preceded that which I mentioned in 
 the Introdudlion, will put this matter out of all difpute. Jt is en- 
 tituled, The Anfixer of the Orthodox of the Eajf to the Vrcfofals 
 fent from Britain for afi Union and Agreement nxiith the Oriental 
 Church \ drawn up by a fynodical judgment and determination of 
 the Lord Jeremias the moil holy Oecumenical Patriarch cf Conftan- 
 unople the nev; Rome, and the moil bleilcd and moi't holy Pairi- 
 
 B archs, 
 
 \fi\ See r.'thcr ^ymrj)'j CrK; HiO. 
 
to The L AT MAN'S APOLOGT. 
 
 archs, the Lord Samuel of Alexandria, and the Lord Chryfanthus 
 of Jerufalem, with the holy Metropolitans and the holy Clergy^ 
 in tlve great Church of Chrift in Conilantinople in Council aflem- 
 hied, in the Year 171 8, April day the 12th. Speaking of the 
 •bunh Propofuion, which had been lay'd before them, they fay ; — 
 " How can any pious perfon forbear trembling to hear this blaf- 
 *' phemy ? as I may venture to term it. For to be againft wor- 
 *' ihipping the Bread, which is confccrated and changed into the 
 " BoJv of Chrift, is to be againft worlhipping our Lord Jefus 
 " Chrift himfelf, oar maker and faviour. For what elfc is that 
 " facrificial Bread, after it has been confccrated and tranfubftanti- 
 *• ated by the accefs of the Holy Spirit? Truly nothing lefs than 
 '' the real Body of our Lord. Chrift himfelf has taught us this, 
 "' when he gave the Bread to his holy Difciples, and {aid, This is 
 *• my Body : And, «;;Ay} ye eat the Flejh of the Son of Man, and 
 ** iirink his Blood, ye ha-ve no Life in you : And again, Jor my Fle/b 
 *' is Meai inJecd, and iny Blood is Drink indeed. But if the con- 
 *' fccrated Bread which we eat, be not the very Body Cff Chrift, 
 *' nor ought, as you fay, to be worfliipped, what is it elfe ? And 
 ■" if, as you fay, there be united to the facred Bread fome grace 
 *' diftin6l from it, then you do not partake of the Body of Chrift, 
 *' but of grace, which is neither the fubftance nor the Body of 
 " Chrift, but a fpiritual gift. Do you not regard cur Lord when 
 *' he faid This is my Body F And why do you teach what our Lord 
 *' did not fay, as if you would correal his word ? (For you fay 
 •' there is in his words fomething divine) which God forbid. Our 
 "' Lord did not fay^ my Body is //; or under or n.vith this, but This 
 ** ii my Body, (Iiewing them the bread which lay in bis hand. Let 
 •* us not diftort and mifinterpret our Lord's words ; but as he him- 
 •' feU underftood them, fo let us recdve them. Therefore when 
 '• we dravv^ near the Bread, which is changed into the Body of 
 '* Chriii, and is ^o called upon the account of the vifible accidents, 
 " Vvc ftiould {;i7 with Peter, / helie-ve Lord and confefs, that thoii 
 " art the Ckrijl the Son of the Vroing God: I believe alfo, that this 
 *■* is thy immaculate Body, having our Eyes upon the Holy Bread.; 
 " and that this is thy precious Blood, looking on the Holy Cup ; 
 '•' that we may enjoy the fame Bleffing that he had. Read the 
 *' holy Fathers who lived before us and you, and ftione with Splen- 
 •' dor from the Apoftolick Age to the prelent times, and you will 
 '• find in »11 of them, that the Bread is changed, transformed, 
 *' converted, and tranfubftantlated into the very precious and un-' 
 ^* fpor;?d Body of our Lord, and that it no longer continues Bread, 
 •* for It 'is changed iiitp that which it was not before Confecration, 
 ** as Cytil o^Jcnfakm fays. But to avoid prolixity in tranfcribing 
 •' their tellimonies, we refer you to Cap. 17. of Syrigus*sTreatife 
 ^* againft the Luthero-Calvinifts, printed at Buenrefty, 1690, and 
 ** you will find them all verbatim. And the Lord grant, that you 
 *' may undcrftand and receive them according to the pious inten- 
 " tion an4 the right fenfe of their Ai^thor?/* 
 
 Tc^ethei 
 
Chap. I. Of the Greek Church. ii 
 
 Together wi^ this Paper was hniy,A fynodical Anfiver to ths 
 fiieflion^ What are the fentiments of the Oriental Church of the 
 Grecian Orthodox ? lint to the lo-vers of the Greek Church in Bri- 
 tain in the Tear of our Lord, 1672. This Paper dy.ted Jan. 10, 
 1672, was fublcribed by Dionyilus Patriarch of Conllantinople. 
 Paiiius and Dionyfius late Patriarchs of the fame Church, Paiiius 
 Patriarch of Alexandria, and thirty-three more Archbifhops and 
 
 Biihops. And in it they thus write ; ** As to the venerable 
 
 •' facrament of the Euchariil, we firmly believe and confefs, that: 
 ** the living Body of our Lord Jefus Chrilt is inviiibly prefent by 
 ** an adual perurm in the fscrament. For when the officiating 
 ** Prieil has repeated the Words of our Lord, and fays, 7nake thif 
 *' Bread the precious Body of thy Chrijiy and nx-hat is in this Cup 
 *' the precious Blood of thy Chri/i, changing them by thy Holy Spirit ; 
 ** then by the fupernatural and ineffable operation of the Holy 
 " Ghort, the Bread is adually, truly, and properly changed into 
 ** the very Body of our Saviour ; and the Wine into his living 
 ** Blood : And we believe it to be entire Chrift, that both cfFcrs 
 ** and is offered, that receives and is given to all, and is entirely 
 
 ** eatyn without pain. Which facrament is and is called La- 
 
 " tria, and therein the deified Body of Chrirt our Saviour is vvor- 
 *• ihipped with divine v;oj;fhip, and is offered up as a facrifice for 
 ** all orthodox Chrillians." This is more than fuflicient Proof, 
 that the GreekChurch holds the doftrine of Tranfubllantiation, and 
 (which is the main objedlion) is very zealous for the Adoration of 
 the Hoft, which is indeed but a confequence of the notion of Tran- 
 fubllantiation ; but, as it is infilled upon and explained by die Greek 
 Church, it is a fufBcient caufe for leaving her communion. For 
 tho' fhe pretends in this to have fcripture and «// antiquity on her 
 fide, yet really fhe has not. 
 
 There is no difpute indeed, but that our bleffed Lord faid of the 
 Bread ^his is my Body, and of the Cup This is mv Blood, as the 
 Evangeliih teach us and S. Paul recites ; but the qutllion is, in what 
 fenfc the holy Catholick Church has ahvays underltood thefe words ; 
 and that the Primitive Church did not undertUnd them in the fenfe 
 of thefe,. Greeks, will certainly appear upon due examination. The; 
 Ijook.wr^e by Syrigus, which they refer to, I cannot now procure ; 
 ba^y\e may't^Jie it for granted, that the paffages there alledged 
 i\rf ii4(iin}e\vijh thofe, which are ufually brought by the Roma- 
 njgs. Novv*7tho* the Fathers fpoke in very high terms of the Bread 
 aad'CiTp af.ter: confecration ; called the Eucharill the Body and 
 Blood of Chffll;'?!^? really is in fpirit, power, and efFeft ; fup» 
 pofed it to be changed from common bread and mixed wine into t)ic 
 reprefcntative, energetical, and life-giving Body and Blood of 
 Chriif, by the power of the Holy Ghoft ; yet they fuppofed thq 
 fubjiance of bread and mixed wine to remain. TlK\t no one writer 
 in the firfl ages in rapturous harangue has ufed flrong langirage, 
 vrhcn fpeaking of ll^is change, is what 1 will no; aSirm ; but 1 
 
12 The LAYMAN'S APOLOGT, 
 
 will, that the whole current of antiquity is clear againfl the grofs 
 notion of Tranfubllantiation, and that it will not bear the left of 
 Vincentius's rule, ncr any thing like it. The current belief was, 
 that <* Chrill: honoured the myftick fymbols, with the title 
 *■ of his Body and Eiood, not changing their nature^ but to nature 
 ** adding grace," as Theodoret exprefles it (a). It roight with 
 as good reafon be faid, that the Fathers believed men to be tran- 
 fubilantiated into Angels by Eaptifm ; the njoater in baptifm to be 
 iranfelemerded ; the ointment \n Confirmation to be changed into the 
 frcfence of ihs Holy Spirit * ; the nvater in the mixed cup to be 
 iranfuhpantialcd into the people ; and the people into the Body of 
 Chrift ; as it can be inferr'd fom their rapturous expreffions in ha- 
 rangue (for you find nothing like it in Commentaries, where they 
 fpeak dogmatically) that the facred fymbols are tranfubftantiated 
 in the k^-\k of thele Greeks, 
 
 And yet 'tis no wonder, that the Fathers fpoke in fuch ftrong 
 terms oF tliis Body, this facramental Body of Chrift. For it was, 
 it is, as his natural Body, anointed with the Holy Spirit; it is a, 
 ipiritnal Life-giving Body, a facriHce for the life of men ; and 
 Therefore conveys all the benefits that his natural Body can be fup- 
 poi'ed to do. ' Pis eafy to fuppofe a change, without a change of 
 juhjiancs. (Not that any parallel can come up to this myfterious 
 change ; for the Fathers looked upon it as a facrament, or myftery, 
 abthat word import?.) The foul of a child is much changed, 
 v/hcn that child is become a learned man, but it is not changed in 
 fubftance. Grace added to nature is a great charge. A fmall part 
 cf a -piece of wax, when fiampt with the PCing's feal, is mightily 
 ch'iDged ; but yet 'tis not tranfubftantiated, tho' it be fo changed 
 fis thac it gives life, pardons the guilty, and fecures pofTelhon. 
 
 In a word, the true opinion of the Primitive Church concerning 
 the Body and Blood of Chrift, may be briefly comprehended ia 
 thefe four proportions, i. The Body and Blood of Chrift in the 
 Sacrament are the bread and mixed wine. 3. The Body and Blood 
 in the Sacrament are Types of the natural Body and Blood of 
 Chrift. 3. But they are not cold and imperfedl Types, as thofe 
 before and under the Law. 4. Nay, they are the very Body and 
 i^lood, though not in fubftance, yet in fpirit, power, and efFefr, 
 So that, to exprefs myfelf in as plain language as I can upon fo 
 
 abftrufa 
 
 (a) Dial. 1. p. 1$. and Dial. 2. p. 85, 
 
 • Cyril of Jerufalem particularly, whora thefe Greeks bring faying, ih%t 
 fhe Bread is no hvger Bread but changed, Sec. fays *' y^i the Bread of the 
 '* Kucharifl-, after the Invocation of the Holy Spirit, is no more bare bread, 
 ** buc the Body of Chrift : i'y alio this holy Ointment is not bare Ointment, 
 ** nor to be called common, after the confecration, but the gift cf Chrift and 
 «' the J>rerence of the Hol^ .Spirit." Qate(bi M^^Jlag. 3, », 3, 
 
Chap. I. Of the Greek Church. j^ 
 
 abftrufe a fubjeft, " by the confecration of the Eucharift the Bread 
 •' and mixed wine are not deflroyed, but fanftified ; they are 
 *' changedy not in their /ulf/Iancey but in their ^a«/tV;>j ; they are 
 ** made, not the natural, h\it tht facramental Body and Blood of 
 «• Chrift: So that they are both Bread and Wine, and the Body 
 " and Blood of Chrift at the fame time, but not in the fame man- 
 They are Bread and Wine by nature, the Body and Blood 
 
 ner 
 
 ** of Chrift inmyftery and fignification ; they arc Bread and Wine 
 ** to our fenfes, the Body and Blood of Chrift to our underftanding 
 ** and faith ; they are Bread and Wine in themfelves, the Body and 
 ** Blood of Chriil in power and efFeit. So that whoever eats and 
 ** drinks them as he ought to do, dwells In Chrift and Chriil in 
 " him, he is one with Chrift and Chrift with him." 
 
 Now as the Ancients I am concerned about, did not believe the 
 Symbols tranfubftantiated, neither did they pay divine adoration to 
 them. They fpeak of venerating them, but only mean fuch a 
 decent and reverential refpefl, as is due to a creature fandiiied to 
 fuch excellent purpofes as the Eucharift is. The original words 
 ufed upon that occafion do not (as the learned agree) neceflarily 
 import divine worfhip. They could not worfhip the Hoft with 
 di<vine honour, becaufe they did not believe that the Divinity was 
 Hypoftatically united to it, as they did believe it united to his 
 natural Body and Blood. * 
 
 I have been the longer upon this head, by reafon of the fuBlimi- 
 ty of the fubjedl and the depth of the myftery. But I now proceed 
 to another Chapter. 
 
 • See Mr. Johnfon's unbloody facrlfice, Chap. 11. And Mr, 
 Article of the Romifli Tranfubftantion imjuii'd into. 
 
 Spinckti'i 
 
 CHAP 
 
14 The L/f rif^iV's A P L G T, 
 
 CHAP. IL 
 
 Of prayhig to Saints and Angels, 
 
 IN the Manufcript above quoted, dated at Conllantlnople, 
 1718 ; the Greeks profefs, that they addrefs thus m their 
 prayers • " O Lord Jefus Chriit, through the Intcrcef- 
 '* fion of the Holy Mother of God, or of thy Baptill John, 
 *' have mercy upon us, and forgive us our fins." They fay ; *' In- 
 ** deed, we v/orlhip our Lady the Virgin Mother of God with 
 " Hyperdouiiut but not v/ith Latria^ God forbid ; that would be 
 *' blafphemy. For God only do we worlhip with Latvia^ and 
 *' make her our Intercefibr with God for fins comn[iitted after Bap- 
 " liiii], and h^) her hope for remifTion from him." And Dr. Smith 
 teftifies, that this prayer Hands in their Liturgy ; " O blefled Mo- 
 ** therofGod, open to us the gate of thy mercy ; Let rot us, 
 *' who hope in thee, err ; but let us be delivered from dangers by 
 ** thee : For thou art the fafety of all Chriftians,'* And " the like 
 •' horrible blafphemies, adds he,\.\v^y are guilty of in their addrcfics 
 ** to angels and faints (^)." But there is no ground for this wailhip, 
 cither in fcripture, or in the finl: pure antiquity for above three 
 hundred years. The Impofition therefore of it now is abfolutely 
 unlawful; and confcquently it is juftiliable to withdraw from a 
 Church, which is guilty of infifting upon fuch an Error ?.s a ternj 
 of Communion. The moft early Fathers mentioned the blefied 
 virgin by the name of plain Mar)\ or the Virgin Mar\\ or the 
 Mother of God ; but never called her ^ucn of Hea^ven, nor pay'd 
 her any religious worlhip. Indeed about the latter end of the 
 fourth century, fome authors by their Rhetorical Jpojlrophcs and 
 Vyijhesy calling upon the Saints at their foleran commemorations, 
 gaveoccafion to the introduction of worfhipping them in after ages. 
 But even that age was, in the general dodtriae and practice of 
 it, fo far from allowing the B. Virgin or apy other Saint to be 
 invorated by way of fupplication, that the mQfl eminent Fathers;. 
 of that time laid down fuch poTitions, as are diredly againlt' 
 and inconfillentWith it: And particularly S. Epiphanius, who 
 then lived, charges it as erroneous 'and fuperllitious. And his 
 teftimony is an evident proof, that " as yet the Virgin had not 
 
 *' commenced 
 
 \ 
 {a) Smithy Account of the Greek Church, p. 2?: 
 
 X 
 
Chap. II. Of the Greek Church^ i^ 
 
 •• commenced Queen of Fleaven, nor Mediatrix between Man and 
 ** God, nor received any Prayers or Addreffes as a fervice due unto 
 ** her, nor fat in the Temple of God §." Befides, thofe prac- 
 tices of addreffes to the martyrs, mentioned in fome authors 
 at the latter end of the fourth century, arc fo far from being 
 the fame with what is now praftifed and impofed by the Greek 
 Church, that there are thefe three great diiferences between them. 
 I. The Greek Church ufes diredl invocation or formal prayer 
 to Saints, whereas the others were meerly fuch requefts as arc made 
 from one friend to another. 2. Thofe requefts were made at the 
 tombs of thofe martyrs to whom they were prefented, and who 
 were believed to be prefent there, tho* invifibly, at that time : 
 whereas the invocations and prayers to the Saints in the prefent 
 Greek Church are made, not only in every place, but in ten 
 thoufand different and moft diilant places to fuch or fuch a parti- 
 cular Saint. 3. Thofe requefls and interpellations to the martyrs 
 were neither commanded by the Primitive Church, authorized by 
 her General or Provincial or any other Councils, nor ufed in the 
 publick offices of the Church : whereas, on the contrary, the 
 invocations and prayers to Saints in the Greek Church are en- 
 joined by her, and ufed in her publick offices. The Greek Church 
 has therefore departed in this point from the Primitive Catkolick 
 Church. 
 
 ^ See Bp.Hickes's difcourfe of the due praife and honour af the V. Mary, fronj 
 p. 30. to the end. And Bp. Collier's Sermons, p. ?. ;g. to the end of that 
 
 Sermon. And Gee's Primitive Fathers no P^pifts, p. 40 82. Aa«£ 
 
 Ci^geu's dilcourfe concerning the wcrfhip of the B. Virgin aj.d the Saints* 
 
 C H A I'. 
 
i6 The LATMJN's APOLOGl. 
 
 CHAP. III. 
 
 Of the JVorJhlp of Image s\ 
 
 THESE Orientals moft firenuoufly adhere to the decree 
 of the fecond Council of Nice, which fo boldly deter- 
 mined for Image-worlhip, A. D. 787. For in their 
 anfwer to the propofals above mentioned, they fay : " It 
 " is impoflible to repeal the ninth canon of the fecond holy fyno^ 
 ** of NicCt as yoa defire ; for it was well and rightly ena£led and 
 •* decreed, in an afTembly of many holy men in the prefence of the 
 •' Holy Gholl, who infpired, illuminated, and directed them. 
 ** Therefore it is willingly received by all the world, by all na- 
 ** tions, tribes, and people ; and to this day is reverently obferved 
 ** by all the Eailern Church, and the parties of here ticks Arme- 
 " nians and the Cophihi^ and the fchifmatical Papljls. Befides, 
 " we fee the Images of S. ?eter and S. Paul and of our Saviour 
 ** in the Lutheran Temples, placed upon their altars and railed on 
 ** pedeftals in the walls of their Temples, which (God willing) 
 •• we hope almoft both to fee and worfiiip amongft you, not with 
 ** Latvia^ for that is referved only for God, but relatively. We 
 *' omit many things, (continue they) which we have here to fay 
 *' upon this fubjedt, but refer to the Ads of the feventh fynod, 
 ** and the treatifes of the learned in defence of the holy Images." 
 
 Now, in anfwer to this, the determinations of this fynod were 
 far from being <^illi7}gly recei'ved by all the nxiorld^ by all nations, 
 tribes, and people ; as thefe Greeks exprefs it. 
 
 It is plain from the very Afls of it, that Image - worfhip had 
 l)een pretty warmly oppofed before that time, othervvife the Pope's 
 Legates had not then had occafion to move that ail writings, which 
 were extant againll Images, Ihould with an Anathema be effaced 
 or committed to the flames ; nor this fynod to have provided a 
 Canon, (a) *' that all fuch books fhould be brought into the 
 •• Bifhop's palace at Conllantinople under pain of dcpofition, if a 
 
 *' Clergy-man 
 
 (a) CaUf 9, 
 
Chap. III. Of the Greek Church. i- 
 
 •' Clergyman ffeould conceal any ; and of Excomniunicatior, if 
 •* any Monk or Laick did not obey." 
 
 What occafion for this, if Image worihip had been iLnlllngh 
 recei'ved by all the ivorld? Though it got fome ground in after- 
 time, and is reverently received by All the Eafl em Church at 
 this Day, yet it has not been fo received (no not even from the 
 time of this fecond Nicene Synod) to this day, as their phrafe in- 
 fmuates. 
 
 It was not received by all even in the Eajl, it had dilFerent for- 
 tunes according to the will and humour of Princes. Indeed pretty- 
 early, here and there^ fome particular Chriilians had fome pidures 
 pri'uately in their houfes, in memory of fome great perfon or 
 a<5tion. But then it was a long traft of time, before any pi^ures 
 were introduced IntoChurches; and much longer Hill, before Statues 
 were fo much as made by Chrif.ians \ and many hundred years 
 longer, before either Pidlures or Statues were ufed for any thing 
 but Ornatnctit or Hijlory. 
 
 The firft making of Pidures among Chriftians, proceeded prin- 
 cipally from the fond inclinations of the Heathen Converts, who 
 retaining a relifh for the old fuperllitious praftices of worfliipping 
 their Gods by Images, thought they might honour the Image of 
 our Saviour and the Images of his Apoftles, as the means of 
 their falvation, as Eufebius relates, calling it a Gentile or Heathen 
 cullom, inconjideraiely, imprudently done contuary to thjB 
 Ancient Discipline; as the learned Valefius himfelf ex- 
 pounds his words (b). 
 
 For, as another learned writer obferves (c) : The Fathers dp 
 cxprefsly fay, the Church of Chrirt hath no fuch cuUom. ** We 
 •* Chriilians, faith Theodotusy have no Tradition to form the 
 '* Images of Saints in material colours.'* So certain it is that 
 they had no fuch cuftom in the five firfl centuries, that they 
 plainly tell u?, that the iirft thing they taught their Converts, 
 was the contempt of In'iages. ** \Ve plainly fliew forth the gra- 
 " vity or decorum of our principles, and not hide them as Cel- 
 ** fiis imagines, feeing even to thofe, who are firft entred among 
 ** us, we teach the contempt of Idols and of all Images :'* fays 
 Origen. 
 
 They add, that they were taught thus to abandon and forfikes 
 «z// Images and Statues by the Religion they embraced, and by the 
 
 C Doclrine 
 
 (o) See Mr. Felling's Antiq. of the Proteftant Religion concerning 
 Images. Second Part. London 16S7. p, 20, ai, (^) Pr. Whitby's 
 l-zWih, of the Roman Church, p. 6. 
 
5S The LAY MAN'S APOLOGl, 
 
 Jjortrine of ihe llolyjefus. They fiy, that it was proper to the 
 Ihathens to make and worfhip Images i and it is frequent among 
 x\\t lathers, to call them ivorjhippers of Images inftead of Hea- 
 thens, and to dtfcrlbe the Chrijlian as one who hath left off and 
 renounced that pra(51ice. Nay, this thing was fo notorious to the 
 jtleathefj3, that they obje^ed it to the Cbriftians zi their crime, 
 that they had no Images, that they would not make, would not 
 endure, much leis venerate them, and that th-jy laughed at thofe 
 who did. And the Chriftian Apologifts confefled of thsir fe(5^, 
 that they had no fuch things, and went on to fhew that they ought 
 not to havs, and gloried, and commended themfelves on that 
 peccant. 
 
 Now the Father? of thefe early ages could net haye argued 
 fis they did ag.iinft the lieathens, if they had them.felves pradbfed 
 Jinage v;oin.iip in ever fo qualified a fenfe ; for then their adver- 
 iafie?, thofe v^-itty and ingeniojs Heathen-writers (one of whom 
 v/as Julian the Apollate) would moft fmartly have replied upon 
 them, as the hirer Heathen writers did, afcer this corruption had 
 begun tg fpre.^d vSz\{ through the Ea/lern Churches, and to be 
 tountenar.jrcd at Rome. In a word, the early Fathers determine, 
 th;U the fecond Commandment forbids not only Z^^/r/t7, butalfo 
 Doiilia, to be given to an Image; That " the Command forbids 
 •* both inward woifnip and outward adoration." 
 
 But to return to tjie reception, which this fecond Nicene fynod 
 jr.cc with, when its determination firfl appeared in the world. 
 The Fmprefs Irene fent Charles the Great a copy of the 2(fts of 
 this fynod : Charles fent it into Britain, A. D. 792. where it 
 was condemned as a thing, which the Church of God utterly 
 carfcd arid iibhorred. A convention of Biihop?, and pther prin- 
 C'-p?.!. ptrfons, met here in England upon the reception of the 
 t-ook ; and one Alcuinus or Alivinus was ordered to write an An- 
 i-ver to it, v»hich he carried to the King of France, who fum- 
 37-.oaed three hundred Bi/hops from Italy, Germany, and France, 
 to n.eet at Franckfort, which they did, A. D. 704. Charles being 
 himfc-lf prefent. Pope Adrian fent thither his Legates, Theophy- 
 ].'<fl and Stephanus, wiih another copy of the Niceneads to be 
 V'or^rmed, as he hoped, by that Council : But upon a clofe De- 
 bate of the u hole Matter, the' decrees of this Nicehe Council 
 were condemned, and the Council itfelf as a PfeuJo-fynod. They 
 allowed hovvever, ir.at fetting up of Images was not a thing evil 
 in iiftlf, but they iijiLily forbad all uorfi-iip and adoration of them, 
 as contrary to fcripture. But the cppofition and condemnation of 
 this pictsndcd fynod may be f«.€n at large in the Trads iail men- 
 tioned in the Margin. 
 
 HoweYfr, 
 
Chap. III. Qf the Greek Church. ^19 
 
 However, this Council pretends to have Antiquity in Its favouv 
 But, as another writer (c) has obierved, '* There .ire many Pafl'i- 
 ges cited as telUmonies of antiquity, which are moil incredible 
 Fables, worthy of Derifion rather than a ferious confutation, — • 
 Rather the dreams of fuperllitioas Monks, and apocryphal as 
 vveU a? ridiculous fables, than the tellinionies of any eminent or 
 genuine Fathers. As for the Pallagcs they cite out of approved 
 authors, either they are only about the ufe of pidures lor 
 ornament and hillory, or they are nothing at all to the Purpofe, 
 and none of them are lufHcient to prove a Tradition down from 
 the Apoftle's times." 
 
 With regard to the Greek Church, I now conclude, that as flie 
 hath, at leaft in thefe three particular?, i. Tranfubftantiation and 
 Adoration of the Hod, 2. Fraying to Saints and Angels, 3. V/or- 
 fliip of Images, departed from, yea determined againft, the Pri- 
 mitive Catholick Church, and impofed ihefc corrupt praclices and 
 determiniitions upon all who communicate with her ; I cannot 
 therefore comply with her in thefe particulars.vvithout breaking the 
 rule laid down at the beginning ; and confequently it is my duty, 
 as it is the duty of every Christian, to depart from and determintj 
 againft her, till Ihe fhall return loher firll fold, which God grant 
 fhe may. 
 
 (c) DIfcourfe concerning the fecond Council of Nice. London i6SS. p'* 
 ?3, 24. 
 
 C FT A P. 
 
[20] 
 
 Of th Roman C h u r c h. 
 
 CHAP. IV. 
 
 Of the Roman Churchy r^mth regard to 
 the Sidyjeoi of the foregoing Chapters. 
 
 T 
 
 H E Roman Church is not lefs niodell than the Greek, 
 in her determinations with regard to the fubjed of the 
 three laft chapters. 
 
 Foi 
 
 with refperi to 7ranfuhJlantiatton tvtry Clergyman of that 
 communion is obliged by the Church to profefs, (a) ** That in 
 •' the moll holy Sacrament of the Eucharirt, there is truly, really 
 "* End fuhftantiaUy the Body and Blood, together with the Soul 
 ** and Divinity of our Lordjefus Chrill ; and that there is a change 
 *' made of the nvhole fuhJJance of the Bread into the Body, and of 
 •' the Wine into the Blood ; which change the Catholick [meaning 
 *^ the Roman] Church calk l^ranfuhfiatitiation?'' And the coun- 
 cil of Trent (h) declares, ** That by the confecration of the 
 •* Bread and Wine, there is made a converlion oflhe whole Jab- 
 •' Qance of the Bread into ihcfuhjlance of the Body of Chri(t, and 
 •* the whok/^bjlancfi of the Wine into his Blood : which conver- 
 '' fion is by the holy Church aptly and properly called 'Iranjuh^ 
 " JIaniiation:' 
 
 And then for the Adoration, the Church of Rome decrees ; 
 *' That all the faithful according to the cullom which" [as fhe 
 
 pretends] 
 
 ^ (a) Cresd Qi Pope Pius JV, At;. 
 
 (1^: Coufl- of Trent, Seflf. !■ - 
 
chap. IV. Of the Rom Aij Church. 21 
 
 pretends] " has always been received in the Catholick Church, 
 " lliall in venerating this moft holy Sacrajnent, render to it the 
 " adoration of Z^//7« which is due to the true God." And that 
 ** It is not lefs adorable for having been inftituted by our Lord 
 ** Jefus Chrill with defign that it fhould be eaten (c).'' Again, 
 " If any one ftiall fay that Jefus Chrill, the only begotten Son of 
 " God, ought not to be adored with Latria in the holy Sacrament 
 *' of the Eucharift, even with external adoration, and that a parti- 
 *' cular feaft ought not to be celebrated to it's honour, and that it 
 ** ought not to be carried in folemn proceffion according to the 
 •' laudable and univcrfal cuilom of the Church, and that it ought 
 " not to be publickly expofed to be adored by the people, and 
 •' that thofe who adore it commit idolatry ; Let him be Anathc- 
 « ma." (d) 
 
 As to the Invocation of Saints, the Trent Council " commands 
 
 ** all Bilhops, &c. diligently to inftrud the people That it iar 
 
 ** good and profitable humbly to invocate the Saints, [whom that 
 •* Synod falfely fuppofes to be] reigning together with Chrift (e).^* 
 And Pope Pius's Creed obliges the Romaniil to ** believe, that the 
 " Saints reigning together nvith Chrift^ arc to be worfhiped and 
 *' prayed unto (f)^'' 
 
 It was (aid above in oppofition to theGieek?, that there is no 
 ground for the worfhip of Saints cither in Scripture, or the firit 
 pure antiquity for above three hundred years ; and that the mol? 
 eminent Fathers of that lin'.e laid down fuch pofitions, as are dire£l- 
 Jy againft and inconfiilent with it : and that when, at the latter 
 end of the fourth century, fome authors mentioned addrelTes to the 
 Martyrs, they did not ufe direct and formal prayer to them, buc 
 meerly fuch requeils as are made from one friend to another ; nor 
 did they make thofe requeils, fave at the tombs of thofe Martyrs, 
 to whom they were prefented, and who were believed to be present 
 there, tho' invifibly, at that time ; again, that thofe requelis aod 
 interpellations to the Martyrs were neither commanded by the pri- 
 mitive Church, nor authorized by her General or Provincial or any 
 other Councils, nor uled in the publick Ofhces of the Church : 
 Eut as it was Aiid of the Greek, fo it muil be of the Roman Church ; 
 that fhe ufes diret^ invocation or formal prayer to Saints, and t.hac 
 not only in one place, but in ten thoufand different and moft 
 dillant places, to fuch or fuch a particular Saint, and thefe devo= 
 tions are enjoined by her, and ufed in her publick cfnces. 
 
 I mufl produce a few examples, and will for one give Bllhop 
 Hicke&'j iranrialion of thchymnyfrc rnarr, ftel/a. *' Hail ftar of 
 
 " the- 
 
 :c) Ibia&Iu, ch3P,y^ f<i;Cai3, 6, (-j S^AT, 15. (j) Creed of Pojx: 
 »»», a;;, 2,0, 
 
^2 The LATUdlTs AP0L0G2\ 
 
 ** the Sea, and nurfing Mother of God, perpetual Virgin, and 
 *' bleffed gate of Heaven, Thou that receiveft the falutation which 
 ** was {poken by the mouth of Gabriel, and changed the Name of 
 " Eve, loofe the bonds of guilty Sinners, eniightea the eye? of the 
 " blind, drive away all evils from us, and afe all good things for 
 " us. Shew that thou art the Mother of Chriil, and let him who 
 '* was born of thee for us, and vouchfafed to be thy Son, receive 
 *' our prayers through thee, O moll excellent and humble \'irgin ; 
 ** make us humble and chafte, and' free from the bonds of our Sins ; 
 '* give us purity of life, and grant us a fafe pafTage into the 
 *' next world, that we attaining the Beatifick vifion of Jefus, may 
 '' rejoice with everlalling joy. Praife be given to God (he Father, 
 *' Glory to Chrifl the Sovereign Lord, and to the Holy Ghoft, to 
 *' all three be one honour. Amen, (gy 
 
 You fee (fays the Bilhop) they pray unto her here, as unto an 
 author and donor of fpiritual bleffing?, and remind her of her 
 power and influence over her fon. And fo in another hymn they 
 remind him of whom he took his body, and then pray unto her 
 in the following manner : ** Memento rertini conditor^ Szc. Re- 
 " member, O Creator of all things, that thou formerly tookeft the 
 *' fhape of our body, by being born of the holy womb of the 
 ** virgin. O Mary, mother of grace, and fvveet parent of mere/, 
 *' proteft us from the enemy, and receive us in the hour of 
 '* death. Glory be to thee, O Jefus, who Vv'aft born of the virgin, 
 " with the Father and the Holy Spirit. Amen. {/jJ'' 
 
 In the fecond day of the odave of the bleffed Virgin's nr.ti- 
 vity there is this Prayer or Leflbn. " O B. Maria, ScQ. O 
 *' B. Mary, who can fufnciently give thee praife and thanks, 
 *' who by this fingular aflent didll fuccour .the world when it v/as 
 '* undone ? Whrst praifes fufHcient can frail mankind pay unto 
 " thee, who hall found out a way of recovery only by thy corn. 
 " merce with God ? We therefore pray thee receive our Ihankf- 
 •* givings, how mean fcever they be and unequal to tiiy merits j 
 " and when thou fhalt receive our devotions, excufe our faults 
 *' by praying. O admit our Prayers within the fanfiuary of thy 
 " audience, and bring back unto us the antidote of reconcili- 
 *■' .Ttion (i).'' 
 
 The next LefTon is a Prayer of the fame rtrain in the following 
 words ; Sit per te, Sec. (k^. *' Let every thing be cxcufed which 
 *■' we bring unto God by thee, and let us obtain wharfoever we 
 '* afe with a faithful mind. Accept that we ofrer, give that we 
 *' aik, and pardon that we fear : becaufe thou art the only hope 
 
 C^J Omc. B. M. in Sabbat3 Si alibi, fbj Off. parv. C. M, C'J f eft, S, M, 
 a4 Nivis, (kj Brey, Rom, 
 
Chap. IV. Of the Roman Church. 23 
 
 ** of finners. We hope for the pardon of our clfences by thee, 
 
 " and in thee is the moH blefled expeftation of our reward, O 
 
 *^ holy Mary. Succour thofe that are miferable, uphold thofe 
 
 *• that are faint hearted, comfort thofe that weep, pray for the 
 
 " people, ^c." 
 
 In the ofHce of the Blefled Virgin the Apoftles are thus prayed 
 to : " O ye juft Judges and true lights of the world, we pray unto 
 *' you with the requelU of our hearts, that ye would hear the prayers 
 •' of your {upplirints f/j." *' Ye that by your word (hut and 
 *' open Heaven, deliver us, we befeech you, by your COMiVIAND 
 *' froni all our fins." 
 
 " You, to whofe Command the health and Sickncfs of all men 
 " are fubraftted, heal us who are fick in our manners, and reiiorc 
 *' us to virtue." 
 
 *' Let Mary andHcx fon blefs us (m):' 
 
 But enough of this. I muft fay a word or two upon the fub- 
 jctt of Image worfcip in the R,oman Church. 
 
 That the Primitive Church did not allow the viaklng, much 
 lefs the ^jjorpipphg of Images^ or even of God by Ima^'es, but 
 condemned all approaches to that kind of worfiiip, as of heathen 
 original ; determining that not only Latria, but DouliUf was by the 
 fecond commandqient forbidden to be given to an Image, has been 
 fufficiently fhewn in the laft chapter : it only remains therefore 
 to fiiew, that the Roman Church teaches and pradlifes this Anti- 
 primitive, I may fay Anti chriilian, worfhip ; and then the reafons 
 for refuhng communion with the Greek Church will be valid againft 
 her alio. 
 
 Now fhe makes it an article of Faith " mod firmly to he ajferted, 
 *' that the Images of Chrift, and of the Ever-virgin mother of 
 •' God, and of the other SalnCf, ought to be had and retained, and 
 *' due honour and veneration ought to be given to them (^?/ J.'" 
 And again : *' The holy fynod ]^of'lrent'\ commands all Bifiiops 
 
 *' and others, that have the charge and care of teaching, that- 
 
 *' they diligently inflrufl; the people — '. 7'hat the Image of 
 
 *' Chrlli: and — ought efpccially to be had and kept in Churches 
 
 *' and to have due honour and veneration given to them - 
 
 ** becaufe the honour which is given to them, redounds to the 
 ** Prototypes, which they reprcfent ; fo that by the Images which 
 *' we k'lfs [as the fynod t^oes or.] and before which we uncover the 
 
 *' head 
 
 (I) Offic. B. Virg. Antw. 163 1. p. 407, (m) Qffic. L. Virc. p. 10;, 
 («) Creed ot Pcpe Tius, art. 21, 5 r j 
 
24 The LJTMJN's APOLOGT. 
 
 ** head and p-ojlrate oarfelves, we worlhip and adore Chrift and 
 ** the Saints, whofe fimilitude they bear : as hath been eftablifhed 
 ** by councils, hut cfpecially by the decrees of the fecond council 
 •* of "Nice, againft the oppugners or oppofers of Images (o),'''' 
 The Catechifm appointed for Curates by this council of Trent, 
 directs them to inflrufl the people, that Images are fet up, " not 
 " only for Inflrudion, but for Worfhip." 
 
 The Church's Hymns will fpeak plain enough. One of which 
 here followcth. 
 
 ** O Crux, a've fpes unica, kc. ( p ) ** Hail, O Crofs our only 
 
 " hope, in this glorious triumph, do thou augment the grace of 
 
 " the godly, and blot out the lins of the guilty." Again : ** O 
 
 ** Crux fplendidior cunBis, &c. O Crofs ! brighter than all the 
 
 *' liars, famous through all the world, much beloved by men, 
 
 ** more holy than all things, which alone waft worthy to bear 
 
 ** the weight of the world: S^.veet ^cvood ! bearing fweet nails, 
 
 ** fweet weights, Sa^ve this prefent congregation gathered together^ 
 
 •* this day to celebrate thy Praife ( ^ )•*' 
 
 But why Ihould I ftand to multiply inftances of the guil? of the 
 Roman Church in this particuhr ? fince it is fufficient cauie of leav- 
 ing her communion, th?rt (he worships God even hy an Image ; 
 as hath been largely proved in this controverfy, and may be 
 faid to be diffidently (hewn even in what was produced in the lall 
 chapter : And therefore I fhall not here further purfue this fubjeft; 
 except it be juft to obferve, that the Rubrick of the order for re- 
 ceiving the Emperor in frocejjtojt, determines, that the Legatees Crofs 
 fhall he on the right handy Because LATRIA is due to it. 
 
 (e) Council cf Tren\ Seff. 25. (p) Brevlar Rom. May 3. p. 79: 
 Vt.xiz 1643. Cf ) Ibid. 
 
 
 C H A E 
 
Chap. V. Of the Roman' Church.' 2/; 
 
 CHAP. V. 
 
 Of the Supremacy of the Pope or Bl/Jjop 
 
 of R O M E. 
 
 TH E Doftrine of the Roman Church upon this head, 
 which every Clergy-man promifes, vows, and fwcars 
 moft conftantly to keep and profefs entire and invio- 
 late, even to his laft breath ; and to endeavour more- 
 over to the utmoft of his power that it may be kept, taught, and 
 profeffed by all his Subjefts, or by thofe that are any way under 
 his care : (as he does indeed of all the articles oi Pope Pius lYth*s 
 Creed and the determinations of [chat which is commonly called] 
 the Council of Trent (a :) The Roman dodlrinc, I fay, is thus 
 profeffed ; " I do acknowledge the Holy Catholick and Apollo- 
 ** lick Roman Church to be the Mother and Miftrefs of all 
 '* Churches : And I do promife and fwear true obedience to the 
 ^* Bijhop of Rome, the Succeflbr of S. Peter the Prince of the 
 ** Apojiks and vicar of Jefus Chrift. (hy^ 
 
 But in truth the Roman is neither the Mother ^ nor the Mijire/s, 
 pf ^//Churches. 
 
 Though one Church may in fomefenfe be the Mother of another, 
 yet how can the Roman Church be the Mother of thofe Churches, 
 which were begotten or planted befor.e herfelf? Methinks, I 
 fnould be glad to have an anfwer to this interrogatory. But thac 
 no one particular Church can be the uni^verfal Churchy nor 
 yet the Mijire/s of any other particular Church, much lefs of 
 all Churches, will appear in the fequel of this chapter ; when wp 
 (hall have viewed this dodrine a little, trying it by our Rulep 
 that is, by the Rule which {he and we agree to be the beft. 
 
 It ihall not be denied, but that the Church of Rome in primi- 
 tive times was reverenced upon account of fome accidental ho^ 
 Hours, fuch as S. Peter and S. Paul's receiving the glory of 
 Martyrdom in that city, S. Peter fuffering upon the Crofs as our 
 
 D Lord 
 
 {a) See P, riws's Crccd, Art, 74, (Ij Ibid, Art. zj, 
 
Lord did, and S. Paal being beher-ded, as S. John Baptiil Ir.d 
 been : /\nd S. "[olm the Apoflle r^ay be faid to have fufFercd 
 rnartyrdorii there, alfo, when he came out of the boiling oil 
 without sny harm, and was baniflied ir.to Patmos; Thtfe par- 
 ticular honours are mentioned by TertulUan in his Prejcription 
 rpainft Hereticks. And it is very remarkable, that notwithiLmd- 
 ing this booU ib often'alledged by Pnpilb, yet io fiir is it from 
 fciving them, that he may be faid to prefcribe againft this very 
 heicfv'^of niaking one particular. Church the Miurefs of all others, 
 or <?i;^vBifi:op the Prince of the College ^ in the fenfe of this arude 
 \ve are now upon. 
 
 *• Survey, f/jys he, the ApoAolick Churches, in which Bl'ro-bs 
 
 *y prefide in \h^ Thrones o'i the JpofiUs, and in wb.ctj tii^-ttiy 
 
 *.* ^qchcntick orciiginal epiftles of the ap.olilgs are read, exprcf- 
 
 «vfiqg the voice and repTefeiiting the perfon of every ppe oF 
 
 ..■ ;:;,'^n. II- AcUii|be near thee, i here thou has i\ic Chitrck of 
 
 .. cIk^u art not far' fro..! Macedonia, there thou h.ic 
 
 : ,.,,. o,..v;.,:.i of PMli^pi'^nd "Th.Jfalonica: ^If.chou wilt ^o 
 
 '' i^tp /ifia, there' thou halt the Church of ^phefus. But if the a 
 
 "' livclt ne^r luilj. There thou hail, the Church of K^e, fran,! 
 
 *• vvben-ce we, 9/ y^;/.-*^ derive our MifTion. O bit fled Church ! 
 
 -■" •* And iiq lie goes on to fpeak of thofe accideijta] hor.our. , 
 
 I juiV nop aiencicned, but leaves her only upon a Kvcl 
 
 v.i.h. ;he Churciies ..planted firfl among tht Je-^s iind^ Saviizn- 
 
 n^-rsAxx the fii/>' , Z.^M.,^"<^ '^^^^ an-.ong the Gentiles in Syria, 
 
 ■fial Greece, and Tlaly i, as at Antioch, Smyrna ^ Ephefus ^n<X 
 
 Corinth : I fay J.e only Ieav6s her upon a level with them in re- 
 
 (pea.of J^.^'•/■/^ic-^77i;f.. 'If aman lived v\Qzr Italy, There he had 
 
 'thV Church of l^or>;e ; jaO:' as, if he lived near Achaia, There 
 
 he had ihe Church of Corinth, &c. He could not have argued 
 
 ^s h£..4a€s throughput that book, if he had thought the Roman 
 
 't^imcaiYiz' Mifirefs of all Chiirches.^ He 'could not have faid 
 
 ^:i he, eoGs a licde befoie. " Wherefore as many and famous 
 
 ^■-ao the C/j;.7-f/-^^j.ar.c, tKey came from that one Church which 
 ", the' APQSTLE5 fifil planted, and fo may be all called /;^^ 
 ^^2iii ^f^LL. ApofiQlicsil Owirches, while they are all united' in a 
 •.*,peaceTar"coajmunion, brotherly love, and the lame rights of 
 "^•^'iicicitality one. with anoiher ; which nothing can reguiate 
 
 and p 
 
 rcfeive. bu: the tradiiion cf one and the fa;rx fai 
 
 And as Tcrtullisu thus wrote before A. D. 2co ; fo S. Cy- 
 prir.n's writing in the next age, will afrord many pafiages againfl: 
 this 'Ro;^:an dJaritie. For example, when Telicifiir.us went to 
 P.ohie\v\x\\ a rumber of Pnrcizans, to get the fchifmatical ordi- 
 'na'tldnbf f(?r/;.7^^/«J i^pproved bv Cornelius and the reft of the 
 *'■ '■ Italian 
 
 • Tertull, de pra:'U:ript, Heretic, § 35. 
 
Chap. V. Of the Roman Ci-Iurch. 27 
 
 ItaUa?! Birnops; (as Ko-vatian h?iJ the affurance to fend to Ccrr- ■. 
 ihage^ to get his ichifmatical ordinntion approved by Poi^e Cypri- • 
 a?!, for, in the langQKgc then current every Billiop v,"ns c.ilied Pope) 
 Cornelius vvas'.i little llapjgered by the artifices of thofe fchifma.- 
 ticks, and therefore his Brother Cyprian writes to him, and lays ; 
 
 '■ — " After allthis, when they had procured a (pretended) 
 
 *V,Biniop to be ordained for them by Heretiqfks, taey make a far- 
 *' ther venture, and fet fail for Ro7?te, and cnrry letters vyith 
 ** tliem from impious fchifniaticks to the Chair of S. Petevy a 
 ** Church of principal account y fro?n <zvhenc€ the -'uvAty of the facer- 
 *• dotal college takes its rife (a) \ not confiderinr^ that thefe 
 " were thofe Romans, whofe faith the apollle fo ir.ach cornmend- 
 *' ed ; and to who'iJ (therefore) fuch infamous bctra}cr3 of ir, 
 *• could never be fuppofed cap.^bl'e of gaining ( a favourable ) 
 ** accefs. Now I would fain know, \\\\il pretence of leafoa 
 ** they could have for coming to you, and teni;ig you th^.t ;he/ 
 *' had ordained a rival Biiliop ngainfl rre ? For either iluy aie 
 " pleafed with what they have done and pei fevere in their crime, 
 ** or elfe they repent ; if the latter, they know whither they 
 *' ought to return. For feeing it is determined /^y us all, and is 
 " Tiiiojt/ft and reafonahle in its f elf, that every one's caufe (hould 
 " be examined where the crime v/as committed; and fmce there 
 *' is a portion Q'i the Floclc [the Catholick Church] iifiigned to 
 *' EVERY Bijhop, to be governed by Him as He fhsil be r.c- 
 *' countable [not to the BjP:>op of Rome but] to GOD; cur 
 *^ fubjefls ought 7iot to run about from Bifnop to Bifnnp, ^ ; :• 
 " break the harmonious concord, which is among BiO^ons b - 
 *' their fubtle and fallacious temerity : but every man's cj.e 
 *' ought to be difcuffed, where he may have accufers and witn:uj:i 
 " of his crime, (cf' 
 
 It mull be allowed, that there was a Supremacy of Order ia 
 S. Peter's miflion, and feme of the ancients fay, the Chnrth vv?.-> 
 built upon him firjl [in order of time] ; and ft-om thence they 
 fometimes allegorize in favour of unuy ; but then they add, 
 or fay in ot'her parts of their writings, \.\i-xx. the reft of the apcftes 
 n<:erc the Jh\i^ KfjilbS. Pefer, e?idued ^clth An^ EqUALiTY of 
 ponver and honour, as S. Cyprian words it, in his book of tbs 
 'inlty of the Church (d), 
 
 The ancients had no other notion of the Church of Rome, bat as 
 
 of one particular Church^ which was apart of the vvhole, of wiiicn. 
 
 [whole Church] ChriU only was the Head. They never faid the 
 
 D 2 Catholick 
 
 ^ .) Note tlih fcrap.of a fentcncs", disjointed from the tcnour of lbs 
 -..vft;-*, is OK Ebfurdly i^uoted by the Rom^nillo. {c ) S. Cyprian,^ Ep, 
 
28 Tht LATMAN's APOLOGl. 
 
 Catholick Church of — — ^— this or that particular city^ but when 
 the word Catholick was taken in its limited fenfe» as fignifying 
 orthodox: when it was ufed in the general lenfe, it was then 
 taken for the whole colle6i"ive body of all chriftian Churches, 
 united under Chrift as their only Head. And therefore when they 
 gave the title of Catholick Church to the Church of Rome, it was 
 in fio other fenfe but that, in which they gave it to other parti- 
 cular Patriarchal or Diocefan Churches, to fignify that they 
 were faithful parts of the whole Church (e). 
 
 S. Thomas planted Churches in Parthia, S. Andrenv in Scythia, 
 S. Johf: in the proconfular j^Jia, S. Mattheiv in ^thiopia^ S. 
 Bartholomenv in India, S. Peter among the JenAJs of the difper- 
 fion in Pontus, Galatia, Bithynia, Cappadocia, and laft of all at 
 Rome where he was crucified : And fo did S. Paul in all the 
 parts of the Heathen world from Jerufalem to Illyricum (f)* 
 All thefe and every one of them planted Churches, and ap- 
 pointed Miniilers for them» independently one of another, and 
 adted as independently of 5. Peter, as he did of them *. 
 
 In a word, for above fix hundred years ** there was na uni- 
 •* verfal Bifhop under Jefus Chrijl, who might be the fupreme 
 *' 'vifihle head of the Catholick 'vifihle Church. There was in- 
 •* deed an uni-verfal Bijhoprick j but it was not holden by any one 
 ** Jingle perfon. There was an Vnus Epifcopatus, one Epilcopacy, 
 ** one epifcopal office, one Bifhoprick ; but it was divided into 
 •* many parts \ and ei'ery Bijl^op had his Usare of it ajjigned him, 
 ** to rule and go^uern nuith the plenitude of epifcopal authority [g], 
 '* There was one Church all the n.vorld ever, dl'vided into many 
 •* members', and there was one epifcopacy diffufed in proportion to 
 •* that one Church, by the harmonious numerojity of many hi- 
 •• Jl:^ops [h). Or, if you would have it in other words, the one 
 *' Catholick Church was divided into many PrecinBs, Dijiri^s^ 
 ** or Diocefes ; call them as you will : Each of thofe DiJiriSis 
 " had its fingular Bipop, and that Bijhop within that DiJlriSl 
 •* had the supreme POWER. He was fubordinate to none 
 •* but the great Bifhop of Soul?, Jefus Chrili, the ONLY uni- 
 ** verfal Bilhop of the univerfal Chureh. He was independent on 
 «* and l^cod collateral with all other Bifhops." See the Princi^ 
 pits of the Cyprianick age, in Oda'vo^ p. 31. to /. 35. ^arto, p. 
 
 27, 28. 
 
 ( e ) See fi-vcra! Letters betioeen Dr, Hichi ard a Popip} Prieji, p. 
 179, &c. where this is largely proved and all objeftions anfwered. (/) 
 Eufeb. Eccl. Hift- L. i. c. xix. L. iii. c. xxiii. (g) Cyprian of the 
 Unity of the Church, p. 108. Engli/h by Marfhal, p. 98. {b) Epift. 
 Iv. p. 112. Englifh, p. 139, 
 
 • See Hick?«'» fwnd CeUcai^n of Letters, p, J76, &c. 
 
Chap. V. 0/ //^e Roman Church.' 2^ 
 
 .2*7, 28. where the learned author obferves, that " There is 
 ^-•* nothing more fully, or more plainly, or more frequently in- 
 - •• fifted on by S. Cyprian, than this great Principle ;" and gives 
 a (hort view of it from him and his contemporariers. And as 
 there is an Engliih tranflation of S. Cyprian's works, it is to 
 be wifhed that every Englifh Popifh reader (who will fometimes 
 find his Popifti authors taking upon them to cite this eminent 
 Father in favour of their doftrine even in this point) would 
 with his own eyes confult the tranflation, and if he miftrufts 
 a paflage let him confult the original by his own Prieft and fome 
 indifferent perfon Ikilled in Latin. The unlearned Frenchmen 
 or Women may do the fame by the French tranflation of M. 
 Lombert, who has done S. Cyprian juftice, not only in his 
 tranflation but in his preface, and has in his learned notes an- 
 fwered all the fallacious arguments, brought by the flattering 
 writers of the Roman Communion in favour of this pretended 
 omniregency of their own Church. And many other candid Po- 
 . pifli writers have done the fame, as who-ever examines the 
 controverfy, will find : And let that have its due weight. 
 
 C PI A P. 
 
[ 30 1 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 CHAP. VL 
 
 Of P U R G A T O R Y. 
 
 \K OTHER article of the Roman Creed is exprefled 
 in thefe words : «* I do firmly believe, that there is a 
 - Piirr?.torv, and that' the fouls therein detained are 
 " relie'ved by the fultrages of the Faithful,- but 
 
 " chiefly by the acceptable facrifice of the altar {a)y Now that 
 bv relica;ed [jwvari] ihe means from fiery torment i, is too plain 
 from her own explication in the Catechifmus ad Farachos, v^^nc^ 
 was drawn up and publifhed by order of the Trent fynod. 
 
 - There is ( fays that book ) a Purgatory fire, by which the 
 '■' fouls of the pious are expiated, after they have been tormented 
 " for a determined time, that an entrance may be opened for 
 •' thcni into the eternal country, into which nothirg enters that 
 
 - is dehled." And again: " Wherefore before our Saviour 
 *' died and rofc again, the gates of heaven were open to n,o one : 
 *' But the fouls oT the pious, when they departed this life, were 
 "' either carried into Abraham's bofom ; or eife they were expi- 
 *' ated in the ;?r^ of Purcratory, which likewife happens now to 
 *' thofe who 'have any thing to pay or to purge away (/)." 
 
 The council of Florence thus dctcrnunes : '* If thofe who arc 
 " truly penitent, depart in the favour of God, before they have 
 •* made fati?faaion for their fins of commifiion and om^'lfion by 
 *' fvu->s wo'ihv of rcpeniar.ce, their iods after death are purged 
 
 ' '^ " " by 
 
 ( a 1 Creccl cf P. P 
 
 ;it. iq. ara C 
 
 Trent, fofT, ?.$. {b) d 
 This is to be fecn in En<- 
 
Chap. VI. Of the Roman Church. ^i 
 
 " hy purgatory pains ; and that they may be relieved from thofe 
 ** pains, die fuffrages of the living faithful (namely the (a- 
 "** crificcs of the m.nfs, prayers and alnis, aud other pious offices, 
 ** which u(ed to be done by the faithful for other faithful ac- 
 ** cording to the inilitutions of the Church) are prolitdble for 
 ** ^hem." Thus far this Council with relation to iurgatory ; 
 (whicli involves another dodrine unknown to the' ancients as wiU 
 appear in the feqnel) The council goes on ; "^ und the I'ouls of 
 *' thofe, wh^o after the r^^ception of b.iptifm hdVQ contr,:dted no 
 *' ftain of fm, and thole who afrer having contracted the ftain 
 •' of fin have been purged, eitiicr in their bodies, or olfe after 
 *' they are diverted of their bodies, in the manner above men- 
 *' tioned, are imtnediateh rzzz\v&d iinoh^awan and dearly behold 
 " the Tri-iine God himfelf as he is, but yet one more per- 
 *' feftly than another, by reafon of the difference of their me- 
 ** rits." And in other places the Church of Rome fuppofes the 
 Ss'nts to be reigninv together nvlth Chriji (c). 
 
 ..;^.v It is plain from fcripture, that the foul of our blefTed 
 Lord did not ifcend into Heauen, till it went thither together with 
 hi. body, forty days after his Refurredion [d). After his death 
 it went only into Faradife or Abraham's bofom, where all pi- 
 ous fouls niuil be retained till the refurreftion of their bodies. 
 S. Paul did not expeil to receive his crown, till the day of 
 the coming of the Lord, the Righteous Judge : he was perfwaded 
 that he fhould /^^« at laft receive from God the foul cohimitted 
 to him together wirh eternal Inc. I affi per/^^adt ^(nys he 2. Tini. 
 i. 8 ) that he is able to keep wlxit I have committed unto him 
 again ft that day. When the fame S„ Paul prays for mercy on 
 r.ny one. promifes Joys, or threatens Torments, he refers ftiil to 
 ^That Day I that is, the Day of Judgment. 2. Thefi^ i. 7, 8, 
 9, 10. 
 
 Let us row try this Roman doflrine by our golden rule : ant| 
 
 £ril: of the Saiiits clearly beholding the Tri-une God and 
 
 reigning together ivith Chriji. 
 
 Now I find Juflin Martyr, who flouriflied in the middle of the 
 fecond century, teaching the direfl contrary. Fur he fays, tha; 
 *' fuch people are not really, but are only called Chriftians, who 
 *' {:>^y there is no refurredlion of the dead, but that as foon 
 *' as people die, their Ibuls are taken up into heaven: Do not 
 " look upon thel'e as Chriflians." Dialogue n.vith Trypho the Jenv, 
 p. 223. Edit, Paris, 1636. as 1 find him cited by an author 
 
 [Dr. 
 
 {c\ C. of Trent, Seff. -^., ?. Fi'i^'s Creel art, 20, {d] John xx, 
 
 J/. /^ 'V3 ii. J;, 
 
52 The LATMAN's APOLOGT, 
 
 [ Dr. Deacon of Manchejler'] who has been moft exaftly care- 
 ful in taking his quotations from the original, and from whom 
 I fhall borrow moft of this chapter ; for he has cxhaufted the 
 fubjeft. The title of the book is, The Doarine of the Church of 
 Rome concerning Purgatory, pronjed to be contrary to Catholick 
 Tradition y and inconfijhnt ^uith the necejfary duty of praying for 
 the dead. London f 1718. 
 
 S, Irenseus, who flouriflied about the year 167, argues again ft 
 the faith of the Church of Rome from our Saviour's own exam- 
 ple. ** Since (fays he) our Lord went into the midft of the 
 •* ihadow of death, where the fouls of the dead were, afterwards 
 •* rofe again in the body, andy^/^r his refurreSiion was taken up : 
 " It is manifeft, that the fouls of his difciples likewife, for 
 ** whom our Lord did thefe things, go to the place ordained 
 ^' them b> God, and there they ftay till the refurreSiion, exped- 
 •* ing it ; afterwards receiving their bodies, as our Lord himfelf 
 ** rofe, thus Ihall they come into the prefence of God." 
 
 Tertullian (ays, that " all fouls are in the places below, that 
 ♦* there are both punifhments and renveirdf there, that both Dives 
 *' and Lazarus are there, and that the foul is both puniflied and 
 •* comforted in the places below, in expedation of the future 
 ** judgment." 
 
 S. Cyprian^ Laclanttus, 5. Hilary^ S. Gregory NyJJen, S. GxB' 
 gory }^ayJan%en, S. Amhrofe, S. Chyfodom^ and S. Jugujiin, 
 are all witneiles who depofe for the fame dodrine diredly op- 
 pofite to that of the Church of Rome. 
 
 But leaving thefe I find by the ancient Liturgies, that the 
 Primitive Church prayed to Almighty God for thofe Saints, 
 whom the Church of Rome, fuppoiing them to be in heaven, 
 prays to i as will appear from the following authorities. 
 
 In the apoflolical conftitutions the petition for the faithful de- 
 parted in the Euchariftick fervice Hands thus : '* We offer to thee 
 ** for all the Saints who have phafed thee from the beginning 
 ^' of the world, for the Patriarchs, Prophets, Jpcftles, Jufi 
 ^* Men^ Martyrs, ConJeJJorSy Bi/hopSy Prieftsy Deaconsy &c." 
 
 The Romanifts dare not fay, that the Apoftles and all the Saints 
 who had pleajed God Uom the beginning of the world, were then 
 m Purgatory ; confequently the Primitive Church prayed for 
 thofe who were in a liate of happinefs, and confequently for fuch 
 as were neither in Purgatory, nor in the higheft heaven reigning 
 with Chriil, as the Roman faith is profclTtd in the Trent Creed. 
 
 In 
 
Chap. VI. 0/ /^^ Roman Church. 33 
 
 In a word, there are no h(s than thirty-feven Liturgies, every 
 one of which pray for aJ/ the Saints, for the Apofiks and 
 the bleffed Virgin herfelf. The general form, which runs through 
 
 them all, is much like this, " Vouchfafe, O Lord, to be 
 
 ** mindful of ^//the Saints who have pleafed thee from the begin- 
 •* ning, our holy fathers, the Patriarchs, Prophets, Apoftles, E- 
 •* vangelifts, Martyrs, ConfcfTors, and thofe who have declared the 
 /'-gofpel to thy Church, and all the Spirits of the juft, who having 
 ** finiftied their courfe are departed in the faith : But efpecially the 
 ** Holy and Glorious Ever-virgin, the Mother of God, Saint 
 *' Mary, and S. John the fore-runner, the Baptifl, and Martyr, 
 ** andS. Stephen the firft Deacon and Proto-martyr, &c." 
 
 So much for the Liturgie?, which have been publifhed by Renaw 
 dotiui in Latin, and feme of them from him by Bifhop Brett in 
 Englifh with a learned Differtation. And as thefe Liturgies, fo 
 the writings of the Fathers who mention prayer for the dead, are 
 cliar againll the Roman doflrine. 
 
 *' You cannot (fays Tertullian) lay afideyour regard for the former 
 ** [wife] when it is raifcd into religion and made a part of your 
 ** devotion, when you petition for the foui of her, ^vhom the 
 ** Lord has received into his handsy and o§"er up anniverfary ob- 
 *^ Jations for her *." 
 
 S. Ambrofe {peaking of Valentinian and his brother Gratian, 
 fays ; *' \{ my prayers can prevail, neither of you fhall be un- 
 *' happy : No day fhall drop you out of my memory : I fhall 
 ** have a pious regard for you in every addrefs to God Almighty ; 
 *' the revolution of the night fhall not be more conllant, than 
 ■*' my devotion on your account ; and your memory fhall never 
 •* be omitted in the Euchariilick oblation." And yet the Father 
 did not think they were in Purgatory, for he exprefsly fays thac 
 Valentinian " having left this barren and uncultivated fwildernefSf 
 ** is removed to the verdure and beauty of Paradife^ vjhere in 
 *" company vjith his brother y he enjoys the pleajure of eternal 
 *^ life.r 
 
 And S. Auguftin himfelf in his pathctick prayer for his deceafed 
 jnoiher Monica, fuppofes her to be happy : '* I believe (fays he) 
 " (fl) that thou hall already granted what I afk, but yet vouch- 
 fafe, O Lord, to receive the voluntary facrifice of ^y mouth, 
 •• which I offer for her." 
 
 E And 
 
 • Tcrtull. (^e exhort, cor.ftit. 
 § Amtrol". r.e obit, Valcnt, 
 i^) CcTifcir. B, ix. c,_ 13. 
 
34 The L AT MAN'S APOLOGT. 
 
 And a little after ; " Let no one pluck her from thy proteflion. 
 *' Let neither the Lyon nor the Dragon interpoie between 
 
 ** tliee and her." The former of thefe petitions fuppofe^ her in 
 happinefb ; and the latter could not i.ave been put up for her, 
 by a perfon fuppofing her to be beholding the Iri-uue God him- 
 fclf as he is. 
 
 The doctrine of the primitive Church then teaches me. that 
 the faiihlul departed are retained in Paradife, in Abraham's bo- 
 fom, that is, in manfions of blifs in God's houfe in Hades ; For 
 
 jn my Father": houfi (fays our Lord) are many manfions. 
 
 And then as to the Fire of Purgatory, the Soul's being cleanied 
 by fuftl'ring it, and thereby paying, expiating, or purging away 
 her debt : I find, that it is a do<Clrine never received in the 
 EaJIern Church ; that it was fix hundred years after Chrill, 
 before it was allerted in the Wellern, and four hundred before 
 it was fo much as heard of; and that S. Augullin who firft men- 
 tions it, fpenks of it as a doubtful opinion, and that he himfelf 
 in Tome p^rtsof his works, and the Fathers of the firll four cen- 
 turies, deliver a quite contrary dodrine. 
 
 Let feme of the Fathers fpeak to the point : And firil let us hear 
 S. Jcllin Martyr, wjio as before obferved flouriftied not fifty Years 
 after the deaih of S. John. He tells us, that ** all fouls do not 
 •' die, but that thofe of the godly remain in a certain better place 
 ** and thole of rhe ungodly and wicked in a worfe, expecting the day 
 ** ofjud^meut.^'' { b ) 
 
 S. Cyprian fays ; ** Let us make fatisfaftion to God while it is 
 *' in our power, while any of this life remains." And then he 
 goes on : ** When once we are departed from hence, there is no 
 " place for Repentance, Satisfaclion has no Eft'cd j it is here that 
 
 *' life is either lolt or obtained." {c) 
 
 ThispafTage is fo glaring, (o diametrically oppofite to the Popifh 
 doftrinc of Satisfaiftion by purgatorial fire, that the Romifh Doctors 
 would do well to confidcr it. 
 
 S. Gregory Nazianzen tells us : ** It is better to be corrected 
 *' and purged now, than to be fent to torment there, when it is not 
 •* a time ofiurgation^ but of punilhment." {d) Nay this holy Fa- 
 ther fays directly in one part of his work5,(«') *• that there is no pur- 
 •' gation after this nighty' that is, after the night of this prefent 
 life. 
 
 And 
 
 (b) Dialogue with Tryrho. (() Ad Dcmetrian. {d) Orat, 15. in 
 T'-ii. {') Cxat. 4z. hi ?alh. 
 
Chap. VI. Of the Roman Church. 35 
 
 And laftly let us hear S. Augullin, who as I obferved above was 
 the firil that mentions this purgatory fire ; ** 1 do not oppofe it. (fays 
 •• he) perhaps it may be true ( f) " And in other place's he fays, 
 that ** // /; not incredible^ and that one may enquire tvhether it be 
 ** fo or no, and that it 7nay he difco-vered or lie concealed (^)." 
 
 Nay, this Father delivers a doflrine quite contrary to Purgatory 
 in the following pafl-ige. *• All fouls have different receptions, 
 *' when they depart this life. The good have joy, the wicked 
 " have torments. But when the Refurredion fhall have been pali, 
 *• the joy of the good (hall be greater, and the torments of the 
 " wicked more grievous, when they (hall be tortured with the body. 
 *' The holy Patriarchs, Prophets, Apoftles, Martyrs, and the pious 
 ** faithful are received in peace; but they are all yet to receive in the 
 ** end what God has promifed : For the refurredlion of the flefh, 
 ** the deftruflion of death and titrndX life with the angels is Jike- 
 •* wife promifed. 7^his is what we are all to receive together ; for 
 " every one when he dies, then receives that rert which is given 
 ** immediately after death, if he is worthy of i^ (^)." 
 
 Again, *' Suppofe therefore (lays he) that the day of judgment 
 " is at a great dillance, when the unjud and thejuft fhall be recom- 
 " penced ; certainly your lall daycannot be far off. Prepare your- 
 " felfforthis. For as you depart out of this life, fo fhall you be 
 ** received in the next. After this fhort life, you will not yet be, 
 *' where the Saints will be, to whom it fhall be faid, Comey je 
 ** hhjfed of my Fathery inherit the kingdom prepared for you from 
 '* the foundation of the nvorld: Who knows not, that you will 
 ** not yet be there ? But you may be there, where the poor man 
 *' full of fores was, whom that proud and griping rich man in the 
 '* midll of his torments faw rerting afar off. Placed in that relt, 
 ** you may fecurely expe<5l the day of judgment, when you fiiall re- 
 *' ceive your body, when you fhall be changed that you may be 
 ** equal to an Angel*. " 
 
 This paiTige of 3. Auguftin clafhes with the council of Florence, 
 beyond a poflibility of reconciliation ; as the learned author above- 
 mentioned has juftly obferved. 
 
 Upon the whole of the enquiry. Antiquity, Univerfality nnd 
 Confent are directly againll this Romifn dodrine ; and therefore it 
 IS (hocking to find the Trent affembly creeling it into an article of 
 Faith, and making it a term of communion, obliging all her Cler- 
 
 R z gy 
 
 \f) Decivitat, Del. L, zo. c. ?•;. (?) I-'b. <3e o£l) Dnlcitii ansf- 
 tloVi. 'toiVi. 6. p. iz;',. Paris 16S5. " (i' ) Traft. 49. in Joan. f> ic, 
 
 * i■.'•.?J.■r?.^ -.■ip'', 5,6, S-rtn. 1 § TO, 
 
26 Tht LATMAN's APOLOGT. 
 
 gy td profefs that they frmly ho Id //- as true and cqtholi'cl 
 
 faith, ^without which no man can be fa^ved ; and that they <will, as 
 much as in them lies, he careful that the fame be held, taught, and 
 fraaijed ; as God and his holy gofpelsjhallhelp them. 
 
 But from this 1 muft ever diffent : God give thenugrace to re- 
 form it. 
 
 C H A F. 
 
[37] 
 
 CHAP. 
 
 
 Of taking the Apocrjipha into the Canon 
 of Scripture. 
 
 T 
 
 H E Roman Church, in her determination even upon this 
 head, does indeed pretend to follow the examples of thg 
 orthodox Fathers of the Church ; but how truly ihc has 
 done it, it is highly neceflary to examine. 
 
 Her decree is bold and peremptory for " reverencing all the ^ 
 ** books as well of the o/rfas new Teftament," of both which [that: 
 is, of a// the books, Tohlt, Judith, Wifdorn, Ecclefiafiiais, Ba- 
 Tuchy and Maccabees, as well as the reft which were never quelti • 
 oned] (he determines " God to be the immediate author,'* anathe- 
 matizing all who refufe to affent. 
 
 Now it may reafonably be demanded, how the Roman Churcli 
 comes to underftand the Jewutfh Canon better than the Jews them- 
 felves ? For the Jews account thus — 
 
 The books ofMofes^ 
 
 Four books of the 
 former pro^he;s, 
 
 Genefsy Exodus , Lsvitkus, Numbers^ 
 Deuteronomy, v. 
 
 Jo/hua, Judges ( with Ruth ) Samuel 
 { both in one) Kings (bo^h in one) iv. 
 
 - - • ~ - Four 
 
3S The LATMAN'^AFOLOGJ. 
 
 Four books of the later Efay^ Jeremy {\y\ih Lamsriatiofts) 
 prophets, Ezekiel, the book of the t~o:eh'e Ie[Jer 
 
 prophet Sr iv. 
 
 The reft of the Holy writers, Khg Ba'vid'sp falter. 
 
 King Solomon s pro<vsri>s. 
 
 >er. 
 
 Hi i book of the preach. 
 
 Sons: of Songs f 
 
 The book of Job. 
 
 The hook nf Daniel. 
 
 The book of E%ra ( with 
 
 Nehemiah ) 
 The book of Chronicles (both 
 in one ) ix- 
 
 XXII. 
 
 Thefe books were revifed and digelled into thefefeveral clafTe?, 
 after the return of the Jews from the Babylonifh Captivity, by 
 }Lzra their then Priell and leader. And though they were after- 
 wards differently divided, yet the Number of them was never aug- 
 mented } nor was the bulk of them ever encreafed by any addition- 
 al pieces. No? thcfe facred books were accurately preferved by 
 tNe lews, who were beyond meafure tenacious of this facred dc- 
 pofitum. 
 
 jofephus their Hiflorian teftifies, " that t1iey had T^vuenty tuoo 
 " books of Scripture, which might juflly demand credit, viz. Five 
 *' of Mo/es ; thirteen of the prophets^ containing the a(^s of their 
 **^ times from the death of Mofes ;o the reign of Artaxerxes king of 
 ^* Perfia ; and Four 7nore, containing Hymns to God and Admo- 
 '* nitions to men. That from the time of Artaxerxes, though 
 ** certain books had been written, yet they deferred not the fame 
 
 ** credit with the former. That though thefc fcriptures were 
 
 ** written fo long ago; yet no man ever durll prefume either to 
 ** add, or diminifh, or alter any thing at all in them : it being a 
 •* maxim ingrafted in every one of that nation from their youth, 
 " and in a manner in-bred, to hold thefe writings for the oracles 
 *' of God^ being ready to die for them if required ( / ;." We fee 
 that joffphus's arrangement of the books is f:»me-what difTv^rent 
 from the former ; but he molt imnifellly defigns the fame books, 
 neither moie nor iefs. ..\^. 
 
 ^- And 
 
 (« j A;;aTift Apion. B. i. 
 
Chap. VII. 0//^^ Roman Church. 39 
 
 And Philo his cotemporary fays ; ** The Jews would rather 
 ** iiave fufFt-red a iJiouv^d deaths, than that any thing fliould 
 •♦ ^ ive been altered in the divine laws and ilatutes of cheir na- 
 •* Cicn (/•)." And therefore the books called apocryphal were 
 rot wriiren in the Hebrew language, nor ever received into their 
 fcrij:cureo, nor fo much as pubiickly read or admitted into the 
 fyn:igogues at Jerufalem or in Palelline. 
 
 Before we produce the Fathers, let it be obferved, that though 
 we h-^ve no particular catalogue given us, in the New Teftamenc, 
 of all che feveral books which belong to thf Old ; yet it is re- 
 mark ,bie, that when our blefftd Lord fpoke to his difciples of 
 the fcripcures, he manifeftly had an eye to the divifion before 
 fhewn iQ ha»e been made of them by the jews. 
 
 *' \nd beginning <?/ Mofes (fays S. Luke) and all the Prophets^ 
 *' he V poLu, ded uiuo ihem in all the fcriptures the things concern- 
 
 *" wi^ himfelf And Chrill laid unto them, Thefe are the 
 
 ' words, which 1 ipake uoto you, while I was yet with you, 
 *' that all things mult be fulfilled, which were written in the 
 •* Laiv of Mofes^ and in the Prophets^ and in the Pfalms, con- 
 *' ccrning me." Where the Py^/^w^ comprehended all the Ha- 
 giographa or the reft of ihe holy writings ; and being the firft 
 ai'd molt enunent bo^k amoi)g them, gave the denomination to 
 the reit : fo that all thofe icriptures, which are not contained 
 within this di^oijion^ and cannot be referred to one of theje three 
 chiles, (as none cf the co7itro'verted fciptures can be) are by 
 Chri/i himfelf excluded out of the Canon of the Old Telia- 
 ment. 
 
 The Holy Apoftles go upon the fame fuppofin'on.-— ^— " Be- 
 •* lieving all things, which are written in u >. La^v and the Pro- 
 
 *' phets, laymg no other things, than thole which the Pro- 
 
 *• phets and Mofes did fay. Ferfwading them concerning 
 
 *• Jefus, both out of the La^v of Mofes and out of the Pro- 
 « phets —(/)." 
 
 But to proceed with Tradition. 
 
 In the Apoftolical Conftitutions (w), where there is an enume- 
 ration made of fuch books as were then appointed to be read! 
 in the church as appertaining to the Old Teltament, the books 
 of Mofes and Jolhua, of the Judges and of the Kings, of the 
 
 Chronicles 
 
 (k) Philo J.jd. Dpud Eufeb. de praep. Evan. lib. S. (I) For anfwpTS 
 to objeftions, fee Dr. Cofins's Hiftorv, chap. 3. (m) Apsft. Conftit, 
 
 B. 2. c. 57. 
 
40 The LAYMATSlh APOLOGY. 
 
 Chronicles and of the return from Babylon [ Ezra, Nchemfah 
 and Efther ] are named i but of Tobit and Judith, or any other 
 bf the books which are now in quetb'on, there is no mention at 
 all, which is a fign that in thofe days they were held to be 
 
 ro canonical farts of the fcriptures. In the Apofiolical 
 
 Canon?, after a recital of all the books contained in the Old 
 fejlament, the IVifdom of the fon of Syrach is recommended 
 only as. a book out of the Canon of Scriptures to he learned and 
 read by ycung beginners^ but of the Wifdom of Solomon^ fudith^ and 
 ^oblt, and the rert of the books commonly called Apocrypha ( but 
 made Canonical by the Roman Church ) not a word is fpoken. 
 There i^s indeed mention made of three books of Maccabees, but 
 whether this be in the original reading, and whether even 
 this reading defigns to give them the higheft degree oF ani'' .n- 
 ticknef?, I lliall not now ftay to difpute : it will be a fufficienc ob- 
 jediion againll the Roman Church, if it appears that flic h<is can- 
 onized but one book more, than the Jews and ancient Chriuians 
 ever received into their canon. 
 
 About fixty years after the death of S. John ( who furvived the 
 reflofthe College of Apoftleb ) fome Pcrfons, in thofe parts where 
 the ApoiUe died, made enquiry concerning x\\e exa^ nitfnber of 
 the canonical booh of Scripture i and Melito Bifhop of Sardis v/ho 
 ilouriflied A. D. 170, having been formerly requeued to do it by 
 Onefimus, made a perfeB Catalogue of all the books that by common 
 confent of the Oriental Chriftian: were received as Canonical pirts 
 of the OldTeftament, and returned him this Anfvver: * '• That he 
 ** had diligently enquired into the number and order of thofe 
 *• books; and for this parpofe he had made a journey into the 
 ** Eaft, where they were firll preached ; that he compiled fix books 
 ** of Cornmentarics upon them; and that to fatisfy his deiire, and 
 ** to fee forth the doflrine of faith he had lent him the Names of 
 ** them ^//, that IS to fay, The Five books of Mofes Gf«<?//j, Ex- 
 "^^ oduSy Lenjiticus, "Numbers^ Deutero7zo?ny ; The book of ^-^a/?, 
 ^' Judge!, nnd Ruth ; Four hooks of the kings ; T^zvo books of the Chro- 
 "' nicks ; The Pfalms of Danjid ; The Proverbs or the Wifdom ofSo- 
 ** lomon ] The book of the Preacher ; T-heCanticles i The book of Job ; 
 *• The Prophets Ejay and Jeremy ; the twehe Prophets comprehend- 
 *' ed in one book ; Daniel, Exekiely and E%ra :''* Whereunto 
 J^eheniiah and Efther were commonly annexed, as Vv'ere the 
 lamentations to jeremy. 
 
 Origen, who was vevy well fliilled in the knowledge of the Scrip- 
 fures, both Original and Tranflations, informs us, that ** the Ca- 
 ^* nonical books of Scripture contained in ihe Old Teitament are 
 ^' Twenty two in number, which theHebrews have left us accord- 
 
 *' ins 
 
 >uJ. luf'ib, hift, !.- 4. 
 
Chap. VII, Of the Roman Church. 41 
 
 ** ing to the number of the letters of their alphabet (;;)." And 
 then beginning at GeneftSy Exodus, See. he reckons them up as 
 the Jews do, joining Ruth to Judges, and Lamentations to Jeremy, 
 Judith y Tobit, EcclefiafticuSy and /■/'',^5;» he never mentions. But. 
 immediately declares the Maccabees to be out of the Canon. The 
 additions to the book of Ellher are likewiCe exploded by him ^0). 
 
 TertuUian is the firft of the LatinFather?, whofe writings are ex- 
 tant, (p) He indeed makes the books of the Old Teftanjent to 
 be Tnventyffto'y anfwering to the twenty four elders a^id twenty 
 four wings mentioned in the Revelation of S. John : But in this 
 account, he muft fever the Lamentations from Jcrcm^y and Rulh 
 from Judges, as was feme- times done. 
 
 Eufehius has not only preferved to us the foregoing teftimonies of 
 Melito and Origen, but prefled the nccefTity of recording them to 
 poilerity ; and declares for himftlf, that the Wifdom of Solomon 
 and the Wifdom of the Son of Syrach are not allowed in the Canon, 
 He alfo e^icludes the Maccabees irorn being part of the Old Tefta- 
 ment or being received into the holy Scriptures, ( fee Dr. Cofin';; 
 Hiftory, Chap. VI. ) But I mud not multiply tellimonies to ex- 
 ceed my intended bounds. 
 
 I find it was an ajicient cullom to read to the people in the 
 Church, not only thofe books which were properly and ftridtiy 
 canonicaly but alio fome others which were in honour among them 
 for their antiquity, and the many good rules and examples that 
 were found in them : As 'Tobity judithy EccleajUcuSy &c. which 
 were added to the Old Teltament ; and the Palior of HermaSy the 
 book called the Doarine of the j^poflksy and the E pi [tie ofS. Cle- 
 menty which were by fome added to the New; And thcfe were 
 called Ecclefiafical Scriptures. 
 
 There was a third fort, which fome private men endeavoured to 
 introduce to be read in the Church ahb ; but being intermixed with 
 pernicious doftrines and fabulous relations, they were utterly for- 
 bid to be read ac all (q). Thefc were proper/y called j^pocryphaL 
 Now the Ecclffafticai were by fome called Apocryphal Scriptures, 
 bat for fome ages never called Canonical i and though afterwards 
 they were palled in a lower fenfe Canonical, yet they were moft 
 commonly called Apocryphal. But then, even thefe Apocrypha^ 
 EcclefiaficalScriptures were afterwards forbid to be read in 
 
 F Churches ; 
 
 (yi) See his pref. upon the pfnjms recorded by F.ufeb. Hifl. B. 6. c. 25. 
 S, Balil S: S, Greg. Naziaii. in Origims PbilocalicJ. c. 3. Suidas in verbo 
 Oiigenes. Nicephorus Hilt. B. 5. c, 16. and Hil. pref. in Pfal. For 
 th/, difputed piir^iics in Origen : See Bp, Cofin, chap. v. (0) Sivt. Scneni'. 
 b:bl. Sanft. 1. i. "^ 3. &c. See Bp. Ccfin's Hift. chap. v. § xllx. ( p )A^^i\i-\i\ 
 Mircion, B. 4. c,'7. (q) ijee Eufcb. Hift. B. 3. c. 3. 
 
42 Tht LATMdN'^ AP0L0G2\ 
 
 Churches , but yet were held in high eftcem, quoted with honour- 
 able Epithets, called in a lower fenfe Car.onica/ and ijo/>" Scriptures ; 
 But ftill diilinguifhed from Mo/es and the Prophets^ which with the 
 Kcvv Teflament ( exclufive of lis Apocrypha ) were /(r^^/^r/y called 
 THE Scripture, (r) 
 
 But pa fling over many ancient teflimonies, let us ftep forward 
 to S. Jerovt^ fo much celebrated for his knowledge in the Scriptures, 
 ^vhofe Latin tranflation is preferred before all others, and whofe 
 rrologues (land at this day in the front of the feveral books of the 
 Latin iiibles publifned by the Roman Church ? 
 
 In his preface upon the book oi Kings ^ ( which he calls his arfn- 
 
 ed prologue ) having recounted Genefis, Exodus^ and the reft of the 
 7fa'j///t' Canon, as the only authentick parts of the Old Teftament, 
 he excludes al! the roll from the Canon of Scripture. In his pre- 
 face before the books of Solomon, he acknowledges no other books 
 to ht Cana-nual^ but what he had tranflated out of the //^^r^iy 
 
 la another of his prologues upon the fame books, he adds thus 
 iciJch to the former, ** That the Church indeed reads the writings 
 *' cf Tobity Judith^ and the Maccabees ; but that fhc doss ret re- 
 ** eeive them i'lto the number of Canonical Sciptui es ; and that the 
 •' book<; of Wifdom and Ecclefiaflicus are ( or ought to be) read 
 *' for popular edification in life and good manners, but not for the 
 " eP.abltjhing any doctrine in the Church^ 
 
 In his prefscc before Ezra^ he rcjcj^s ail other writings from 
 the Canoji of tlie Bible, which the Jetvifj Church did not acknow- 
 ledge, or belonged not to that number whereunto the twenty four 
 elder-- alluded in the Revelation of S. John. 
 
 Ill hi'.; preface upCi'i the Chronicles, having faid that the Church 
 received none of rhe Apocryphal books, he concludes, that there- 
 fore we ?.re to have recourfe to the Hebre-LV text, from whence 
 both Ciirilt and his Apoilles took their teuimonies. 
 
 In his preface npcn Jeremy^ the reafon which he gives for omit- 
 ting the book of i;«;;v<.v'', i?, becaufe the /^^^r^w Church neither 
 read nor had it among them. 
 
 \xi his preface upon Daniel, he affixes this note to the fiories of 
 Sufanna, Sovg of the three Children, and Bel and the Dragon ; 
 Thrit the fc-o.s gife n9 Credit to them, as being no part cf Daniel's 
 
 Prophecy^ 
 
 itt Di-, Cofm's Hlft, chan, VI. § LX. 
 
Chap. VIL Of the Roman Church. 43 
 
 Prophecy, nor written in tlieir language. Of Tobit he fays ; That 
 they cut it off from the catalogue of di<vme Scriptures ; And of Ju- 
 dith, that it was counted among the Apocrypha. In his pre- 
 face to the book o^ E fiber, he notes that the vulgar editions of it 
 had contrafted many corruptions , and that dinjerfe pieces had been ad- 
 ded t9 sty according to men's fancies, which he therefore correft- 
 
 ed by the original^ and fevered them from the reft.— In his 
 
 Commentary upon Ezekielt { which he wrote in his old age) hs 
 declares himfelf to be of the fame mind herein, which he had al- 
 ways profefied before. 
 
 S. JuguJIin is the next Father I (hall mention. And it muft be 
 confelled,that thepafiage which thcRomar.ilb frequently cite out of 
 his book oiChriftian DoSIrine, if taken fcparately, without regard- 
 ing its connection with the foregoing words, and without conlider- 
 ing that diilinftion, which in many other parts of his works he 
 makes, between Canonical ?^'^ figni fy lag Divine in the hightjl fenfc^ 
 and CanonicaH^ fignifying Ecclefiailically Divine in a popular way 
 offpeaking, that is, fuch books as the Church then rt/^xy^^/ to be 
 read in her publick aflemblies for inftru(f"tion in morality ; I fay, if 
 the pafTage be taken thus feparatcly, the Romanills may fcem at 
 laft to have got one advocate. 
 
 And though the Englifh Editors of the Di'iu^;' Bible, in what 
 they call the argument of the IVIaccabees, pretend that " diverfe 
 *' of the ancient Fathers alledge thcfe books as divine Scripture ;" 
 referring their readers, among other authorities, to S. Augudin 
 ( of whom we arc now fpeaking ) faying; " S. Auguftin moil 
 ♦* clearly avoucheth lib. z. c. 8. de doci.Chrifl. & lib. i8. c. 36. d^ 
 " Ci'vit. that notwithlhnding the Jews deny thefe books, thcj 
 " Church hoideth them Canonical : " yet it will evidently appear 
 to an/ impartial perfon, who fhall examine S. Auguftin in the 
 places quoted, that even there exclufive ofother parts of his works, 
 he means Canonical in the lower fenfe ; particularly in the lalt 
 book referr'd to, The City of God. *' The account of which times 
 *' we have not ( fays he ) in the Canonical Scriptures, but in the 
 " others which the Church indeed holds for Canonical''' Here he 
 plainly makes t^vo forts of C^.v^'ric^/ Scriptures. Compare this 
 with another pafTage in lib. i ^-^ c. 2 ^. and ic v/ill be beyond all 
 difpute. '* Therefore (fays he) let us omit the Scriptures calhd 
 ** Apocrypha, becaufe the ancient Fathers from whom we received 
 *' the Scriptures, knew not the Authors of thofe works ; wherein 
 *' though there beyS^^ truths, yet ihe many fali}hoods Qont^mQd 
 *' in them iliew them to be of no Canonical AUTHOp.iTy." 
 
 And h was in this limited retrained fenfe, that the word Can- 
 snical is taken in the council of Carthage, fo often referr'd to hy 
 
 Che Roaianift^. as i? evidently f^C fc- th beyond d^.fpute by Bifnop 
 
 Coffty 
 
44 The LATMANz APOLOGY. 
 
 Cofin, fo often mentioned upon this fubje<5>> (f) vvhofe book ha5 
 never yet been vouchfafed an anl'vvcr, nor ( it is prefumed ) ever 
 will be. And no wonder ; for in it he has proved, that this fmall, 
 this petite ojjevihlce at Trent were fo bold, as to decree a different 
 \\oCiur\txo what had been taught by the Cathoiick Church of God 
 corctrning the Canon of divine Scripture, in all times and in 
 ALL PLACES : In JuDEA by the ancient HeL-re-zvs, by Chrijl Je- 
 fus and his Apojlles ; In Palestine and Syria, by Jufiin Martyr, 
 Eufch'us, S. Jercm^ and Damafcen ; In the Apostolical 
 Churches or Aha hy Melito, Polycrales^ <iT\d Oft ejtm us ; In 
 FiiRYGiA, Cappadocia, Lycaonia, AND Cyprus, by thg 
 Council cf Lacdicea^ S. Balli, Amphilochius^ and Epiphanius ; In 
 Egypt, by Clement of Alexandria^ Origen, and Athanafius i In 
 the OTHER Churches OF Africk, by Julius , 7ertullianf S. 
 Cyprian, S. An^uJIin, the Council of Carthage, 'JtiniliuSy and Pri- 
 ma fius \ In ALL THE FIVE Patriarchates, hy S. Cyril, S. 
 Gregory Nazianzen, S. 'John Chryfofiom, Anajtaftus, S. Gregory, 
 Nicephorus, httd Baljamon ; InGREECE, hy Dionxfjus, Antiochus, 
 Adrianus, Lcontias, Zonaras, Philippus, and Calliftus ; In Italy", 
 by Philaflriusy Riffn^ Caffiodore, Comefter, Balhtis, AntoninuSy 
 Mirandula, Cajetan, znd Pagnin ; In Spain, hy I/tdore, Hugo 
 Card. Paulus Burg. Toftatusj and Xivienius ; In France, by S. 
 Hilary, the Di^jines of Marfeilles, Vi^iorinus of Poitiers, Charle- 
 tnaigne'' s Bif^ops, Agobard, RadulphaSi HonoriuSf Petrus Cluniac, 
 HugOy and Richard us of S. P'iclor''s at Paris, Beleth, Petrus Al- 
 len. Heh-csus Isa talis, Faher, and Clitchlo<vius ; In Germany 
 and the Low Countries, by Rabanus, Strabus, Hermanns Co?!- 
 traci. Ado, Rupert us, the Ordinary and Interlineary-Glofs vpon 
 the Bible, the Glofs upon the Canon LazVy Lyranus, Dionyfius Car- 
 thus. Erafmus, Driedo, and /vr«j ; And in the Church or 
 England, hy Venerable Bede, Alculn, Gllfelbert, Joh. Sarifbii- 
 rienfis, Brito, Ockam^ T^hoinas Anglicus^ and Thomas Waldcn ; 
 befides many others not here numbred. 
 
 However thefe might fome of them difFer in other matter?, they 
 all agretc in ihis : And therefore I cannot fiibfcribe, cannot fub- 
 mit to thi.s dtcree of the T r ent ■iS^^mh\y , pafied but on the eighth 
 of April, A. D. 1546, by forty fix Italian Bifhops, affifled by a- 
 boiit ten others, and many of thofe ( in the private Congregations, 
 which were held twice a Week at one of the Popes Legates lloufes) 
 had protclled againll it, but were over-ruled by the Popc&Ccurticr*; 
 fome of whom, particularly one, being determined to cppofe the 
 
 wnnn 
 
 b- 
 
 i f ) ^i<: h LyA^iiHo 
 
Chap. VII. O//^^ Roman Church 45 
 
 writings of Cardinal Cajetan, a learned writer of their own 
 Church, who had, in his day, more ingenuoufly difcuffed this 
 point, (i) 
 
 CO See Father Paul's Hift, of the Council cf Trent. 
 
 C H A Fa 
 
46; 
 
 CHAP. VIII. 
 
 Of avhhdiding the Eucharijlick Cup, or of 
 Commumon m one kind. 
 
 IN this article, the governors of the Roman Church dd not 
 indeed pretend to have the Primitive prafiice in their favour, 
 but determine by their plenary power. Being taught ( they 
 fay) by the Holy Spirit andfollonuing the judgment and cuf torn 
 of the Catholick [ by which they mean the Roman'] Churchy from 
 Kvhofe Faith and Obedience in fome provinces many had feemed to 
 depart ; againft thefe many I fay, fhe determines : (a) That 
 •' Laicks and Priefts who do not confecrate, are not obliged by 
 '* divine precept to receive the Sacrament in both kinds ;^ That 
 " though Chrift in his lall fupper did inftitute this venerable Sacra- 
 *' ment under the fpecies of Bread and Wine, yet that Inftitution 
 " and Delivery does not bind all the faithful by the law of Chrift 
 ** to receive both Species ; and that they who affert the contrary, 
 *' fpeak ralhly and prefuaiptuoufly." And *' If any perfon does 
 •' fay the Holy Catholick [that is according to their meaning the 
 •' Roman'] Chsirzh, v;as not by juft caufes and reafons moved to 
 " give it to the Laity and Non-confecrating Prielts, in one fpecies 
 '* only, let him ( fays ihe) be Anathema, (bf i 
 
 Kow little reafon ihcre is, 
 
 for diflinguifhing between the 
 
 fec--3ting Priefr, and the Receivers whether Cle7gy or Laity ; and 
 how contr?.ry this manner of proceeding in delivering one kind 
 only, h to thedefignofChrifl in the imlitution, will appear fuffi. 
 
 cientl 
 
 y 
 
 (c) Cour.cn of Trent, Scfif. ir.-c. i. & 3. (h) Ibid Can. %, 
 
Chap. VIII. 0//^j? Roman Church. 47 
 
 ciently plain by the quotations, which I fhall produce to ihew, 
 how contrary it is to the fentiments of the Primitive Fathers. For 
 ( by the way ) it was but creeping into the Roman Church about 
 thirteen ages after Chrift, and was firft eftablilhed into a law, A. 
 D. 1415. 
 
 To come then to the Primitive Fathers. 
 
 S. Ignatius fays : (c) ** One Bread is broken to all, one Cup 
 ** is diftributed to all." 
 
 .S. Juftin Martyr, the firft Father, whofe works are extant, that 
 gives a particular account of the Chriftian worfhip, relates to the 
 Emperor, when fpeaking of the Holy Eucharift, That '* After 
 *• the Prcfident had given thanks and all the people faid jlmetty the 
 " Deacons gave to every perfonprefe7it to participitate of the Bread, 
 *' and Wine and Water, which were bleffed, and this food they 
 ** called the Eucharift, which [fays the Father] none but he 'vjho 
 '* helie'uesonrdo^rine, andishaptifedy can recei've (d).'" 
 
 Here then it is plain, that he, whoever he was, whether Non- 
 confecrating Priell or Lay-man, who believed the Chriftian do6l- 
 fine, and was baptized, received the Bread and Cup. The Fa- 
 ther adds, thaD " the bleffed Apoftles had delivered, that Chrift 
 *' commanded them to do fo ; for he having taken Bread and given 
 ** thanks, is by them declared to have faid, Do this in remem- 
 *' brance of me, This is my Body ; a?id alfo when he had taken 
 " the Cup and given thanks, to have faid. This is my Blood, 
 *' and to have given // to them alone i" that is the faithful 
 
 ONLY. 
 
 Now the Father here fpeaks of a command of Chrid, which 
 cannot poffibly relate to the ConfecrationoxAy^ but alfo to the parti- 
 cipitationoi the elements, the command being D^Z/^/V, take, eat. 
 
 Drink YE all of this. He had faid before, ih2it only be- 
 
 iie'vers did communicate ', this he now proves, becaufe Chriil deli- 
 vered the Elements to thetn alone, commanding them to partake 
 .ofthem. He therefore clearly fpeaks of delivering the Bread af:.i 
 Cup to the communicants. Moreover, fpeaking of the fervice 
 performed by Chriftians on the Lord's day, S. Juftin fays, '* Prayers 
 ** being finifhed, we offer Bread and Wine and Water, and the 
 ** Prefident gives Thanks and Praife, and the people iay /Jmcn ; 
 " And a diftribution is made ofthofe things, which have bee. 1 
 " confecrated, and Every one partakes ofthem ; " And then 
 
 lie 
 
 {:) Ignat. F.p. to the Philadslphians, (d) Apol. a. 
 
4S Tht LAYMAN'S APO LOOT. 
 
 lie thus concludes : •' Chrlft arifing upon this day, appeared and 
 •' taught thofe things, which we have now laid before your eyes.'* 
 He therefore mull have taught, according to this early Father, the 
 diliribution of the Bread tf«^ mixt cup to every communicant. 
 And let the Roman criticks take notice, that both the fpecies were 
 fent to the abfent alfo : For fo the Father adds. 
 
 S. Cyprian, in his epiftle to Cascilian, complains of fome, who 
 out of ignorance or fimplicity in fandiiying the Lord's Cup and in 
 the miniflratio-n of it to the people, did not do that which Jefus 
 Chrill our Lord and God, the author and teacher of that facrifice, 
 did and raughc j becaufe they ufed only water, and did not mix 
 wine with it in the cup, which they confecrated and diftributed a- 
 mong the people. And this he calls " receding from that which 
 " ChrillourMafter hath commanded and performed, by a nevv and 
 ** human inftitution. I thought it { adds he ) both religious and 
 *' necellary to write thefe letters to you, that if any be yet held 
 ** under this error, feeing the light of the truth, they may return 
 
 •* to the root and original of the Lord's tradition. For when 
 
 " any thing is enjoined by theinfpiration and command of God, 
 *• it is neceiTary that the faithful fervant fhould obey his Lord, and 
 *' he will be excufed by all men from arrogantly affuming any 
 ** thing to himfelf, who is compelled to fear the anger of thg 
 ** Lord, if he do not what he hath commanded." 
 
 Here it is plain, this Martyr argues that the mixt cup fhould be 
 diftributed to the people, by virtue of Christ's Inftitution. He 
 doth not lay the neceffity upon the Confecrathyi only, as fome mo- 
 dern Roman criticks do, but upon the distribution also. 
 
 Some of thoT*: who ufed water only, did it for fear left the fmell 
 of wine (hould difcover to the heathen perfecutors, that they were 
 Chriftians ; a plain argument this, that the Cup was diftributed to 
 the people. And S. Cyprian argues for it upon the foot oi 7teceffity. 
 *' If we blufh {fays he) to drink the blood of Chrilt, we cannot be 
 *' prepared to pour out our blood for Chrift." 
 
 The ApoftoIIcalConnitutlons ( which I might have placed be- 
 fore S. Cyprian ) Pjall come next. The title of one of tliem is ; 
 *' what every one of the Clergy afid Laity ought to do in the af- 
 
 femby.*' In which Conilitution this order is given ; *• When. 
 *' the facrifice is offered, let e'vety order of believers receive by 
 *' themfelves of the Lord's Body and of his precious Blood.'* 
 In the Sacramental Thankfgiving are thefe words, ** We give thee . , 
 '• thanks O Father, for Chrill's precious blood fhed for our fakes, 
 " anO'for his precious body, the anti-types of which we now ceie- 
 " brate, he having commanded z^^ to fliew forth his death." Us, 
 ;n this Sentence, fjgnifics all baptized perfons. 
 
 Ag?jn, 
 
Chap. VIIL Of the Roman Church. 4a 
 
 Again : *' Let the Eifhop communicate, then the Priefts, Dea- 
 ** cons. Sec. Among the women the deaconeflcs, virgins, ancj 
 ** widows ; then the children ; then all the people in their order : 
 *' And the Prieft let him tender the oblation, f;»}'ing, The Body of 
 *' Chrift, and let the receiver fay Jmen ; The Deacon let Jiim 
 ** hold the Cup, and giving it lay, "The Blood of Chr'iH the Cup of 
 
 *' Life ; and he that drink?, let him fay Amen. — "J'hcie 
 
 *' things we the ApoUles have commanded you Bifliops, Priells 
 ** and Deacons to obfcrvc, touching the mylUcal fcrvice (e).^'' 
 
 From hence it is plain, that when this book was publifhed, it 
 was the cuftom for psvery mnh of baptized Chriflians (nof in the 
 fcate of penance) to receive not the Body or Blood of Chrid, 
 but the Body of Chrift and the Cup of Life. The fear of fpillin^ 
 it did not hinder thefe fucceflbrs of the Apoftles from communi- 
 cating all and e'very conwiimicant in tjie Blood of Chrilu 
 
 The moft nncient Liturgie? fpeak the fame language ; They all 
 fuppofe the body of the faithful to receive the precious body and 
 blood of Chrif, to be admitted to the participation of his Holy 
 My.'^eries, and that not by concomitancy as the modern Romanills 
 would fain perfuade us. No [ They partook of both fpecies. 
 
 " It is not now ((ays S. John Chryfortom {f) ) as under the 
 *' Jewifn Law, where the Prieft partook of feveral things from 
 ** the altar, which the people did not. There is tio dije^-ence be- 
 *' tween the Prieft and the People, when we come to receive the 
 *' Holy Myfieries ; for one Body and one Cup is offered to «//." 
 
 In a word, there would be no end of producing tel^imonies 
 from the Fathers againft the Roman practice, not to fay doftrinc. 
 Indeed their dolors do not deny, but that for above a thoufand 
 yean it was the 'Teneral cuOom to adminiiler both bread and the cup 
 to the faithful Laity } and therefore if they had proved (which 
 yet they have been very far from doing, the contrary being highly 
 probable) that one fpecies was given, m particular c?Ses, to fick, 
 weak, and agonizing Penitents, to Infants and travellers by fea, 
 .&c. that will not excufe them for taking away the Cup from thofe 
 who arc capable of receiving it; and for declaring, that " Notwith- 
 *♦ (landing Chriil's Inftitution" it is as valid a facrament, as if they 
 received both the fpecies, which he (according to their own con- 
 fefiion) did really inftitute. The pailages which I have produce4 
 
 Q from 
 
 B, S, c. 13; and 15. ff) Hem, 
 ll iii's3. ^^^' 
 
50 The LAYMAN'S APOLOGT. 
 
 from antiquity, fpeak for the necefllty. And fince thefe things 
 are fo, I murt, asIdefireUfe, accord mg to S.Gregory Naz.an- 
 zen's exhortation, (g) " without any doubting or (hamefaced 
 *' fear eat Chr'ft's Body aW drink his Blood.'* And fince I cannot 
 be allowed to do that in the Church of Rome, or if I could pro- 
 cure that favour, yet could not be permitted in her communiori 
 to believe it nscefaryi I mull feek for a more pure branch of 
 Chrill's holy Catholick Church, which adminifters all his ordinan- 
 ces in their evangelical perfedtion. " Since my. dear Redeemer has 
 - given two diftina pledges of his love, it would be grievous to 
 •' my love to be deprived of either. Ah Lord ! who is there that 
 " truly loves thee, what lover can be content to have one half of 
 *' thy love withheld from him ? all love, all glory be to thee, 
 " for giving both (h)''' 
 
 (g) Orat. 42. (i) Bp. Ken's Catechifm. 
 
 ^,0^_i^^^ 
 
 CHAR 
 
[;t ] 
 
 CHAP. IX. 
 
 Of Infant Communion, 
 
 u 
 
 PON this article the Church of Rome teaches, " that 
 *' young children wanting the ufe of reafon, are noc 
 by any neceflity obliged to the facramental communion 
 
 of the Eucharift ;" and decrees thus *♦ IF 
 
 ** any one (hall fay, that the communion of the Eucharift is ne- 
 ** cefTary for children, before they arrive at years of difcretion ; 
 " let him be anathema, (a)'* 
 
 She pretends however, that fhe does not in this condemn anti- 
 quity, infinuating that the >noJi holy Fathers did not prafiife it as 
 of necejjtty. But we have already had fo many proofs of the fal- 
 libility of this Church, that we mull not depend upon her decer- 
 mination. 
 
 That the Fathers held it neceiTary, will be feen in the courfe of 
 this enquiry ; mean time I will briefly mention fome of the 
 grounds, which there are in fcripture to warrant this cuftoin. 
 
 Now does not the blcfled Apoftle S. Paul make the partaking of 
 the Lord's Table, of the Sacrifice of theEucharift, a badge to diitin- 
 guiih Chrillians from Heathens, who communicated with Daemons 
 by eating and drinking of the facrifces offered to them ? And is it 
 not reaionable to fuppofe, that the dillinguilhing badge fhould 
 extend as widely in the cafe of the Lord's Table* as in that of 
 
 G 2 (hff 
 
 CouTcIlof Tjent, ^'rC, 21, ch-'p 4.. and cxu, 4., 
 
52 The L A TM J N's, APO LOGI, 
 
 the Table of Dseinons ? And is it not the more reafonable to 
 fuppoTe fo, becauie our Lord inftituted this diftinguifliing badge 
 Jong after the other had been ufed among the Heathen ? If Chil- 
 dren then were partakers of thofe tables of dasmons, that is, of 
 the feaih.upon the idolatrous facrifices ; ought they no: likewife 
 to he partakers o^ the Euehariltick feail upon the facrifice of 
 Chrifl ? 
 
 That Infants partookof the Gentile facrifices, may be prove4 
 from the heathen writeis, (but I (hall wave that) from a paffage in 
 S. Cyprian, (of which more hereafcer) and alfo from the Holy 
 Scriptures, And can it be thought, that when Chriit appointed 
 a diilinguifliing badge of his friends, he did not defign the ufe 
 of it fli'juld bf a5 wide and extennve as that of the oppofiie inte- 
 rert was, and had been for. a long lin^e r Had the Devil his meat 
 and his cup, to betoken thofe who had communion with him ;• 
 and has not ChriU his meat and his cup. to betoken thofe who 
 
 arc in communion with him ? Infants had a right to partake 
 
 of the facraments of the Old Teftament ; and indeed there was 
 fcircely any kind of feivicc mentioned under the Law, but Chil- 
 dren, ysa Little ones, are fpoken of as having a part in it. And 
 S. Paul has taught us to argue from the Old Teftament to the 
 New in this cafe, in. the tenth chapter of his firll epidle to the 
 Corinthians. Now it were eafy to lliew, that Jewifh Infants had 
 a right to, and did partake of, the facrament of the Pafibver, and 
 of tiie facrjfiCe5 which were offered upon God's altar, and to eat 
 of thofe Eucharillick fealls which v/ere held upon thofe holy 
 things. Again, if Infants arc allowed to be p?.rts of Chrilt's bo- 
 dy, which all who baptize them mult allcv/ ; then it may be 
 argued from t!ie Apoftle, that they ought to partake of the ONE 
 BREAD he fpeaks of. 
 
 In fhort, \v]v*t puts this matter cut of all difpute, and rr.of! 
 plainly demonllrates the necefuty of Infant Communion, is the 
 exprels declaration of our blefled Saviour : ** Verily ^ n^crily, I 
 *' /ay ufito yoTi, except ye eat the ficf}:> of the [on of ?nan, and drink 
 ** his blood, ye ha-uc no life in you : Whofo eateth my fief:) and 
 *^ drinkeih ?n^ hhod^ hnth eternal life, ard 1 n'sill raife him zip at 
 
 *' the In]} day"" Thefe words are peremptory and without 
 
 t:xcept:on : And that this text muft necefiarily be imderfiood of 
 the holy eucht^rift, might be plainly proved both by reafon and 
 authority, had I room for it here ; but I refer to an author (a)^ 
 wiio hn's effedlually done it : for the fame reafon I cannot lake 
 notice of all the fcj^ipture argamenis produced for Infant Commu- 
 
 nior~ 
 
 {a) Johnfen's ur.-blocdy (2c:if;c?, vol, I. p, 356— 4x2- 
 
Chap. IX. Of the Roman Church. 53 
 
 nion, but refer to the books mentioned in the margin {.h)^ and 
 proceed to examine this determination at Trent, by the teltimony 
 of the ancient Fathers. For we muR keep in view of our gene- 
 ral rule, and fleer by the com oafs that we determined to fail 
 by. 
 
 The Liturgy in the Apoftolical Conftitutions is the iirft evidence 
 to be brought for it. The paifage is that mentioned in the lalt 
 chapter ; " Let the Bifhop communicate, then the Priefts, Dea- 
 •• cons, and Sub-deacons, &c. Among the women, the Deacon- 
 *' elTes, virgins and widows ; then tke Children''' And before 
 this, at the beginning of the Euchariftick fervice, it is proclaimed ; 
 " Mothers, take care of your Quii.dke^,''^ 
 
 S. Cyprian, about a hundred and fifty years after the death of S. 
 John the Apoille, is the next author who exprelly mentions Infant 
 Communion. The writers between theApoftlc^ and this Father are 
 but few, their writings much in their own deic;nce againil the 
 Gentiles, Jews, and Hereticks ; and except thefe lall had raifed 
 any difpute about it, it was not likely that any writers againft 
 the former would be led to fpeak of it. Nor was there an/ 
 occafion for exhortations to frequent Communion (in which it 
 might indeed liave been mentioned) till we come dov.'n to the 
 fourth and fifth ages, when S. Chryfoilom inveighs againft fome 
 who communicated only on the great Fellivals. But let us kafteii 
 to S. Cyprian's tellimony, who more than once mentions it as the 
 common practice : In his book <?/ thofe that laffed in time of per- 
 fecution, he Ipeaks of fome parents, who took their little children 
 in their arms, when they went to facrifice at the heathen altars, 
 and he brings in thofe Infants thus complaining at the day of judg- 
 ment : " We did nothing ourfelves, neichf r did we leave the 
 *• Bread AND CUP of the Lord, to run of our own accord to 
 *' the profane contagion : It was the treachery of others that de- 
 " flroyed us, we fell by the hands of our own parents.'" 
 
 A little further he gives the following account : *' Hear what 
 *' happened, myfelf being prefent and a witnefs thereof: The 
 ** parents of a little girl fleeing out of the city, were through their 
 *' fright lefs careful of her than they ought to have been, and left 
 '* hei behind at nurfe ; The nurfe carried her to the magiltrates : 
 *' 1 hey brought her to an idol, where the people were gathered 
 *' together ; and becaufe ii\Q v.as too young to eat flcfii, they 
 
 '' gave 
 
 (Z) See Mr, PiV/j^'s ElTay iJp&n giving the Ei^cliarift to Cli'J.-eDj part 1, 
 •.J A Fall, True, and CwdT'ti.eh nfive View yf Chr ft aauj, Lv~\-^:^ 
 chir^-.; part .'., Uz^qh U], %.c, '■;■ 543. &c, 
 
54 The LATMAW% APOLOGT* 
 
 ** gave her fome bread crumbled into wine, which was left of the 
 *' facrifices of thofe miferable idolaters. After this the inother 
 *' took her home : but the girl could no more declare or fiiew the 
 •' horrid fadl, than Ihe could before undert^and or hinder it. 
 *' The thing being not known, it happened the mother brought 
 *' her with her, when we were facrificing. The girl being placed 
 ** among the faithful, vv-as not able to bear our prayers*, but be- 
 ** gan to cry out bitterly, and to be grievoufly tofTed through the 
 *' diforder of her mind ; and as though an executioner was wrack- 
 *' ing a confefiion from her, her ignorant foul at that harmlefs age 
 ** acknowledged by all the figns fhe could, a confcioufnefs of the 
 ** faiSl. The conlecration being ended, when the Deacon began 
 •' to offer the cup to thofe who were there, and among the reft 
 ** her turn came ; fhe, through a divine inllin(S turned away her 
 ** face, fhut her mouth clofe, and refufed the cup. The Deacon 
 *' perfilted in his offer, and forced fome of the facramental cup 
 ** into her, whether fhe would or no. Hereupon fhe fell a hic- 
 *' cupping and vomiting. The Eucharift could not continue in a 
 ** body and a mouth defiled with idolatry : The" drink fandlified 
 '* in the blood of the Lord, forced its way out of her polluted 
 " bowels. So great is the power, fo great the majelly of our 
 ** Lord. The fecret works of darknefs are difclofed by his 
 *' light, nor could hidden crimes efcape undifcovered to God's 
 ** prielt. This happened in the cafe cf an Infant, who wa» not 
 •• yet old enough to utter another perfon's crime with refped to 
 " herfelf.'* 
 
 The author of the works of Dionyfius the Areopagite fays, 
 that •' children, tho' not capable of underiUnding divine things, 
 *' are made partakers of the holy regeneration, and of the molt 
 '* holy fymbols of the divine communion §." 
 
 Now S. Ignatius, Irensus, Clement of Alexandria, Crlgen, 
 Julius Firmicus, Eufebius, Hilary, Athanafius, Bafil, Cyril of 
 Jerufalem, Optatus, Ambrofe, Ephraim Syrus, Gregory NyfTen, 
 Macarius, Jerom, Gaudentius, Chryfoftom, Cyril cf Alexandria, 
 and Theodoret, who have, 1 find, interpreted the fixth chapter 
 of S, John's gofpel of the Eucharift, and have taught the necejjtty 
 of All baptized perfons receiving the Eucharilt, which is the 
 confequence of that interpretation, are fo many evidences that 
 infant Communion was received from the beginning in fhe Chrif- 
 tian Church; fmce otherwife it is next to impoihble, tliat they 
 fliould have fallen upon fuch a fenfe of the place, as affcrted the 
 Eucharift to be ordinarily neceflary to falvation : And therefore 
 
 this 
 
 • Probably that part of the confecratlon, which invocates the. Holy Spirit 
 ro defrcnd upon the gilts ; as Monfieur Lombert fuppofcs. 
 ^ Dionyl, Areopag, C? Ecclef, Hie^rch, cap. 7. p. 360, 362. 
 
Chap. IX. Of the Roman Church. 5^^ 
 
 this cloud of vvltnefles may be faid to declare for the necefli ty of 
 Infant Communion. 
 
 But S. Auftin is mofl exprefs in favour of this neeeflity : ** Why 
 " (fay? he (a) ) is that blood, which was (hed for the remiffion 
 ** of fins, miniftred to the Infant to drink, that he may have 
 " life, if he is not obnoxious to death by reafon of original 
 
 «' fin ? " 
 
 Again: (h) Chrifl is the faviour of Infants ; *' and unlefs 
 *' they be redeemed by him, they will utterly periih, fince with- 
 ** out his fleOi and blood they cannot have life : This S. John, 
 " thought and believed, learned and taught." 
 
 And again : " When Chrifl: fays, Exceft ye eat my flejh, and 
 ** drink my blood, ye ha've no life in you ; can I fay the child fhall 
 
 *' have life, who ends his life without that facrament ? 
 
 " Let us hear our Lord fpeaking, not of the facrament of haptifm *, 
 ** but of the facrament of his holy table, where no one is rightly 
 " admitted unlefs he is baptized ; Except ye eat my fejh, and 
 " drink my bloody ye hawe no life in you. What do we farther 
 ** feek ? Dare any one be fo bold as to fay, that this fentencc 
 " does not belong to little children ? or that they can have life 
 *' in them, without the participation of his body and blood ?'* 
 Once more (for to cite every paffage out of S. Auguftin to this 
 purpofe would fill a little volume) : " The Chriflians of Africa (fays 
 *' he) do well call Baptifm itfelf Salvation, and the facrament of 
 '* Chrifl's body Life. From whence is this but, as I fuppofe,' 
 *' from that Ancient and Apoflolical Tradition^ by which the 
 ** Churches of Chrift do naturally hold, that without Baptifm 
 ** ««<;/ partaking of the Lord's Table, none can come either to 
 <* the kingdom of God or to falvation and eternal life? For the 
 ** fcripture, as I fhewed before, fays the fame (c):"" 
 
 A learned author of the Roman Communion allows, that" the 
 " Eucharilt was given to Infants for a very long time, and that S. 
 ** Auguftin and fome Fathers of the iirll ages believed it fie- 
 *• fefary {dy\ 
 
 And another later writer of the fame Communion agrees with 
 
 hi? 
 
 (a) Auguftin. Op. imperf. cont. Juh'an. 1. 2. § 2. (Z-) Id. Contj 
 
 Julian. Pelag. 1. i. c. 6. 
 
 * N. B. The late Dr. Waterland would have perfuaded us, that S. Au- 
 guftin naight mean, that Chrift s Body and Blood might be eaten figur- 
 atively in baptifm. Butftiould not the Saint be his own expofitor ? 
 
 (c) Ibid 1. 3. c. 1. de pcccat. merit, ^ remis, }, J, C, 20. {(i) 
 
 Cautme ds^rifr d( i'P«^ To»i I. p. 11, 
 
^6 The LArMAN'5 APO LOGT, 
 
 his adverfary of the fame Church, (e) that ** the pradice of 
 ** giving the communion to infants was general throughout the 
 ** church during; the hril ages." After this, it is in vain for this lad 
 *' writer to pretend {/) that *' the decifions of a general Council, 
 " or what he would call an equivalent to it, the confentof all the 
 ** [he means the prefent i?/9Z7;fl;/] Church, can authorize a con- 
 «* trary pra6tice/' Efpecially, it is abfurd to plead S. Auguilin's 
 authority for fuch a change. 
 
 In a v;'ord, I find, that by the fiime rule that Infants of the 
 Church were admitted to BTptifrr in the Primitive times, they 
 were admitted to the feal thereof, commonly called Confirmation ; 
 and after that, to the Eucharift. •' For though Baptifm regene- 
 *• rates them, and makes them pure, and though Confirmation 
 ** conveys the Holy Spirit into them, to illuminate and firengthen 
 " them; yet the EueharKl is necefiary to continue this divine 
 " fpirit in them, as food is neceffary to continue life: It is by 
 ** the Eucharift alone, that Chriilians are made one Body with 
 ** Chrifr, and are fo united to him as the Body is to the Head ; 
 ♦* it is the Eacharilt alone, that renders their bodies incorruptible, 
 '* inftillino; a principle of life into them, by virtue of which they 
 ** are raifed to a blelled immortality {g)^ 
 
 Now when I confider, befides all this, and a multitude of other 
 j^rguments, which are brought in favour of this pradice, in the 
 book mentioned in the margin (h) ; that *' it has continued in all 
 •' chriftian clii-'zates and countries, and is at this day pradlifed 
 •* in all the Churches of the Greeks, the Ruffians or Mufcovite?, 
 *' the Armenians, and Ethiopians, and we do not find that thefe 
 " Chriilian Communions have ever laid it afide," as a certain 
 foreign Prefbvterian has it (/) ; and that the Latins theml'elves 
 continued the Pra(5tice, yea and taught the necejjtty of it, for at 
 leart a thoaf^.nd years ; I muft (to fpeak very foftly) conclude it 
 much fafi;r to communicate with a Church, which retains, than 
 Vv'ith one wliich rejects, this ancient pra6lice. 
 
 (e^ Juftif.cfttion (ies difcours & de THifloire Ecclefiaftiquc de M. I'Abbc 
 pleury. 1736. page 20a. {[) Ibid p. 204. (g) See A Full, 
 
 True, and Comprehenfive View of Chriftianity : Shorter Catechifm ; i)art 
 2. LefTorj 29. p. -]%• {i>J Ibid. Longer Catechifm, part 2. Leflbn 
 
 413, &c. {ij M. i'ArrociU6''3 Hiilory of the EucharJil;, part I. chap, ii* 
 
 CHAP. 
 
( 51 ) 
 
 WMS^i0^-^'~- 
 
 
 ?i « ,o 
 
 
 
 C 
 
 H 
 
 A P. X, 
 
 Of maki?ig the Con Iteration of the Eucha- 
 r/ji to confiil In the ^joords ofhijiltution. 
 
 ^\ "^ H E council of Florence decrees the form of the facra- 
 I ir.ent of the Eucharid to be the words of our Saviour^, 
 
 I Tor this is my Body, and for this is the cup of my Blood. 
 
 ^ *' By the force of thefe words ( fays the council ) the 
 ** fuhjlance of the Bread is changed (a.),''^ The council of Trent: 
 fays, it is " bv the words of Confecration that the Change is made 
 (l>)y And the Catechifm of this council determines thofe words 
 to be, Thii is my Body ; fF his is the cup of my Blood (c). The 
 Rubrick of the Roman Miffal exprefly declares, that the words of 
 Confecration are This is my Bcdy^ Scz. and that thefe words are the 
 Form of this Sacrament fd ). 
 
 The Catechifm alledges the authorities of S. S. Ambrofe, Chry- 
 foRom, Auguitin, and Irena^us ; of Origen, Hefychiu<;, Cyril of 
 Alexandria, and Tertullian : For lo the Catechills were pleafed to 
 place chem. 
 
 Here then we have the full fenfe of the Roman Church. 
 
 Now the Orthodox ConfeiTjon of the Oriental Church rr.nkes 
 the Confecration, or rather the change (for that is what (he mean'^) 
 to be made by the Invocation or Bieliing, and that book is the 
 ftandard of the Greek dottrine : For though fome particular writers 
 of that Church, in their expofitions of the Liturgy, determine that 
 H " parti/ 
 
 (a) Cdnc'l, Tom viii. p. %S<3. col. r. (i>) C iinc:i of Trent ScfT. x'if. 
 clian.3, Y^; Catecbiimus. par, II. § ao.. ( J) Ds defwCl. in celeb. roiJ". 
 
SS The LAI MAN'S APOLOGT, 
 
 •' partly the recital ofChriri's words, and partly prayer which h 
 *' founded upon thofe words, is neceiTary to the confecration of the 
 *' Eucharifticril Bread and Wine ; " And th?it " it is not only by 
 •' the voice of our Lord's words, but alfo by the following prayer 
 •' and bleffing of the Prieft, that the divine gifts are fan6tified ; " 
 
 ^ And that " the fo-m indeed begins with the words of our 
 
 •* Lord, but confiils alf(> in what is afterwards faid by the Priefl :" 
 And though this comes nearer the truth, yet the other is the au- 
 thentick Record ; it is //jeir orthodox Confelfion, by which their 
 caufe n.uH: bt tried. 
 
 I am afraid we cannot (ay, that one of thefe two oppofite deter- 
 ininatiGns niufl be true and the other falfe, for they may be both 
 partly true and partly falfe : they proceed upon this miftake, that 
 the change ( I don't allow them change ov fubflance, fee chapter L] 
 is Jn/Iantaneous, whereas it is indeed p-cgrefhve. Now the expla- 
 nation of this progreiiive change will give us a clear view of the 
 fenfe of the Liturgies and Fathers, fo frequently quoted on both 
 fides in this debate between the Greeks and Romans, and among 
 the Romans or Latins themfelves ; for particular writers in the 
 Roman Church are very much divided in their fentiments up- 
 on it. 
 
 But before I (hew what, upon mature deliberation, I find to be 
 ihe truth of this matter, I will fhew what is not fo ; that is, that 
 the Fathers referred to by the Council of Trent's Catechifm, do 
 rot prove what it is pretended they do, feeing they fay the fame 
 greAt things of the Invocation, as they do of the words of 
 Inftitution^. 
 
 Changing ^hen the order ( for the penners of the Catechifm 
 Lave not been very accurate in their manner of citing the Faihers) 
 I wi.'l be?;i^ with S. Ircnzeus. ** The Bread and Wine { fays he } 
 by the •Vildoni ( the fpirit ) of God coming into the ufe of men, 
 and receiving the word of God, become the Eucharifl which is 
 the Body and Blood of Chrill (ay\ And in another place he 
 i^s thefe v?ri'o ; *' The Bread r^r^'/x'/w^ the Invocation of God, 
 is no longer common bread, but tKe Euchariii, conHfting of two 
 things, an earthly and .. heavenly (^^)." And again he fays. 
 And hei-, when " e ha/e finifhed the oblation, we call down 
 t]ie Holy Spirit that he miy confecrate this Sacrifice and [make] 
 the bread the body ot Chrift, and the cup the blood of Chrift ; 
 that they who parttke of thcfe Anti-types, may obtain remiffi- 
 on of their Sins and eternal life ( c )." 
 
 So 
 
 /^/»)L,5c,2, (^)L.4.c.34, (f ) Fragment. 2. par P^afT. p.27. 
 
Chap. X. ^f the Roman Church. 59 
 
 So much for this Father. Only I will juft obferve, that the 
 Catechifm docs not quote any of his words, only refers to Book 4. 
 chapter 34. againft herefiesy which is the very book and chap 
 ter, from whence one of the paflages juft produced for the contra*^ 
 is taken. • ^ 
 
 Tertullian is the next, and I fuppofe the paffage referr'd to by 
 the Catechifm is : ** Our Lord made the Bread his Body, by fay- 
 *'• ing l^his is my Body^ that is, the figure of my Body." Well, 
 but the fame Tertullian fpeaking of the inconfillency of Marcion, 
 who held that this world and the things thereof were not created 
 by the true, but by another God, fays: *' He performs the office 
 ** of Euchariilizing or calling down Bleinng from one divine Being, 
 ** upon the Bread which is the creature of another ( ^) ;" or if we 
 take the more litteral tranflation, *' . e offers Thank/gi^in^ to one 
 •* God over Bread belonging to another God." If we take the 
 former tranflation, he feems to attr bute the Confecraticn to the 
 Invocation ; if the latter, to the Thar^kfgiving, bee ufe a long 
 Thaukfgiving was always apart of the Eucharillick prayers, whence 
 the whole aclion had the name of Euchirift or ^'hankfgiving. And 
 in another place ( ^ ) he fpeaks of the prayers attending the Sacri- 
 fice, which the Learned have interpreted to mean the Confecration 
 itfelf, fo that he can by no means be prefTcd into the fervice of the 
 Roman noiion: no ! he fuppofed the confecration progrefTive. 
 
 Origen againd Celfus S. 8, is referred toby the Catechifm ; but 
 what words the authors build on, I cannot tell ; but in that fame 
 book are found thefe moft remarkable ones directly againft their 
 point. " We that ftudy to pleafe the creator of all things, da 
 ** with prayer and thankfgiving for the mercies we have received 
 ** eat the facrificial bread, which is bv prayer made a holy 
 *' body, fanftify ing thofe who make a righteous ufe of it."Thus far 
 Origen, as tranflated by Mr. Wagi^afre, with the following remark 
 of Dr. Grabe : '* Which pafTage of Origen'b is the more to be de- 
 ** pended upon, becaufe, as Daillee rightly cbferves in his piece 
 ** of human punipmenls and Jatiifailions, p. 618, Thofe nvords of 
 •' Origetit from njohich other tejiimonies are produced^ are extant' 
 ** only in Latin, and xh^t niiferably interpolated ', but his piece a~ 
 ** gain ft Celfus^ from nvhence this paffage is tranfcrihed, <vje ha've 
 *' in Greek as it nvas ^written by the author j pare and uncorrupt- 
 ** ed(f)''' Nay, a certain French author, who writes with a 
 great deal of cunning to apologize for his own Church, cites this 
 H 2 pafTage 
 
 (d) Againfl: Marcion. J. i.e. 25. See NecafTity of m alteration. ]». 139. 140^ 
 ( e ) de oration, c. 14. (/) Mr. Wagflafte's Tranflation of Dr. Qrabc's de- 
 fence of tile Qreek Church agalnil the Roman, p. ^z, 43, 
 
6o ThcLATMdlTs AP0L0G1\ 
 
 paffage as above, and then fays: •• Will it not be faid upon read- 
 •* ingthefe words, that Origen placesthe Form ofconfecration in 
 *' PRAYERS ONLY ? yet ( Continues he by way of apology ) the 
 *" pafiage pr ceding [he had juft quoted him fpeaking in S, Paul's 
 *' words, It is (anftijiedhy the n-vordofGod AND PRAYER. ] (hews, 
 ** that the word of God mult be joined to it, which (continues 
 ** this Gentleman ) cannot be any ot ler than thofe of the Inftitu- 
 ** tion of the Eucharifl:, which are found in all the Liturgies (^).'* 
 Well, but the ^vord of Gad and prayer are more i\iZXi the 
 'vjordofGod ALONE. And io much for this Father, ivhofe words 
 >ve lee are nothing to the purpofe of the Church of Rome, but 
 much againfl it. 
 
 The next in order is S. Ambrofe. The Catechifm refers to B. 
 4. of the Sacraments i but it is univerfally allowed now, that this 
 Creatife is none of his ; pafs we on therefore to his genuine works ; 
 and here we find S. Ambrofe faying, ** As often as we take the 
 *' S.icrament. which is tran?iigured into flefh and blood by the 
 ** Viyjiery of Holy prayer, we fliew forth the Lord*s death (^J " And 
 elff where ne ules the word Benedidion or BleJJing, and lays it is 
 confecratt-d by that. His words are : " Perhaps youjmay fay, I 
 •* fee another thing, why do you alTert tome, that l^^rceive the 
 *' Boiy oT Chrift, let us prove this not to be what nature has form- 
 •' edit, but what the Bi- nedictjon has confecrated it (z).'' He 
 faye in the fime place indeed, that the confecration is made by the 
 words of our Lord : *' What do we iay ( fays he) of the divine 
 •* Conlecration itfelf.where the very words of ourLord andSaviour 
 *' operate? For that Sacrament, which thou receiveft, is made by 
 *' tlie word of Chriit (k)^ 
 
 From hence it is plajn, S. Ambrofe did not place the confeerati- 
 on in the words of our Lord only. It is beyond difpute, that 
 this Saint alio {'uppofed it to be, as it really is, prOgreJ/i<ve. 
 
 S.John Chryfoftom's famous pafTagein his homily on the treafon of 
 yudas comes next to beconfidered.ButMr Bingham, in hisAntiquities 
 of* the Chrjiiian Church, has fo diiVobed it of all the power with 
 which the Romaniils ufed to clothe it for their purpofe, that I fhali ^ 
 thufe to tranfcfibe the words of that learned author. 
 
 Chrvfoftom fpeaks of the confecration after this manner : 
 
 ' It 
 
 (r) Nonvelle DifTertation (^\t les paroles de la Confecration: a Troves, 
 •r-'^3. p. 122. ( i; j E. ^«ci Faiih, (/) B. of JnU, chapter 9. i^k) 
 Ibid. 
 
Chap. X. Of the Roman Church. 6i 
 
 * • It is not man, that makes thefelements become the Body and Blood 
 
 * ofChrili, but Chrilt himfclf who was crucified for us. The 
 
 * Prielt Hands fulfilling his office, and fpeaking thofe words ; but 
 
 * the power and grace is of God, Chrift faid, Ihis is my body : 
 
 * This word confecrates the Elements. And as that word which 
 
 * faid, Increafe^ and multiply y and replenif!} the earthy was fpoken 
 
 * but ot.ce, yet at all times is efFcdtual indeed to ftrengthen our 
 
 * nature to beget children : So this word once fpoken, from that 
 
 * time to this day, and until his coming again, perfects and con- 
 
 * fummates the facrifice on every Table throughout the Churches,' 
 "" The meaning of which ( fays our author ) js not, as x\\eRoTnan- 
 •* ijls miftake, that the pronouncing of chefe words by the Priefl is 
 •** the th'.ng that makes the facrifire.but thatChrill by 'i\y^\ fpeaking 
 ** thofe words gave power unto men to make his SymbolicalBody; 
 ** as by once fpeaking thofe wordi^ Increafe andmultlfly^G. gave them 
 "' power 10 procreate children. ChriiVs words are the original 
 "* caufeof the Confecration ; but flill prayer, and not the bare re- 
 ** pitition of his words, is the inflrumentai caufe and means of the 
 •* Sandification. As Chryl'oflom bimfelf fays plainly in another 
 " place, where he attributes the Confecration of the Elements to 
 *• the Invocation of the Spirit, and the Spirit's dcfcent purfuant to 
 ** fuch Invocation.' What meaneil thou, O man, fays he ? when 
 
 * the Prieft ftands by the Holy Table lifting up his hands to Hea- 
 ' ven, and invocating the Holy Spirit to come down and touch the 
 
 * Elements, there Ihould be then great tranquillity and filence. 
 ' When the Spirit grants his grace, when hd comes down, when 
 
 * he touches the Elements, when thou feeft the Lamb (lain and of- 
 
 * fered, doll thou then raife a tumult and commonon, and give 
 
 * way to ftrife and railing ? (w). * In which words (continues 
 " Mr. Bingham ) it is plain, Chryfoftom attributes the confecration 
 •* to the power of Chriil and the Holy Spirit, as the principal and 
 *' eiEcient caufe i to prayer and {application, as the inftrumental 
 •• caufe, operating by way of condition and means, to fandi fy the 
 ** elements according to Chrilt's command, by a folemn Beredic- 
 ** tion ; and to the words ^his is my Body^ and This us my Blood, 
 ** as fpoken by Chrili in the firft InlUtution, implying a declaration 
 •* of what was then done and what ihould be done by his power 
 •^ and concurrence to the end of the world ( n j." 
 
 We now proceed to S. Auguflin. The Catechifm fends us to 
 hcok 4 of the Trinity. But whatever S. Auguflin may fay in other 
 places, which thefe gentlemen may think favours their opinion or 
 
 rather 
 
 (m) Chryf. Kom. 32. in Cstnetenaappellationem. t. $• p. 4S7» It. de 
 fn^erdot. l.b. 6. cap. 4. p. 93. t. 4. Et de i'acsrdQt, lib. 3. cap. 4, ( « ) Bing- 
 ha.T/3 Antjcj. B. xv. chap. III. ^ xi. 
 
62 The L ATM JN*s JPO LOGT. 
 
 rather their Church's doiflrine, in this his words are againft it ; for 
 he fays : •* We call that the Body and Blood of Chrill, which is 
 •* taken from the fruits of the Earth, and confecrated by mysti- 
 ** CAL PRAYER, in a folcmn manner, and fo received by us unto 
 ** Salvation, in memory of our Lord's fufFering for us, but which 
 *' is not fandified to be fo great a Sacrameni but by the invifibie 
 " operation of the Holy Ghoil." 
 
 Hefychlus, a writer of the feventh age, B. 6. upon Lenjiticus, 
 is appealed to alfo by the Trent Catechifm. But as ihey have not 
 given the words, and I have not opportunity of fearching them 
 out, and he being a writer of fo late date ; among fo many early 
 Fathers, his teftimony can be of no confequence. 
 
 There is but one other writer, that this Catechifm has been 
 pleafed to fend us to, and that is Cyril of Alexandria ; but the 
 Epillle quoted by the Catechifm cannot be found : however, in fe- 
 veral places of his Works (<? ), he calls the EuchariA i?^^^/^?, 
 which is the fame as Benedidlion, and in one paffage {/> ), he ex- 
 prefly affirms, that our Sa^viour Jills his Body •with the life gi'ving 
 Energy of the Spirit. 
 
 Havinj thus flievwn what is not, I will hallsn to fhew what is, 
 the truth of this matter. 
 
 Now in order to this let me aflc, " whether in a pofaiije iftfti- 
 ** tution^ every part of \x. is noK equally necejjary to be obferved, 
 "' cfpecially when there is nothing in the nature of the things them- 
 •* felves, which can produce the effects, but all the benefits we re- 
 ** ceive thereby, are derived to us upon account of our exaft con- 
 " formity to the V/ill of him that inilituted them ? ( ^ )•" If fo, 
 was it not ( to fpeak foftly ) a piece of idle temerity to raife this 
 into a controverfy ? multiply dodlrines which have no ufe ? But 
 this is a dodtrine, not only needlels and without foundation, but 
 it is abfolutely falfc. For, enjery part of the ancient Form is iiecef- 
 lary, as will appear by and by; 
 
 Now our bleiTed MaRer's command DO THIS is as much as 
 to fay, Blefs the Elements, and do all other a Sis 'which 1 ha^je 7icnAj 
 done, in remembrance of me. This Command is for ever obligato- 
 ry upon the whole Chriftian Church. 
 
 (o) Qom. in Efa. 25, and often In Glaphyris fuper Genes. Exod, Levif, 
 (p) In Joann. 1. 4. c, 2,. {^) Append, to Bp, Bretl's Divine Ri|iUt of EpiU 
 
Chap. X. O//^^ Roman Church 6^ 
 
 It will not be denied by eitlier Greeks or Romans, but that the 
 Euchariit is a Sacrifice, as well as a Sacrament; Though Imuft 
 beg leave of them to fay, that it is an unbloody Sacrifice, an offer- 
 ing of the Reprefentati've Body and Blood of Chrift to God the 
 Father. 
 
 * *' Ic was at theinditution ofthe Eucharift, that our Saviour 
 ** began to offer himfelf to his Father for the fins of al] men : The 
 •* facrifice which he ihen cffered, was his natural Body and 
 ** Biood, as fepar ate from each other y becaufe his Body was con- 
 *' fidiired as ^roken^ and his Blood asjhed, for the fins of the world. 
 ** But became it would have been unnatural for him to have bro- 
 ** ken his own Body and (hed his own Blood, and becaufe he could 
 *' not as a Jiving High Priefi: offer himfelf when he was dead ; 
 •* therefore, before he was fo much as apprehanded by his enemies, 
 *' he offered to his Father his natural Body and Blood, voluntari- 
 •• ly and really though myftically, under the Symbols of Bread 
 ** and Wine mixed with Water : for which reafon he called the 
 ** Bread at the Eacharift his Body, which was then broken, given, 
 " or offered for the fins of many ; and the Cup his Blood, which 
 ** was then fhed or offered for the fins of many." And this myfii- 
 cal offering of himfelf was done with Ihankfginjing, which word 
 it is allowed implies 'A^oBleJJtng qx praying for a BleJJing, 
 
 Now, according to all the ancient Liturgies we have, and where- 
 in they all agree, and that in conjunftion with the Holy Fathers 
 who have had occafion to write upon this fubje(5l, the fenfe of the 
 Catholick Church may be faid to be expreffed in the following 
 quotation. *' :j: The confecration of theEuchariH is thus performed: 
 *' The Frieft [for fuch he mud be at leaft, who pretends to con- 
 ** fecrate] after having placed the Bread and mixed Cup upon the 
 " Akar, firft gives God thanks for all his benefits and mercies con- 
 ** ferr'd upon mankind, efpecially for thofe of crettion and re^ 
 ** de.mption. He then recites how Jefus Chrill inflituted this Sa- 
 ** c-araent the night before his paffion, and performs his command 
 *' of dding what he did. Fie takes the bread into his hands and 
 ** breaks it, which broken bread reprefents the dead body of 
 " Chrirt pierced upon the Crofs : He takes the cup into his hands, 
 " which cup confiding of wine and water, reprefents the 
 ** blood and water that flowed from the dead body ofChrifl 
 *' upon the crofs. Fie then repeats our Saviour's powerful words 
 
 *' over 
 
 • A Full, True, and Comprehenfive View of Chrlfliani^v, Shorter 
 Catechifm, part 2. LeiTon 27, p. 74, 
 X IbidLeff. 23, p. 75, 
 
64 The LAl'MAIsTs APOLOGT, 
 
 ** over them, by which the bread and cup are made authoritative 
 " reprefentations or fymbols ot Chrift's crucified body and effufed 
 " blood." Now, by the way, thus far our Saviour's powerful 
 words or the words of iniUtution, rnay be faid to change the Ele- 
 ments, to fet them apart, to make them the body and blood of 
 Chrili, that is, his Reprefentati've Body and Blood, as broken and 
 fhed to take away the fins of the world : And this niuii be what 
 the«,holy Fathers mean, when they attribute the change to thofe 
 ■words.. And they are then fo f^r changed, as to be *' in a capa- 
 ** city o( being offered to God, and accordingly he [the confccra- 
 *' torj'm^kes the obUition." For that is another part of the Form 
 ofconl'ecration, to which the Fathers frequently refer (^r^, which 
 oblation is *' the higheft and moli proper aft of chriflirm worfhip : 
 *' After God has accepted of this f.icrifice, he is pleafed to return 
 •' it to us again to feall upon, that we may thereby partake of alf 
 ** the benefits of o ur Saviour's death and pafiion ; in order to 
 ** which, the Prieft pray« to God the Father to fend his Holy 
 '* Spirit upon the Bread and Cup offered tohira, that he may en- 
 ** liven thofe reprefentations of Chriil's dead body and effufed 
 *• blood, and make them his fpiritual life — giving Body and Blood 
 •' in virtue and power, that the receivers thereof may obtain all 
 ** the benefits of the Inflitution." And this is that part of the 
 Confecratron, which is called the Invocation: And the Fathers de- 
 clare for this alfo ( f) . '* After which the Prieft continues his 
 *' prayer and oblation in behalf of the whole world, particularly 
 *' of the Church, Bifliops, Clergy, King, and in general of ali 
 " the Faithful, whether living or dead j" as our Saviour difl at 
 the Inftitution, who offered to God the prayer contained in th^ 
 fevenieenth chapter of St. John's gofpcl [t). 
 
 In a word, all the ancient Liturgies and many of the Fathers 
 plainly fhevv us, that the Form ofoirering and confecrating the 
 Eucnarirtconfifts of £ve parts, that is to fay, the Thanksgiving, 
 the words of Inftitution, the Oblation, the Invocation, and the 
 Interceffion. And therefore as the Greeks have erred by plac- 
 ing it in the Invocation alone, fo have the Latins by faying 
 IX is made only by the force of the words of Inftitution. I 
 might have brought more numerous and more early tcllinionies 
 ill favour of what I have maintained, but I have confined my 
 felf to thofe which the Catechifm of the Council of Trent was 
 pleafed to refer to, as fancying them to favour the Roman notion : 
 1 have brought, even from them, counter evidence, and think 
 enough has beeu faid upon this fubjeft. 
 
 C H A P. 
 
 {r) See View of Chriftianity : Longer Caltehifm- part 2. LefTon cvi. 
 (^) lb. Lt!T cYii, ('.' I 1I\ LciT. cviii. 
 
[6?] 
 
 CHAP. XL 
 
 mm 
 
 '^f n »^? iAii 'm 
 
 Of I?npoli?i(T the F i l i o qjj e.'^^,.,^ , '^ 
 
 ^^P> 
 
 I SHALL briefly difpatch this fubjefl, becaufe it is not ne-^ 
 ceilaty for me to crquire into the docftrinai part of the dif- 
 pute between the Greeks and Latins upon this head, but by 
 what authority the Latins /w/c/? their alteraiion of the 
 ancient creed ? And in order to this J muit recur to the hiftory 
 of it. But firfl: 1 will jull obferve, that although every Bifhop 
 may have the liberty of forming his own Liturgy, provided that 
 he retains all that the Univerfal Church always retained, and 
 varies only in the fna?iner of expreflion ; and though by the fame 
 rule different particular Churches, in communion with the Catho- 
 lick, may vary their manner of exprefling the Creed or Symbol, 
 which diflinguifhes them from any heretical party ; yet fuch 
 Bifhop and fuch particular Church muft neither add to nor dimi- 
 nifh from the Faith. Now adding the Fiiicque is adding to the 
 Creed, nay to the Faith in the fenfe of the Greeks at leail ; and 
 therefore by what authority the Latins impofe it, is a \Qry nc- 
 cefTary enquiry. 
 
 When herefies arofe with relation to the fecond perfon in tha . 
 Trinity, the Son of God, it was nccelTary for the Creeds (efpe- 
 cially in the Eaft) to be more explicit than the firft were, but in 
 words taken from ancient, orthodox, and catholick authors. 
 Thefe Creeds were ufed as it were in conjunction with the former. 
 Thus the Nicene Creed concluded with barely profefhng belief in 
 the Holy GhoJ}^ eftablifliing the belief of the divinity of the Son 
 being the main thing then aimed at. But when the divinity of 
 the Holy Ghofl came to be oppofed by other hereticks, the auguft 
 charaders of Lord and Gi'ver of life, ivho proceedeth from the 
 Father, were added by the Covfantinopolitan Fathers. And 
 this was eftablifned by the fecond general council of that city, 
 and in convenient time after received as the cathohck dec- 
 trine, and the council acknowledged as general by all other 
 branches of the Catholick Church j becaufe nothing was zddtt^f 
 but what was confonant to the Faith thereof. 
 
 I To 
 
66 Tht L ATM J N's AP0L0G7, 
 
 To this article of the Creed, the pyocejfion of the Holy Ghoji 
 from the Father, the Latins in procers of time added the word 
 Filioque, And the Son : The Greeks protelled againft thii Inter- 
 polation, or as Bifhop Pearfon exprefles it," " Being admoniflied 
 *' by the Greeks of that as of an unlawful addition, and refufing 
 " to rafe it out of the Creed again, it became an occafjon of the 
 *' vaft fchifm between the Eailern and WePern Churches." Now 
 when thcConftantinopolitans added the words, nxiho proceedeth from 
 the Father, (as Bifhop Pearfon obferves) " they fpake moll warily, 
 *• ufing the words o^ the Scripture, and the language of the 
 " Church," And the Creed being received by the ^hole Church 
 of God, the next general council at Ephefus decreed, that it 
 iliould not be lawful to make any addition to it. Yet the IVef- 
 ter7i fathers agitated the queftion, whether the Holy Ghoft did 
 not proceed from tlie Son as from the Father ? and determining 
 that he did, not only declared the dodrinc to be true, and added 
 the Filioque to the Conftantinopolitan Creed as above, but fang 
 it publickly in their Liturgy. This was firii done in the 
 Spani(h and French Churches, and the matter being referred to 
 Leo IlL Bifhop of Rome, he abfolutely concluded that no fuch 
 addition ought to be tolerated. And lell the Roman Church 
 fhould be accufed of joining with the Spanifli and French Churches 
 in the addition, the fame Pope caufed the Creed to be publickly 
 fet forth in the Church graven in filver plate?, one in Latin and 
 another in Greek, in the fame words in which the Council of 
 Conltantinople had firfl: penned it. 
 
 This was the great and prudent care of Leo IIL that there 
 fJTOuld be no addition made to the ancient Creed, authorifed by a 
 General Council and received by the whole Church ; and by this 
 itieans he quieted all dill:empers for his time. But in the time and 
 by the power of Nicholaus the firft, thefe tables were neglet^ed, 
 and the Filioque added : Tho' by the aftivity of Photius, Ni- 
 cholaus was condemned for it. 
 
 Now this is partic'-jlarly to be obferved, that the Latin Church 
 sdded Filioque to the Creed contrary to a General Council, which 
 had prohibited all additions, and that without the leall pretence 
 of the authority of another council. And fo the fchifm between 
 the Latin and the Greek Church began and was continued, never 
 to be ended till the woids And the Son or Filioque are taken out 
 of the Creed faj. 
 
 Now without entering into the doflrlnal part of the controver- 
 fv» 1 mul'l conclude, that this addition is a tyrannic7.r iinpofition 
 
 and 
 
 {a) See Pearfon en the Creed. Art VIII, and Dr» Berrirnan's Sermons at 
 Lady Mover's Ledlures. 
 
Chap. XL Of the Roman Church. (^-j 
 
 and ufurpation of authority in the Latins, and that the fchifm 
 lies at their door. For the article, as exprefTed by the Greeks, 
 might have been profefled by the Latins, becaufe it did not 
 cxprefsly condemn their notion of proceeding from the Son alfo, 
 which might hax'e bttn ftill left as an undetermined point, freely 
 to be agitated pro Jm con : but not fo the Latin article ; for 
 that turns it into a point of Faith, without any ncceffity for 
 fo doing, and is certainly fchifmatical. 
 
 CHAP. XIL 
 
 of not ufi'dg Trine hnnierfion tn 
 Baptism. 
 
 F ^ "'^ HE reader will remember with me, how zealoufly the 
 3 Roman Church (as we produced her in the beginning 
 
 M of this trait) decrees for the unanimous confent of the 
 
 -^^ Fathers ; and that it is by Antiquity, Univerfality, 
 and Confent, that we are trying this caufe ; the contending par- 
 ties concerned in the ilTue, having, as is there Ihewn, all agreed 
 to be tryed by it. 
 
 But have not thefc Romanifts or Latins, for it is them we are 
 now concerned about, have not they in this point alfo departed 
 from the ancient doftrine ? Do the Fathers unanlmoujly agree, 
 that " whether Baptifm be performed by one ftngle nvajhing^ or 
 •* with a threefold pouring of water on the Baptized, it is not 
 ** to be thought of any moment ?" So the Catechifm of the 
 council of Trent orders the Curates to teach their Faithful, and 
 that conformable to the Ritual (a). 
 
 Not fo the Holy Fathers : for though they allowed the Bap- 
 tifm of thofe, who had been baptized by afperfion or fprinkling, 
 to be fo far valid as that they did not care to reiterate it ; yet 
 feme of them, particularly S. Cyprian, (as we Ihall fee by and 
 by) fpoke but dubioufly of it, and was for allowing icrupulous 
 perfons a liberty to have it repeated, 
 
 I 2 But 
 
 (a^ Catechifm, part 11, § 27, 
 
68 1\it LAYMAlSlh A P L G T. 
 
 But what ihe'u fentiments were, will appear as we produce their 
 feftimonies to clear the matter of fafi, as to the Church's prac- 
 tice, which is what we are moil concerned about. To begin 
 
 ihen : Jg 
 
 S. Barnabas, or the epiftle under that name A. D. 75. has 
 thefe words ; " Blefied are they, who putting their truit in the 
 *" crofs, defcend into the water j for they have their reward in 
 
 *' due time : We^o do^n into the water full of fins and 
 
 *' pollutions ; but come up again bringing forth fruit, &;c. (hy 
 
 Hermas A. D. 94. fays : " For before .1 man receives 
 
 *♦ the name of the fon of God, he is ordained unto death ; but 
 *' when he receives that fcal, he is freed from death, and af- 
 *' figned [delivered] unto life. Now that feal is the water of 
 ** Baptifm, into ijjhich men go doivn under the obligation unto 
 ** deaih, h'SLtcomeup appointed unto life ('rj." 
 
 The Apoftolical Conflitutions, which were probably colledled 
 together before the year of our Lord 150, fpeaking ofthofe who 
 were to be baptized, order the Biihop or Piefbyter to (d) 
 b.iptize them in the water, wh^re baptix.ing cannot be any thing 
 but dipping ; and to fhcw that it is fo, in the very next chapter 
 at is faid, fe) that " the Defcent into the water fignifies the 
 ^' dying together with Chrift, and the Afcent out of the water 
 " the riftng again with him." x'^nd the 5Gth of the Apoftolical 
 Canons rtands thus : " if any Bifhop or Prefbyter does not per- 
 ■* form the three immerfions of the one initiation, but one im- 
 *' merfion given into the death of Chrift, let him be depofed.'* 
 
 Tertullian before A. D. 200. defcribin^ the manner of bap- 
 tizing in his time, fays:"*' the pcrfon [to be baptized] was 
 *' broiight do'ivn into, the nj^ater without any new ornament or 
 
 •' fumptuous preparations and dipt ( f )'^ And again (g) : 
 
 *• There is no difference, whether a perfon be waflied in the fea 
 *' or in a pool, in a river or a fountain, in a lake or in a chan- 
 *' nel ; nor is there any diilindlion to be made, between thof^ 
 *' whom John dipt in Jordan, and thofe whom Peter dipt in 
 •♦ fhe Tvber unlefs it be fuppofed that the Eunuch whom Philip 
 ** l^tinxit"] i3'//»/ in the water, which they happened to meet witk 
 ** 0:3 the road, ti;creby obtained more or kis faivaiion." And 
 
 ia 
 
 (b) Epift. of S, Barnabas, A. Bp. Wake's tranflation, p. iS.D, 181. 
 (i) Shepherd of Htrmas B. III. fimiJ 9. § 16. Wake's tranfl- p. 32-. 
 {d) Apoft. Conft. E. 3. c 16. (ej Ibid, t, 17. (f) Treatiis 
 
 9t B^i-tirm, c. 2. {g) lb. c. 4. 
 
Chap. XII. Of the P^oman Church. 69 
 
 in another place (h) he mentions Trine Immerfion, among the 
 immemorial cuUcms and traditions of the Church. 
 
 S. Cyprian is the next Father we fhall produce. I faid of 
 him above, that he fjpoke but dubioufly of baptifm performed b/ 
 fprinkling or pouring, which manner of baptizing, as we (liall 
 now fee, was chiefly, if not only, ufed in the CUnick laptifms ; 
 for I mufl own, that I do not think, " that the Jay lor and his 
 ** Family, who were baptized by S. Paul in halle, the fame 
 ** hour of the night that they were converted and believed, are 
 *• reafo?2abh fuppofed to have been baptized by affufion :" as 
 ^is been argued from its being " hardly to be thought, that 
 '-" r,-.; .uch an exigency, they had water fuflicient at hand to be 
 *• iir.nerfed in." For, as bathing was fo common a cuftom 
 among the Jews, it is hardly to be thought, that he, tz/x. the 
 jayk r, was without a Bath or Cillern ; as an ingenious Ana- 
 bciptill: has, I own, rightly enough obferv'd (i). But to return 
 to S. Cyprian, who, I fay, fpeaks dubioufly of it, as pradifed 
 cue of urgent necefllty upon thofe CUmcks, who had fooliflily 
 deferred their baptifm, till they lingered on their death-beds : 
 one Magnus doubti:.'?, of the validity of thefe Eaptifms, and for 
 this realbn bee Lie Immerfion was the proper manner of its 
 being performed : " Indeed (fays Mr. Bingham) the Church 
 ** was fo punctual to this Rule, that we ne^ver read of any 
 ** exceftion made to it in ordinary cafes, no not in the baptifm 
 *• of infants ;" therefore Magnus applies* to S. Cyprian for his 
 judgment in this cafe, and the Father in his anfwer fays : 
 ** You have moreover, my deared fon, allied my opinion of 
 *'* thofe, who in a time of ficknefs receive the grace of God, 
 ** whether they are properly to be efleen.ed as Chriftians, be- 
 *^ caufe they are not wafhed but only fprinkled with the fav- 
 *' ing water ? in which particular I would by no means be 
 *' underftood as taking upon me to judge for others, or to 
 ** reflrain them from the free ufe of their own judgment, or 
 ** from ading according to it." And then the Father goes 
 on, with great modcfty, to deliver his opinion, that thcle Cli- 
 nickbaptifms might be allowed. But a little after, as if du- 
 bious of his own arguments, adds : *' Or if any one is per- 
 *' fwaded, that men in fach circamftances, have really nothing 
 ** conferred upon them, becaufe they are only fprinkled with 
 ** baptifmai water, and that all which is done for them in 
 ** thai way, is without effed, let them then run no further 
 ** rifques ; and therefore if they recover, let them e'' en be lap' 
 ** tiz.ed.''' And after fome more of his private reafoning, he 
 
 thus 
 
 (h) Of the Soldiers crown, c. 3, (i) Se? Jofcpb Stennett''% anf\\-er 
 
 \^ David Rujjcn, p. jzj, ji<^. 
 
yo The LAYMAN'S APOLOGT. 
 
 thus concludes : ** Thus, my deareft fon, I have delivered my 
 own opinion to you, and returned fuch an anfwer to your 
 queftion, as my llender abilities have enabled me to give ; 
 yet I would not be undeillood, as prefcribing to any one, 
 or as hindring any Bifhop from fuch a determination upon 
 this point, as fhall feem to himfelf moft realonable ; fince 
 each of us muft account to our Lord for his own admini* 
 (tration ; according to what the blefied Apoftle S. Paul hath 
 written in his cpiftle to the Romans, faying : E^ery one Jhall 
 giue an account for himfelf \ let us not therefore judge one 
 another. My deareil fon, I heartily wifh your welfare, and 
 take my leave of you." I have tranfcribed this from Dr. 
 Marfliars tranflation of our martyr, who upon the words, as 
 pall feetn to himfelf fuofl reafonahhy has the follovv'ing note. 
 *' Here we may obferve our author's modefty, and withal in- 
 
 " fer That this queftion concerning the validity of dif- 
 
 ** puted baptifms, was all along confidered as a point of difcN 
 *• pline ; or at moft of fuch do5lrine only, in which there was 
 " room for a div^fity of opinion and praftice." 
 
 Now fuppofe this to be allowed in cafes cf urgent necejpty, 
 like this our martyr pleads for, what fhall we fay to that 
 particular Church, which without any fuch neceflity, and, as 
 we fee, againft the current of antiquity, praiElifes contrary to 
 the Catholick Church, and teaches men (that they may do) yb ? 
 
 •' But (to borrow Mr. Bingham's words (k) ) I muft obferve 
 ** farther, that they [the Ancients] not only adminiftred bap- 
 ** tifm by immerfion under water, but aifo repeated this three 
 ** times. Tertullian fpeaks of it as a ceremony generally ufed 
 ** in his time : We dip not once but three times, at the naminr 
 *' e'very perfon cf the Trinity. The fame is afterted by S. Ba- 
 *' fil, and S. Jerom, and the author under the name of Dio- 
 ** nyfms, who fays likewife, that it was done at the diftindl 
 *' mention of each perfon of the blefled Trinity. S. Ambrofe 
 " is moft particular in the defcription of this Rite : Thou ivafi 
 " cjked, (I) fays he, dofi thou believe in God the Father Al- 
 ** mighty? and thou repliedfi^ 1 belie<ve<, and fvoaji dipt, that is 
 *' buried. A fecond dem.and ivas made, doejl thou belie^ve in. 
 ** Jefus Cbriji our Lord, and in his crofs? thou anfnAjeredfi a- 
 ** gain, I believe, and ivaj} dipt. Therefore thou n.va/1 buried 
 *' nvith Chrijl. For he that is buried voith Cbriji, rifes again 
 ** n;jith Chriji. A third time the quejiion ivas repeated, Doejl 
 *S thou believe in the Holy Ghojl^ and thy anfvoSr nvas, I be- 
 
 '• lieve. 
 
 fM Antiq. B. XI c. II, Sea. 6, (/} Ambrof. da Sacramcat, 
 
 K z. c. '. 
 
Chap. XII. Of the Roman Church." 71 
 
 ** lie-ve. ^hen thou nuajl dipt a third timey that thy triple 
 *' confejjion might ahfol<ve thee from the njarious ojjences of thy 
 ** former life.'''' Thus far from Mr. Bingham, who does in- 
 deed fay in his next fedion, thac *' th^ original of this 
 ** €uftom is not exadly agreed upon by the ancients. Some 
 " derive it from Apoftolical tradition ; others from the firit 
 " inftitution of baptifm by our Saviour ; whillt others \he is 
 ** pleafed to faj'\ efteem it only an indifferent circumftance or 
 *' ceremony, thac may be ufed or omitted without any detri- 
 *' ment to the facrament itfelf, or breach of any divine appoint- 
 ** ment." Now this learned author obferves that Terlullian, S, 
 JBafil, and S. Jerom reckon it of Apoftolical Tradition, and 
 that S. Chryfoitom feems to make it a part of the firfl infti- 
 tution ; that Theodoret was of the fame opinion, as was 
 Pope Pelagius, nay, he advances up again to the author of 
 the apoltolical canons, and fays, "■ It is plain, all thefe writers 
 •' thought this a necejjary circumftance from our Sa'viours in' 
 *' Hi tut ion.'''' 
 
 But then he begins his next fediion in thefe foft words ; 
 " Yet there happened a circumftance in the Spanifo Churches 
 " in after ages, which gave a little turn to this affliir. " 
 And, pray, what was that ? Why, in fliort, Pope Gregory the 
 Great was, for prudential reafons, for allowing a contrary cuf- 
 tom : and indeed a Spanifh Council, in this feventh century, 
 did allow it ; but the more ancient and general praftice of the 
 Church flill prevailed after this Council. Now the letter, which 
 Gregory wrote upon this fubjeft, is all that can be oppofed 
 to fo great a cloud of witneiTes ; and therefore it may well 
 be called a little turn to this affair : And this epifile of Gre- 
 gory to Leander is all the authority, that the Trent Catechifm 
 has referred us to : How weak is their lirength ! A certain 
 writer of their own has thefe words : (m) *' As to thofe, who 
 *• were baptized in their beds, and who were called CUnicks^ 
 *• we find from Hillory, that they carried them to fome Bath 
 *' that was near, to jnake them defcejid into it like the rejt^ 
 •' unlefs their Vv'eaknefs was fo great as not to permit ic ; and 
 " then they were contented with only pouring vy a ter c^i-'^r //^^/> 
 
 ** nvhole body. When perfons to be baptized were e»-' 
 
 •' tred into the Baptiftery, they plunged themfelves three times 
 *' in the water. Anciently three immerfons were required. The 
 " 50th Canon of the Apoftles, S. Baiil, Tertuilian before him, 
 *' kz. fay fo; and it feems to have been even an Jpoilolical 
 *' Tradition/' 
 
 Tho' I have been ^^ilready more prolix, thin I at Br(i in- 
 tended. 
 
 'rij D; i' ancienni CoulunriC de prkx dcbout ; Tm\, i,?. zS}, ?.6.^ 
 
';2 The LATMAN'^ APOLOGT. 
 
 tended, upon this head ; yet I miiil beg leave to mtroduce 
 a conceffion from the late ingenious Monlieur BoJJuet Bifmp of 
 Meaiix (n). " To ^^/z/z^ (fays this Prelate) fignifies to;)/«/?^£, 
 ** as all the world agrees. This ceremony was taken froDfi 
 •* the purifications of the Jews : and as the moil perfeifl purl- 
 ** ficalion confifted in being entirely plunged in water ; Jefus 
 ** Chrift, who came to fandify and accomplifh the moil an- 
 •* cient ceremonies, was pleafed to choofe this, as the moil 
 ** figp.incant and moil fimplc, to exprefs the remiifion of fins 
 
 *' and rej^cneration of the new man. -The baptifm of S. 
 
 *' John Baptiil, which ferved as a preparative to that of Jefus 
 " Chrill, was performed by plunging. The prodigious multi- 
 ** tude of people, which flocked to that Baptifm, made S. John 
 •• choofe the places about Jordan, and among thofe the coun- 
 ** try of Enon near Salini ; becaufe there was much water 
 '* there, and a great facility of plunging the men, who came 
 '♦ to confecrate themfelves to penitence by that holy ceremony. 
 
 " When Jefus Chriil came to S. John, to raife Baptifm to 
 " the mod marvellous efficacy by receiving it; the fcripture 
 *• fays, that he came out of and rofe from the ivaters of Jor- 
 " dany to Ihew that he was plunged all over in them. 
 
 *' It does not appear in the A«Els of the Apoille?, that the 
 *' three thoufand and five thoufand, who were converted by 
 *» the firil fermons of S. Peter, were baptized in any other 
 •* manner. Nor is the great number of converts any proof, 
 •' that they v;ere baptized by afperfion or fprinkling, as I'ome 
 «* have conjedured. For, befides that nothing obliges us to 
 ♦* hy, that they were all baptized on the fame day, it is cer- 
 ** tain that S. John Baptift, who baptized no lefs a number, 
 •* fmce ail Judea flocked to him, yet baptized them by Dip- 
 •' P'ng • ^^^ ^^5 example fhews us, that to baptize a great 
 ** number of men, places muft be chofen where there is much 
 ** water. Add to this, that the bachs and purifications of the 
 «* ancients, efpecially thofe of the Jews^ rendered that cere- 
 ** mony eafy and familiar at that time. In fine, we read not 
 ** in the Scripture, that they baptized other.wife ; and it may 
 *' be fhewn by the Afts of the Councils and the ancient Rituals, 
 ** that {^t thiriien hundred years Baptifm was thus performed 
 «' throughout the whole Church, as far as poilible.'* Thus 
 far this^RoiniHi Prelate, by way of apology for taking away 
 the Cup in the Euchariil, and as an Arginnentum ad hominem 
 acalnii: the Proteilants. 
 
 But 
 
 (n) Tra'iu 4c b Communion fur Ics deux efpcccs, part. 2, Seft. 1,2. 
 
Chap. XII. O///^^ Roman Church. y^ 
 
 Rut let us hear, how a Proteftant of his own country, fuppofed 
 to be M. L'Arroque, anfwers thefe allegations, or rather anfwers 
 the author by honellly allowing them. '• 1 add ( fays he ) to the 
 rcafonsof Monf, Bofluet, that Baptifm is an external mark that 
 we ciYe willing to die to fin and the world, and to have part in 
 the death and burial of Jefas Chrift. S. Paul fays, that by Bap- 
 tifm ive are buried n.vith hitn ; which fhews, that they phmged 
 the Faithful in water, to reprefcnt by that a kind of death and 
 burial. I further fay, that S. Paul calls it by a name, which 
 properly fignifies a Bath, (7it. Hi. ^.) when he fays, that God 
 
 has faved us by the wafhing of regeneration (o).'" — As to 
 
 the Proteftants having changed Dipping into Sprinkling, he thus 
 anfwers : ** It is true, that hitherto the greateil part of them bap- 
 ** tize only by Afperfion, but it is aj/u) edly an ahufe ; and That 
 ** pradlice, which they have retained from the Church of Rome 
 *' without duly examining it, as well as many other things which 
 ** they ftill retain, renders their Baptifm 'very defeSIi<ve. It corrupts 
 *' both the Inititution and the Ancient ufe of it, and the relation 
 ** it ought to have with faith, repentance, and regeneration. The 
 *' remark of M. Bofluet, that Plunging was ufed for thirteen hun- 
 ** dred years, very well deferves their moll ferious refledion, and 
 *' our acknowledgment that we have not enough examined what 
 " we have retained from the Roman Church. And feeing now 
 " her moft learned Prelates teach us, that it was She who firft 
 *• abolifhed an ufage, authorized by fo many ftrong reafons and fo 
 *' many ages j fhe has done very ill in this matter, and we are 
 ** obliged to return to the Ancient pradliceof the Church and the 
 ** Inftitution of Jefus Chrilt. I do not fay, that Bapfi«fm by Af- 
 ** perfion is Nu.ll : I am not of that fentiment. But it muft beac- 
 •' knowkdged alfo, that if Afperfion does not deftroy the Subilance 
 ** of Baptifm, it alters and corrupts it in foine manner : It is ai 
 *' Defeft, which fpoils the Lawful Form of it. /"/ij'* 
 
 It will be but reafonable, before I leave this head, to take notice 
 of the Fond Mothers fears of their children fufFering hy this cullom 
 in this cold climate. I might, to fatisfy them, urge the authority 
 of Sir John Floyer a learned Phyficlan, who has written exprelly 
 upon this fubje<^t, to lliew the benefit of Cold Immerfion to children, 
 which is now known to be the bell remedy for the Rickets : but I 
 hope their fears will be removed when I affure them, that in a cer- 
 tain Church in the kingdom of England ( of which more hereafter } 
 I have feen Infar^s of three months, three weeks, nay three days 
 old, baptized with Trine Immerfion at Ealler, which is often a 
 cool time of the year, without the leail harm or detriment accruing 
 $©i;h€m thereuppfl, 
 
 K tet 
 
 (o) Reponfe au Traite de M. Boffuet, touchant la ComjnuBioa &iiS I«i ^WS 
 cfpetes* Partie I, p, 2^, (^J lb. p. sj. 
 
74 The L AT MAN'^ APO LOGT, 
 
 Let my foul then be with That Church, which wanting no au- 
 thority adminifttrs this ordinance ofChriir, as he was pleafed to 
 inllitute it, and the good Fathers in the Primitive Church pradiled 
 it. 
 
 raytnz 
 
 C H A P. XIIL 
 
 Of departing from the praciice ofp 
 
 Standing on Sundays^ a?id on the Jifty 
 days bet'Zdccn Eaffer and fFlntjuntlde. 
 
 O try this prai5lice by our Rule, we begin with the 
 Apollolical Conilitutions, where are thefe words : (a) 
 *' l^ake care, O Dilliop, to advercife the people to re- 
 " fort to the iifiemblies on the Lord's day. For what 
 ** pretence can he have, who negleds to be with others upon that 
 ** day, on which we uie to pray three times Standing, in memory 
 ** of him who rofe from the dead the third day ? " And again 
 the new baptized perfon is ordered ( being turned towards the 
 'EAi\)(b) to **y?tf»y and fay the prayer which our Lord taught usj" 
 becaufe by his Baptifm he was become one of the Faithful, and 
 was entitled to all their privileges, fo long as hekept his (tation, 
 and did not deferve to be reduced to any of the degrees of the llate 
 of Penitents : And to pray Standing on all Sundays, and between 
 F.afcer and VVhitfuntide, was one of tliofe privileges. Now this 
 Jeafon was formerly the only time for the publick adminillration of 
 Piaptifm. In the fame Conftitutions, after the Catechumens and 
 Penitents are difmi/Ted, it is (aid: (c) '* Let the Sacrifice follow, 
 *' all the people ^/^^/d'//?^ and praying filently. He, (fay thefe 
 ** Conftitutions in one of the places juft mentioned ) who is truly 
 •' rifen with Jefus Chrift, ought necefTarily to pray Standing ; be- 
 •' caufe he, who is raifed up, ftands upright : Let him therefore, 
 " who was dead and is raifed with Chrill, ftand up.'" 
 
 S. Juflin Martyr fays :[d) " Qn the day called Sunday, after 
 
 reading 
 
 (a^ Apoft. Conftit. B. 2. c. 59. (b) B. 7. c, 44. (c) B, 2. C 57. {,d) S. 
 Juilia Mart. Apol. s, which ov»sht to be called the f iril. 
 
Chap. XIII. Of the Roman Church. 75 
 
 *' reading the Scriptures nnd explaining them, {that a after tie 
 ** LeJJons and Sennovs'] we all rife ifp, [_it feems then^ fjme n.ijere 
 ** alhi.ved to Jit at theft^ and prayers are made, and then Bread 
 *' and Wine and Water are offered." The book, z-^Wo.^ !^iejlions 
 and Anj-ivers to the Orthodox, is allowed not to be S. Jaflin'h : Ic 
 contains an hundred and forty fix queflions ; and be the Author 
 who he will, the book is Ancient. The hundred and fifteenth 
 Queflion is as follows : *' Jf it be more pleafms; to God to prny 
 " Kneeling than Standing, and if thofe who pray Kneeling, are 
 *' more likely to prevail with the divine companion ; why do 
 ** ChriHiians, when they pray, not Kneel on the Lord's day, and 
 *' from Eader to Pentecoll? And from whence did fuch a cufloni 
 *' gain admittance among the Churches ? " The anfwer given is 
 thir. **Forafmuch as we ought to remember both our fall by fin, and 
 " the grace of Chrlft by which we rife again from our fail ; there- 
 •* fore we pray Kneeling fix days as a fymbol of our fall by fin, b'JC 
 ** our Not kneeling on the Lord's day is a fymbol of the Refurrqtfti- 
 *• on, whereby through the grace of Chriil we are delivered from 
 ** our fins, and from death which is mortified thereby. And this 
 *' cullom took its original from the times of the ApoQles, as S. 
 '* Irenajus fays in his book concerning Eafler, wherein he alfo 
 ** makes mention of Pentecort, during which time we kneel not, 
 ** becaufe it is of the fame nature with the Lord's day, according 
 *' to the reafon which has been given." If S Irenceus's book had 
 not been unhappily loft, it might have afforded us more to the fame 
 purpofe : However, we have this tellimony, that this cuHom came 
 £rom ApoftoHcal Tradition. 
 
 Tertullian makes ufe of this ancient cuftom to prove the authori- 
 ty and obligation of Unwritten Tradition. He fhews that there 
 are many things, of which we find nothing in Scripture, which are 
 el^ablillied and fortified by Tradition only, which however we are 
 not allowed- to negleft. He gives us a long lift of this fort of 
 praclice?, which are only founded upon Tradition ; and fpeaking 
 of this, which we are examining, he fays : ( £> ) *' We count it a 
 ** crime to faft or kneel on the Lord's day : We enjoy the fame 
 *• privilege fromEaikr to Pentecoft." And then he adds : " If 
 *' you require a command in Scripture for thefe ufages, you will 
 *' Hnd none : the pradice ftands upon the bottom of Tradition ; it 
 ** is confirmed by CuQom ; and one generation follows it upon the 
 *' credit of that which went before." 
 
 S. Cyprian makes ufe of thi: cuftom of praying Standing, as a 
 pradlice which ferves to raiie our hea.rts to God. He calls his 
 chriftian reader to remember, that when the Prieft, in the begin- 
 ning of the EucharifticI: Sacrifice, fays; Lift up jour heart i ; and 
 K 2 ' they 
 
 T'r'.u'.i. d:? ccr-n, mii't or Ttie Scldiei'5 cr ;'.vn, cba: 
 
76 Tat LATMAlSTs APO LOG T. 
 
 they anfwer, We lift them up unto the Lord i their minds and hearts 
 Ihould truly be rt-preftnted by the fituation of their bodies. (/) 
 When vvey?<2/;/:^ praying, (lays he) we ought to watch and apply 
 ourfelvcs to prayer with all our hearts. Let all carn.il and world- 
 ly thoughts be far from us. Let not our mind be then employ- 
 ed, but upon him to whom we pray. Therefore the Prieft, be- 
 fore he begins this prayer, difpofes the minds of the Faithful, 
 by faying Lift up your heart Sy that the people who anfsver We 
 lift them up unto the Lord, might be admonifhed by that to think 
 only of the Lord." 
 
 S. Peter of Alexandria, in the lafl of his fifteen canons made in 
 the beginning of the fourth century, fay^: ** We celebrate the 
 " Lord's day as a day of joy, becaufeon it our Lord role from the 
 ** dead, and we are taught not to kneel on that day." 
 
 Eufebius of Caefarea, reported in the Chain of the Greek Fathers 
 byCcrderius, has thefe words : " The Hebrews have yetafeal^ 
 *' much more folemn, and that is Pentccoft. We have alfo a like 
 ** one, but much more celebrated, in memory that being raifed 
 ** with the Lord, we are made partakers of his glory; and there- 
 '* fore w^e neither kneel nor fafl during that feaft, that we may in- 
 ** cefllintly have before our eyes the idea of that repofe, which we 
 ** are to enjoy in heaven." 
 
 S. Hilary of Poitiers, in the preface to his Commentary upon the 
 Pfalms, fays : " The Apoliles folemnized that feait of feails with 
 ** this ceremony, that during all the days of the Quinquagefima,no 
 " one was allowed to worfhip Kneeling, nor to trouble by the for- 
 ** row of Parting the joy of that grand feftival, which is the image 
 *' and fymbol of glory. The fame ceremony is alfo ordered to be 
 " obferved on Lord's days." 
 
 The pafTagcs already produced are more than fufficientto prove, 
 that this ancient pradlice comes recommended by the rule which we 
 are tied to follow, as an Apoftolical Tradition, teaching the Church 
 the belt mf;nner of celebrating the molt joyful feliivais of our Re- 
 deemer's triumphant RcfurrejSlion, Afcenfion, and Miffion of ihe 
 Holy Gh oft J his leading captivity captive, and giving gifts unto 
 men. " But if the reader is defirous to fee it treated more at large, 
 let him confuk th:? French book {g) here under cited, and above 
 referred to, where he will find proved in a convincing manner and 
 beyond reply. That this cullom has been an ufage received and 
 praftifed during more than twelve hundred years in «// churches 
 of the world, taught by Holy Fathers Greek and Latin, obferved 
 
 at 
 
 (f) S. Cyprian's Treatife of the Lord's prayer, § jg. Itisp. 151 in Dr, 
 M^rfiiai's TranilHtlon, (g) Coutrume dc pritr debout. 2 Tomes : a Delfr, 1700. 
 
Chap. XIIL O//^^ Roman Church." 77 
 
 at this day in the Oriental Churches j and that it is of the 
 nunriber of the ufages, which fland upon the authority of Anti- 
 quity, Univerfality, and Confent, and of which we cannot find 
 the original in any council or ecclefiaftical law, and which may 
 therefore with tlie Fall: of Lent, the obfervation of tJie Lord's 
 day. Sec. be truly called an Apoltolical Tradition. The unpre- 
 judiced reader will find all this fhevved at large by this mod 
 learned writer, who being fo fully convinced of it, has proved it 
 in fuch a manner as to put it beyond all difpute ; but the rea- 
 der, the unbyafled reader, will alfo plainly jfee how the author 
 labours to excufe his own Church for, or rather to vindicate 
 it from, having departed from this { let me fay ) necejfary 
 pradice ; which did not lofe much ground till the dark and 
 ignorant ages, the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, when the 
 adoration of the Euchariil crept into ufe. 
 
 Not flaying to enlarge upon this, I (hall only jufl obferve from 
 my author, that Walahide Strabo in the year 845, fpeaking of 
 tlie different ufages of particular Churches, obferves that of all 
 the VVeilern Churches, there was none wherein Kneeling in the 
 [ Euchai jllick ] ofiice was more frequent, than in the Scotifh 
 Churches. 1 hefe Churches, fays Strabo, chofe fingulaVly to pray 
 Kneeling. But left we ihculd think, that praying Standing was 
 not in ufe in thefe Churches, which alniolt continually prayed 
 Kneeling ; or (hould at leafl: imagine, that it was free for each 
 cue to do as he thought proper, not being tied by the Canons and 
 Laws of the Church ] the fame Strabo fails not to ihevv, that 
 whatever inclination the Scotifh Churches had for Kneeling, yet 
 they always excepted Sundays, Holydays, \ohfer<ve by the nvay, 
 that Holydays in the general 'were not added ^ till about the Jixth 
 fefifuryl and the feal(jii of Eallcr. Publick Penitents only were 
 to kneel by the Canons (/^). Now a late learned Prelate of the 
 fullering Chuich of Scotland, in a poilhumous piece publilhed A.D. 
 1744, entituled, The Jncient Liturgy of the Church of jerufa- 
 lem^ being the Liturgy of S. famet freed from all later addi- 
 tiotjj, n.vith an Englijh tran/lation and noteSy has added by way 
 of appendix, proper rubricks ; and, among others, has this : 
 ** Note, that all Lord's days, and during all the time between 
 *' Eaiter and Pentecoft, the Faithful are not to kneel but to Stand 
 ** at prayer, in memory of our Lord's refurredion" ; and then 
 refers to Tertull. de Coron. c. 3. Concil. Nicen. 1. can. 20. and 
 Beveridgis notes upon it. And if the remnant of the Scotilh 
 Church will adopt this Ancient Liturgy as now publifhed, and rc- 
 (lore alfo Infant-Commpnion, (there being no doubt of her keep- 
 ing clear of the Regale ) Ihe will deferve the Right hand of 
 
 fel- 
 
 ih) Coutume de prier debout torn i . p. 279, aSo« 
 
78 T:\it LAYMAN'S APO LOOT. 
 
 fellowfliip from the moft pure Church upon earth, and will follow 
 after Catholick Unity, the way to which is already opened by a 
 particular Church in England, of which I (hall fpeak in the con- 
 clufion of this trai^l. 
 
 In the mean time I mud beg leave to infer, that if there were 
 no other objection againll the Roman Church, her inconfiilent 
 rubricks and pradlice with regard to this ufage, would oblige me 
 to prefer the Particular Church here hinted at. However, for 
 anfwer to objections againlt the ufage, 1 refer to the French book 
 above quoted ; for though the author cannot prove his own 
 Church in faft to hold and pradlife it, yet he has proved that All 
 Churches ought to do fo. For, as he rightly obferves, (/") ** We 
 ** always run a rific, when we are led by our own private devo- 
 *' tion. Humour and caprice have moft frequently a greater part 
 *' in that, than true zeal." And therefore he might well afk, as 
 he had done in his foregoing page, the following queftion ; [k) 
 •* In fine, ought we not to have for [Antiquity] fuch views of 
 ** veneration and refpefl, as we ought never to depart from but 
 ** upon extreme neceffity ? " To which I fhall beg leave to 
 add another query : What Neceffity can jullify a departure from 
 what the univerf^l Church has pradifed as an apoftolical tradition 
 for more than twelve hundred years ? 
 
 (i) Ibid, p, 273. {h) Ibid, p. 272. 
 
 CHAP. XIV. 
 
 Of dlfregardh?g the Apoftolical Precept oj 
 dbjlahmg from eating BloocL 
 
 f gj "^ H E practice argued for as necefTary in the laft Chap- 
 
 g ter, is built upon Tradition only, but fuch as is a clear 
 
 M proof of its being Apoftolical j and that concludes it 
 
 ■"^^^ in one fenfe di'vine : but the prohibition we are now 
 
 going to fpeak of, will lay claim to di'vine authority in the 
 
 ilricleft fenfe of the word : For to nbftain from eating Blood was 
 
 a command given by God Almighty himfelf, if not io the firll 
 
 man 
 
Chap. XIV. ♦ 0/"/^^ Roman Church. 'j^ 
 
 man of the old world Adam, yet without difpute to Noah, the 
 laj] of the foregoing andfrll of the fucceedlng generations. 
 
 It feems quite plain, that though God gave the Antediluvians 
 dominion over the iilh and fowl of the fea and air, and every 
 living thing that moved upon the earth ; yet they were no: to 
 eat, lave of the herb of the field, and of the fruit of the tree. 
 *• God faid. Behold, I have given you every herb bearing feed 
 " [<jr grain], which is upon the face of all the earth, and every 
 *' tree, in which is the fruit of a tree yielding feed : to you 
 *' it fhall be for meat (If^ Not even the flejhy much lefs the 
 hlood, of animals was as yet allowed. After the fall. God fpeak- 
 ing to Adam, faid : " Thou (halt eat of the herb of the field : 
 *' in the fweat of thy face fhalt thou eat bread : (w) " where 
 bread is certainly limited by the foregoing words, and means 
 bread made of the he'-b of the field, not bread taken in that ex- 
 tenfive fenfe which it has in fome pla.C€S, and particularly in the 
 Lord's prayer. 
 
 Mr. Beyer has obferved from Ovid, (n) " that the wifeft of 
 ** the Heathen world had a notion, however they came by it, that 
 ** in the Golden Age men did only eat of the fruits of the earth, 
 ** and that it was a vvickednefs to feed upon the flefh and blood 
 " of animals." It is iiighly probable, that the Heathens had 
 this notion from the remains qf a Tradition, which had been 
 current among the Antediluvian Patriarchs as from God him- 
 felf. *' And every body knows (as Monfieur Fleuri [o) obfcrves) 
 *' that to this day the Bramins in the Indies neither eat nor 
 ** kill any kind of animals ; and it is certain, they have fo lived 
 ** more than two thoufand years." 
 
 But after the flood God was pleafed to give Noah and his 
 defcendants •' the beafts of the earth, the fowls of the air, and 
 *• all that moved upon the earth, with the fidies of the fea, 
 ^* every moving thing that lived, into their hand was it delive- 
 *' red to be to them for meaty even as the green herb : But flePa 
 " with the life thereof, which is the h/ood thereof, {fays God) 
 '.' fhall ye not eat (/>)." 
 
 And how folemnly is this law prefTed again by Mofes the 
 fervant of Jehovah, the name by which God faid he would be 
 made known, or which fhould be his memorial to all generations ? 
 
 *' And 
 
 (/) Genes, i. 29. (w) Genes, iii. 18. 19. (") Apoftolical Decree 
 
 at jerafalem flill iu force, p. 7. (j>) Moeuia des Ifraclites, p. 135. Faris 
 17x2, (/>) Gsncs, ix, a, 3,4. 
 
So The LATMdN'^ APOLOGI. 
 
 *' And whatfoever man there be of the houfe of Ifrael, or of 
 *' the ftrangers that fojourn among you, that eateth any manner 
 '* of blood ; I will even fet my face againft that foul that eateth 
 ** blood, and will cut him ofF from among his people. 
 *' No foul of you flv-ill eat blood ; neither fhall any llranger, that 
 
 ** fojourneth among you, eat blood Ye fliall eat the blood 
 
 '' of no manner of flelh. -Ye fhall not eat any thing with the 
 
 '* blocd. Only you fhall not eat ;he bloody you fhall pour 
 
 •* it on the earth as water. -Only be fure, that thou cat 
 
 *' not the blood : thou fhalt not eat it, thou fhalt pour it on 
 
 '* the earth as water. Thou fhalt not eat it ; that it may go 
 ** well with thee, and with thy children after thee, when thou 
 •* flialt do that which is right in the fight of Jehovah {^).'* 
 
 In the New Teftament we find^, that it feemed good to the Holy 
 Ghofi and the y^pojlles of Chrif, afiembled in Council, to oblige 
 the brethren to abftain from blood as a necejfary thing. It has 
 indeed been fuppofed by Dr Hammond and fome other learned 
 men, that becaufe this apoflolical decree only fays, that S. James's 
 fentence was, that thofe who from a??iong the Gentiki were turned 
 unto God, fbould be written to' ^fa^gy-n' tighi ihciefLac unJa i l U ii d , ' 
 
 r^TTr i ni/j rtpw'^^iH*J, I \ '' hin^s Jhiifighd, ui.J IIj9v ^ \ and that becaufe the 
 letters fent were only direfted To the brethren of the Gentiles in 
 Antiochy Syriay and Cilicia, whom the Objedors imagine to be 
 fuch as were before Profelytcs of the Gate, therefore the com- 
 mand feems by this not to be given to All the Gentile con- 
 verts ; and confequently it was, as thefe would argue, to con- 
 tinue no longer than the Jewifli temple and Government fubfift- 
 ed, and therefore that the Prohibition does not affeft us. 
 
 On the other hand Dr. Delany {r) argues from S. FauFs preach- 
 ing at Antioch, that he preached to the idolatrous Gentiles as well 
 as to the Profelytes. But, even fuppofing that Antioch in Pifi- 
 dia, not in Syria, was the place where the apollle delivered that 
 fermon, Acls xiii. and further fuppofing the fermon, in confe- 
 qucnce of that, not applicable to the idolatrous Gentiles ; yet, 
 as Mr. Boycr (.() contends, full it appears plainly evident, that 
 S. Paul and S. Barnabas did not only preach to, but made converts 
 among, the Idolaters in this their firfl million to the Gentiles, and 
 that too by the order of i\iQ Holy Ghoft. 
 
 Now, becaufe S. Paul and S. Barnabas coming to Paphos and 
 preaching to the Proconfal, found with him a certain forcerer 
 
 {q) Levit. xvii.. lo, IS, 14. xix. 26. Deut, xii^ 16, 23, 24, 25. 
 (r) Revelation cxamihed with Candour^ vol, s« (i) Apoftoiiiai Decrs^. 
 
 at Jerufaleaa ftiil in, force, pt zi. 
 
Chap. XIV. Of the Roman Chui^ch. Si 
 
 a Jezv, therefore fome conclude this Procop.ru!, Sero;ius Pifuliis, to 
 hnvc been a F^rofelyte of the Gate ; but to others it feeras mere 
 probable, that he was an idolatrous Gentile, from his being made 
 Governor of Cyprus it being hardly to be fuppofcd, that the 
 Romans would confer that honourable pod on any but one of their 
 own country and religion. And then as to the direftion of the 
 decree, did not S. Paul nnd S. Silas cro throurrh the cities of Lyca- 
 onia, and deliver them the decrees for to keep ? And can it be 
 doubted, that they did the fanr>c"in Phrygiuj and in the region of 
 Galatia, throughout \yhich they went ? " And if the decrees 
 *' were obr'^^^atory upon fme of thofe Chrifiians, to whom they 
 " w .re not at firit imiiicdiately fent, v/hy not upon all Chrifti- 
 ** ans throughout the world ? [t)" 
 
 But are not S. James's words, (r/) as touching the Gentiles nvho 
 helienje, plain words without any exception ? And if the Law 
 diltinguifhes not, who is he that docs ? Again, no paflages in S. 
 PauPs epiltles to the Corinthians written A. D. 57, or in that to 
 the Romans A. D. 58. can be fuppofed to repeal the Apoftolical 
 decree made at Jerufalem, becaufc S. James's words to S. Paul 
 jaft mentioned, wherein he declares the decree in full force, were 
 ipoken A. D. 63, fev.eral years after the writing of thofe 
 epililes. 
 
 As to the other little obje£lIons againft the binding force of 
 this Apofcolical decree, I fuppofe they cannot be thought of 
 much weight by thofe, who have read, after Dr. Delany's Dif- 
 fertations, Mr. Boycr's Trad upon this fubjedl. 
 
 Leaving then the Scriptural, I will proceed to the Traditio- 
 nary part oi the argument, and bring this cafe alfo to the tell 
 of the rule, which we are engaged to follow. Mr. Beyer has 
 given the teftimonies of the Fathers in their original languages 
 for the learned readers, but for the unlearned they muil appear in 
 Tranllation. We (hall be content with fome of his many paf- 
 fages. 
 
 And iird fhall come (in Mr. WhiHon's tranflation) the ApoHo- 
 Jical Canons, B. 8. Can. 63. *' If any Bifliop, or Prefoyter, or 
 " Deacon, or indeed any of the facerdotal catalogue, eats f.ef? 
 ** nvith the hlood of its life, or thst which is torn by beafts, or 
 " which died of itfelf, let him be deprived : for this the Law 
 *' itfelf has forbkiden. But if it be one of the Laity, let him be 
 '• fufpcndcd [from Communion.]" 
 
 L S. laHin 
 
 Af^i, x-<i. 
 
82 
 
 The LJl MAI^'?. APOLOGT. 
 
 5. Juilin Mnrtyi's Dialogue \vith Trypho, the Cologn ec'itlon 
 in the oricir.rtl Greek quoted by Mr. Uoyer, p. 237. is thus in 
 .J:>.g1i(h : '* For thnt righteous Noah was permitted by God tr> 
 *" e';r of every animal, excepti*i(T fle/h n.<jith the blood i'j hi ch is 
 *' fuffocrjr.r^^ vou have an account given you in the book of 
 
 Ef.fchiu-'s Ecclcrfiaflical FTfilory {-lv) reprefcnt? Biblias the Mar- 
 tyr thus ple.-icjjng : " How fnculd iuch perfon'? eat little children, 
 ** for whom it is unlawful to cat the blooct even of irrational crea- 
 " tures ?"' 
 
 '^>. Clemer.t of A'cvanlria fays : [x) *' It is rot lawful for 
 "' Men to touch Blood." 
 
 Tertuilian's Apologetick in rvlr. Reeves^'s excellent tranHation 
 runs thus : ( v ) *' For fliame therefore blufh when you meet a 
 ** Chriiliaii, who will rot endure a drop of the Blood of any 
 ** animal among his viduals ; and therefore for fenr any fnould 
 ••" be locfged among the entrail?, we abftain from things Urangled 
 
 ** and fuch a^s die of themfclvcs. Among otiTcr o.peri- 
 
 ^* ments for the diicovery of Chrillians, this is one, to prefert 
 *' them with Blood Puddings, as very well knowing our opinion 
 •* about the unlawfulnefs of eating Blood." 
 
 Qrigrn's wc-ds in Englifh are ; [%) ** But as there would be 
 *' in all that [<?/ the clean and unclean meats of the Je-i'js, and 
 
 of Chriiiian; giuhig fcandal hy eatinp meats ofj^ered to idols'^ 
 " iomc obicurity, wh'.ch would want 10 be cleared up, the A- 
 *' portico of jt^fus and the Pnibyter" jointly aiiemblcd at Anti- 
 " och, and the Holy Ghrfl with tTiem, as themfelvcs fpe^k, 
 •' judged it proper to wrire an epiirie to the Faithful among 
 " the Gtniilcs, to forbid thern "to t-at of thofe things only from 
 '♦ which they Oiid it vas i^rcejjhry to abftain, which arc things 
 ** djlered to idols, things l}ra>ighd, and Hood. J-^or as to thir.gs 
 *' cfrered [^r facrlficcc] to idals, they are facrificed to c'.^'nions ; 
 *"• and a man who belongs to God, mud ^ot pariah of the table 
 " cf d.tmofis. With regard to things firangled, as the blood is 
 ** not taken our, and as we hold that blood is the food of das- 
 ••* mon?, our religion forbids us the ule of them, lefi we fnould 
 
 " have 
 
 (w 1 E. V. c. T. in the EngliiTi Trnnflation printed nt London 1709. 
 r-'^- 7 if' {■'^} I'.'edafoEue, Bi.-ok ?,. Let it be obft-rvecl bv*the \\?.y 
 
 ?icr<*, thaf S. ClcmcrU fays it is rljiciilons to tuppofi, that thcfs words of 
 F.. Paul What is fold in the -rprket, eut^ &.c. nre a n-peai cf the Apotlolxnl 
 Canon. [y.) Reeves's i^pologies, vol. 1. v. -07. fz) Orig.;a 
 
 afraind Cclfu?, B. S. p. 397. in thf Original, w ijonh.t-gu"* French Traiif. 
 lation in 4*0, r. 3-1, 
 
Cliap. XIV. Of ths Roman Chuuch. S3 
 
 - have the ikmc food with drjinons ; [a) For it might happen » 
 ♦' chat at the time we were eating of things nranglctl, iome one 
 •' of thefe fpirits might alio feed on it with us. \\'hat ue 
 
 - have new f^iid of things llran^icd, may eafily be^apphed to 
 ** Blood, from which we Lbllain for the fame reafon."* 
 
 MInucius Felix's telliir.cnv in his Oaavius iliall be given Ir. 
 Mr. R'-eves's tranilation. [b) " Cut Jcr Chnllians. as ue think 
 
 - it unlawful to be fp^aaiors ot your bloody hghts, io cannoc 
 '^ wc endure to hear of them : and we have io much ave.hon lo 
 
 - human blood, that we vuil not fo mu.ch as talle ot tne \M^. .^rp-ff^ 
 
 - of beails, if wc knew that there is any thing of b.ood m £^*^^^ 
 
 ** ''-^ ^ Lm. 
 
 Let this fuflke fbr the Fathers ; and now we will proceed to Q, 
 the CouncU of Gangta. canon 2. Th. words m ^^ Johnlon . •- ^--^ 
 Clergyman's Vade Mccum are: (.) - H any one condemn, him 
 
 - as one that has no hope, who eats iMi with piety and fauh 
 •' if heabliain the while from blood, and things Ilrangled, a.d 
 *' cffered to idols, kt iiim be anathema." 
 
 The fecond Council of Orleans A. 1). 53^; ^^^^ '^ " ^^^^.^.^^^ 
 
 - Cathol.cks be forbidden the ^^^^'l.fY'''':^^':^^^'''^ 
 
 - killed by thebitescf bcaiis, or which died ofany diilempLr. or 
 *' which was fufxocated by chance." 
 
 The fixth General Council in Trullo, canon 67. f • ^- f^;;/ 
 decrees, U) - that abllaining from blood and i rangled an m J. 
 ■ ? be enjoined upon pain of ^depofuion tp the Cleigy and excom^ 
 ♦♦ inunication to the Laity. 
 
 
 '. h.il killed that animal ; but if it was dead hrft, let us flea, be 
 
 1 rnwn awav " And the 65th canon is thus worded ; A- 
 
 tlirown away. ^ i„,.,_ ^,.a Ar.,y._ are not to be 
 
 nim 
 
 IT r-ich are <o,„ by wolves and dogs, are not to be 
 
 3l». wl.icnare loiu ' ,, ,. ^^t hoes which have 
 
 V eaten ; nor a Ibg or goat .f ou. d d ,^^u ^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^ ^ 
 
 :: :r-"'^?.rtXr=;cX:tC.:::rre, b.b,rdsandothe. 
 .■ anir^als. iflUangled in nets arc not to be eaten. ^ ^^ 
 
 L Z 
 
 that this abftJnencQ 
 
 (.) Ongen had no notion of the n^odern op--n, tn^n ^^^^^^,^ ^^^ 
 Js Liniry on account ot the Jew.n. Y^^^^]^" 3, 5/. i 4) ].hu 
 
 logics, vol. z p. U8, 149. ,/'l V ,S0. 
 
2± The L A T AlSTs dPOLOGT. 
 
 I do not procluce this lail Council for the wifdons of Itsde- 
 termitKition, nor do I pretend to underftand the meanin(> of its 
 diliiiidionb ; but I cite it only, to fhevv, that as yet even in 
 this a^c, when learning was at a low ebb, this tradition was 
 j)OC obliterated. " The emperor Lewis the Pious, with Charle- 
 ** niagne ?jjd Chsries the Bald, tzz. made it a point of reli- 
 " gion to regulate by their augull and imperial laws the eccle- 
 " fjaftical matters of their kingdoms, and yet without confound- 
 
 *' ing the fjcerdotal with the imperial rights the nccefiities, 
 
 *' uijich the French and German Churches then lay utider, re- 
 * Ouiicd the afTillance of thefe great princes : [e) " And let that 
 he an excufc fur the inaccuracy of the Clergy's determinations 
 ->n iome points. But to return ; 
 
 '* What \i commonly allcdgtrd from Auguflin, as if many 
 " Chrifcians in his days, at tl.e end of the fourth century, did 
 " not fciuple to eat Blood, feems to me a great miftake. His 
 " words r.re tiiefe : (/) A':d \.vhcn the Church of the Gentiles 
 *' is ['/5-Zv] hecoir.e Jo conp,.ierahle^ that no carnal I/rc elite ap- 
 *' pears therein, Kvhat Chriftian is there ivho is jo nice, that 
 *' he <T.t:ill not touch thru&es or fmaller birds y itnle/s it be of 
 '♦ thoje ^jchofe B!ood is poured out , or that nvill not eat an Hare, 
 '* //' /".' ha-ve the ft r oh on the ncch^ and is not killed by a hlocdy 
 •' I'-jouvd? Ai:J. as for thofe fe-My that are ftill perhaps afraid of 
 " to::ihing fuch crcalitresy thsf are laughed at by the rcjt. This 
 *' who;e paflagc (fays the author, f^;) from whom I now tran- 
 *' fciibe} rather iuppofes, that no Chrillians did then cat Blood, 
 ** bu: that, as to tne confequent leffcr injundion of not eating 
 •* the fljOi of whut is iirangltd, they generally thought their 
 *' Chiiilian liberty did not require them to be fupcrrtitioufly an- 
 *' xious about every circamftance ; a; wiicther the blood of cer- 
 *' tain fmall anirar-Is were, in every Inliance, poured out, before 
 *' they ent the flefh of tiiem, or not ? Which is fo far from 
 ** Gontradiding what I have {h) faid, that it indeed greatly con- 
 
 *' firms 
 
 \e'\ Cfutume d,c pr^er d'jbout : tom. i,p. 230. [/"] Auguflin. cont, 
 
 I\.\jlh Manich. xxxii. 13. [,j;1 Account ct thofc L^^^£ of Mofcs, which 
 
 fb!:^e C'r.riainnR ; Ey Mr. Whiiion, p. 71. \h'\ He means in the 
 
 •'foregoing p;ige, where he fays: *' It were indeed to be wifhcd, that all 
 «<■ Cfauircs (hat arc eaten by Chriftians, vere fo kiiJed that the Blood might 
 *' naturally be poured out. But till that happy time come, perhaps the beft 
 *< rulcfor Chriftian piactice hcrf is that of S.Paul in cafe of the pasallel im- 
 *' portant prohib'lion of eatinp what is facr fired to iculs. WLatfccvertt fold 
 ** ir. the fLumbhi, tLv,teat, o/rJrg r.o qutjiicnfr corfclence fake. ' JVbatJcever 
 •< is fc: bcjcreyou sz a {<:z^., eat.-ajknig no quejiicjifor co-r.Jci'snce fake. ' 1 mean 
 " tins, vjnlefy it be known that auy fort of animals are generally killed by 
 "' pvo;;!;r fuftocatJcn, in order to keep the Blood in for food : In which cafe, 
 " and m which only, liie Patriarchs!, Mofairk, r.Uil Chriftian laws are plain,, 
 '♦ /cr abilaining irv.Ti eating fuch axijnials.'* 
 
Chap. XIV. Of the Roman Church. g^ 
 
 V i^rms it. Nor do (/) Grotius or (k) Curcdteus underftand 
 •• Aagaftm otherwife. Nay indeed, both Fauflus the Manichee 
 ^' {/) and Auguftm himfelf dil.inaiy ovyn, that in their days all 
 *^ Chriltian^ did univerfally stibin, not only fromhhe parallel 
 '♦ forbidden food, I mean what was offered to idols, but alfo 
 '* from what was in a lefTc. degree and perhaps only by confe- 
 *' quence forbidden, I mean what died of itfelf : which evident- 
 *' ly implies, that there was not then the leall thought of the 
 ** lawfulnefs of diredly eating of Blood itfelf. Nor did the Wef- 
 *' tern Church allow it for more than a thoufand years after 
 ** Chrifi : Nor have the E?.{lern or Southern Churches ever al- 
 •* lowed it to this very day : Nor indeed is it in the power of 
 " any Church or other Human Authority, to allow what Divine 
 " Authority has evidently forbidden to all the poflerity of Noah ; 
 ** as we have already feen." 
 
 To what is here faid with relation to S. Auguftin's teHimony. 
 which is much the fame with what Mr. Bovvyer has, let me obferve 
 from the latter, that S. Auguftin and feveral of the Fathers had 
 not the Reading as it is in our text, the words things JlrangUd 
 not being in their copies. 
 
 In fine, the ufage of ah/laining from Blood continued even m 
 the Wellcrn Church till the twellth age, nor can I find that there 
 is any counter-authority till Aquinas in the thirteenth, when the 
 do<^rine of Tranfubilantiation (which began to creep into the Ro- 
 man Church in the eighth) was fully fettled. For certainly it 
 would have appeared very lliGcking to peribns, who were fo very 
 fcrupulous of eating the blood of brute beafts, to think of eatino- 
 the Flelli and Blood of their dear Redeemer in that carnal fenle, in 
 which that doiflrine has fmce that time reprefented the Eucharift ; 
 and no doubt k is by means hereof, that Chriilians have abated 
 that regard, which otherwife they would (till have had for this A- 
 poflolical, this Divine Command. Well then might the author, 
 whom 1 have already mentioned upon this occafion, thuse'poltul 
 late : (w) ♦' May it not therefore feem flrange, how a pradice, 
 •* eftablilhed by Divine authority ; enforced by the grea'tefl Hu- 
 ** man, that of Councils and Emperors ; obierved before the Law 
 ** under the Law, and under the Gofpel for above a thoufand 
 *' years in the VVeflern, and till this day in the Eaflern and Ethi- 
 " opick Churches, fhould after all this be fo generally fet afide 
 ** amongil us! Whr.t new light did the Darker ages of the 
 " Church receive ? What ! Came the ^ora of God out from them ? 
 ** or came it uiito them only? And whofe example fhall we follow, 
 " thofe of the Purer, or thofe of the Corrupter, A^^^?, of it ?" 
 
 CHAP. 
 
 p] Grot, in Aft. XV. 20. \f] CurceJl. de efii fang. [/] Auguftin, 
 
 3fxx:. c. a. xxrvii, q, 23, [w] Mr, Bowser's ApoilolicsJ Ptcrst-^ p. 4«. 
 
[ S6 ] 
 
 CHAP. XV. 
 
 [ Of dtfrcgardh/g the Saturday-F^fthaL 
 
 THAT Saturday was held a Feriival by the firllChrii^ians. 
 is allowed by every one who has but dipt into Antiquity. 
 But whether there remains any obligation upon us Chnllians 
 of thefe latter ages, in any degree fo to obfcrve it ; 1 niean, whether 
 it be obligatory upon Chriilians as Tuch, and whether any Church 
 may lawfully change it into a Fad, is matter of enquiry. That 
 the Roman Churcli has changed its fellivlty into ladnefs, and turn- 
 ed it, if not into a Uriel Fad, yet into a day of AbRinence, is a!fo 
 matter of faift ; as it is, that this Saturday- Fall did in procefs of 
 timejolllc out the obfervation of that of Wednefday, which, as 
 we fhall fee in the next Chapter, lays claim to the fame venerable 
 authoiity with that of Friday. 
 
 We learn from the firft book that was ever written, Genrjis ii. 3. 
 thatGo-a' blejjed the /event h day, hccavje that on it he reJledfrQ7n alt 
 his ^jcrks, ^Mhich he had created. The fame rcafon is given for 
 God's hlejjing and halloiving it in Exodus xx. i i. xxxi. 17. But in 
 Deuteronomy V. 1 4, 1 5. the reaion given for keeping the Sabbath 
 nvith refl is, that the fervants might rell as well ai the mailers ; 
 For, bccaufe the Ifraelites had been fervants in Egypt, and God 
 had brought them out thence with a mij'hty hand and a Ttretched 
 out arm, therefor s he commanded them [i'o] to keep the Sabbath 
 day, in token of their reft from their hondagc. 
 
 Thefe different reafons have occafioned different opinions among 
 learned men about the firll inllitution of this Irloly Day. Father 
 Calmetfjys; (^2) ♦« God blefr<;d it by the deltination which he ac 
 •* firll made of it, and the defign which he then conceived ofcon- 
 *'* fecrating it in the Je-jcijlj religion to reft, to his worfliip and fer- 
 " vice, in a particular manner. Some Fathers and fome Jewifl^ 
 «• Do«^ors hold, that God's ianclificationor hallowing of the Sab- 
 
 " bath 
 
 4^) See Calmet on CcncfiSj ii, 3, 
 
Chap. XV. 0/ the Roman Church. 8^ 
 
 •* bath confifls in his confecrating \xfromthnt time to his worfhip 
 *' and fervice, and that it was always obferved, at lead Jimong the 
 *• moftjuftofthc firlt men and the Patriarchs before Mofes. Some 
 " go {o far as to fay, that the religious obfervation of thefeventh 
 *' day was preferved among the idolatrous nations, and that the 
 •' tradition for To doing is as ancient as the world. Phiio particn- 
 ** lariy fays, that it was a feafl not of this or that country, but 
 *• throughout the univerfe." But then Calmct obferves on the 
 other hand, " That many of the Jewilh Rabbies hold, that the 
 *' precept for the obfervation of the Sabbath was not given but at 
 ** iVIarah, or even at Sinai ; in (hort, that it was not obferved be- 
 
 *' fore the Exodus or coming out of Egypt. That Philo m 
 
 ** his life of Mofes fays, that the ffraelites h'^d forgotten the day, 
 ** which gave the world birth, till they found it out by the Manna's 
 *' ceafmg to fall on that day." Now by the way, this implies 
 that it had been a FeUival from the beginning : He fays, they had 
 Jorgotten it [in Egypt], and proceeds t ** It was indeed a FeJIi-val 
 ** throughout the univerfe, on account of the creation, or the birth 
 ** of the world," as he calls it ; but adds, ** that it does not fol- 
 *' low from thence, that it was obferved with reft^ Nay, he ob- 
 ferves, *' that fome of Jolephus's cotemporaries fay, it was only 
 *• fome fuperfiitious perfons, who reped on the Sabbath after the 
 *' yeTi:iJh manner, and others joked them on that account ; and 
 •• that S. JuUin fays, the Patriarchs did not obferve it either before 
 ** or after the flood.-" and Calmet refers to Tertullian, Eufebiu?, 
 and Bernard for the fame fentiment .- But thefe are found to termi- 
 nate in the 7^'^^"?/^^ /r//. In a word, the truth of this matter feems 
 to be judicioiilly exprefled by a certain author ( b ) abovemention- 
 cd, in the following words ; 
 
 ** From the beginning of the world the Seventh day feems to 
 ** have been fantlitified by God, and to have been obferved before 
 *' the Law by the Patriarchs ^j a Ffjli^jal, as a day ofpubiick 
 " worfiiip, in Riemory of the creation. And though the r^;-^//^<5?//^^/ 
 ** x^^ [up er -added to this Fedival, at the inllitution of the jevviili 
 " Sabbath, was abolifhed together with the Law by the --oming 
 ** of Chrift ; yet the day continued to be obferved as a Feftival day 
 ** of devotions by the Chrillian Church. And that this was proba- 
 ** biv done in commemoration of the Creation, and without any 
 '• defign to indulge the humour of the Judaizing Chrii>ians, as is 
 " commonly fuppofed, feems plain from the Chrirtiansexpreily de- 
 •' daring a^ainU the jEtvi/h manner of keeping it as a day of rei!\ 
 " and that chey did not Judahxe m oblcrvii^g u.' And this will 
 appear in the courfeof tiie teilimonies, now to be produced for it's 
 ©b(trVation among; the firil ChrilVian^-o 
 
 ^ The 
 
 {h) A Full, True, snd Comprehenavs View 
 Caitchilm, part :. , LdRn 3.7 n, "^9'; ;, 
 
S8 Tht LAr MAN'S APO LOG T. 
 
 The Apoftollcal Conditution?, as tranflatea by VIt. ( c ) Bing- 
 ham, thus fpeak : [d] '' On the Sabbath, anc^ on the Lord's day- 
 ** on which Chrift rofe from, the dead, ye fnall more carefully meet 
 " together to praife God, who created all things by Jefas, to heat 
 •' the Prophets and the Gofpels read, and to ofi-er the oblati- 
 '* on, and partake of the holy fupper." And again: [e) ^ On 
 •* every Sabbath, except one, [chat is, that next before Eafter] 
 " and the Lord's day, ye fhall hold Feflival affemblies. The 
 *' Sabbath and the Lord's-day ye fhall obfcrve as Feilivals, becaufe 
 ** the one is the remembrance of the Creation, and the Oiher of the 
 ** Relurre6lion." Finally, the Conftitutions reprefent it as the 
 order of the Apoftles Peter and Paul, {/) " that fervants fhould 
 *' work ii'/e days in the week, but on the Sabbath and the Lord's 
 •' day they fliould refr, that they might have liberty to go to 
 ** Church for inika6lion in piety ; on the Sabbath in regard to the 
 ** Creation, on the Lord's day in regard to the Refurreition." And 
 the 64th Apoilolical Canon runs thus ; *'- If any one of the Clergy 
 *' be four.d to fal^ on the Lord's day, or on the Sabbath day ex- 
 " *cepting one only, let him be deprived ; but if he be one of the 
 •' Laity, let him be fufpended [from Communion.]" 
 
 S. Athanafiusalfo tells us, [g] *' that they held religious afTem- 
 ** blies on the Sabbath, not becaufe they were infedled with Juda- 
 *' ifoi, but to worfliip Jefus, the Lord of the Sabbath.'* 
 
 S. Epiphanius fays the fame, ( h ) that it was a day of public!?^ 
 afiembly in many Churches, meaning the Orientai Churches, where 
 it was a Feftival. 
 
 Other authors, co^inues Mr. Bingham, are more particular in 
 defcribing the religious fervice of this day .• and fo far as concerns 
 pablick vvorfnip, they make it in all things conformable to that of 
 the Lord's day, which is a farther evidence of its being a Fefli- 
 val. (O 
 
 And that this was not done to indulge the humour of the Judaiz- 
 ing Chrijtlansy is plain : For. not to enlarge, the Council of La- 
 odicca has a Canon, { /^ ) *' forbidding Chriilians to Judaize or reft 
 on the Sabbath any further than was necefTary for publick worfhip; 
 but they v-zere to honour the Lord's day, and rell on it as Chyifti- 
 ans ; and if any were found to Judaizcy an Anathemd is pronoun* 
 ced againft them." The like dire^lion is given in S. Ignatius's 
 
 larger 
 
 (f) Bingham's Antiquities,. B.xN'.c. 3. ( <f ; Confllt. 1.2. c. 59. (t) J. 
 7, c. 23. (/) l.S.c. 35. {g ) Horn, de femente, torn. i. p. 1060. {h) 
 IBpitom. t. i.p. 1T07. [Q Bingham's Autiquitics^ B, 20, c. 3. \i» \f\ 
 
 Cjncil, L»od, cua. 29, 
 
Chap. XV. Of the RotvIax ChuTvch. ^c^ 
 
 larger Epiftle to the MagnoHcins, in conformity to the rule nbove- 
 mcntioned ; ** Let us not keep the Sabbath after the J/invi/h ma^=- 
 •* ner, rejoicing in icllcnefs : For. he thfit nvlll mt n.Lork, ndthcr 
 ** 1st him eat ; and, //; thefrjueat of thy facejhall thou eat thy breads 
 ** fay the divine oracles ; bat iec every one of you keep the Sab- 
 " bath rpiritually, rejoicing ia the meditation of the law, not ia 
 ** the relief the body, &c.'* 
 
 Now whereas Mr. Bingham argues, that there was a Preference 
 given to the Lord's day above the Sabbath in fome refpctis j as 
 that we find no Ecclefiailical laws, obliging men to pray Standing 
 on the SabbdlJi, as on the Lord's day ; nor any Impfrial law, for- 
 bidding law-fuits and pleadings on this day, nor to oblige men to 
 abliain ^vholJy from bodily labour ; and fays, thac the Laodicean 
 Fathers forbid a /c?.'^/ reft on the S:ibbath, to give fome preference 
 in this CO the Lord's day, infinuatim^ that a /^m/ reft was thought 
 7iecel/ary on theLord's day : Upon this I fhal! juft ftay to obferve, i. 
 from the excellent French author whom I have more than once al- 
 ready cited, (/) ** that John the Fafter, Patriarch of ConftantK 
 rople. is indeed the firll witnefs, who includes Holyriays in the 
 prohibition of praying Kneeling, which till his time ( A. D. 526.) 
 included only Sundays and the feafon of Eafter, that is from Eafter 
 to Whitfuntide, as has been (hewn above.' This PatriDrch not 
 only fays, that people ought not to kneel on Sundiiys and Ho /y- days, 
 but comprehends alfo under that law Saturdays. Nay, he extends 
 it ( but that was peculiar to the Greeks then, and never any whc^re 
 pradifed in the hrft ages ) from Chriftmas to the Epiphany, whica 
 feafon he calb the Doitecahemeron.''' BaUamon, Patriarch of Anti- 
 och, fpeaking of the anfwer of the Patriarch Nicholas with his iy- 
 nod to the quellion of the Eaftern Monks, whether it was nccef- 
 fary to pray Standing on Saturdays as well as Sundays P ( which 
 anfwer was -. " that although the Canons, which forbid Kneeling, 
 ** fpoke not of Saturday, but rather of Su>:Jay only ; yet people 
 •• might pray Standing on thac day as well as this for this realbn, 
 " becaufe Fa/Jhig was forbidden on it. [But] as the f loly Fathers 
 *' have not exprefly forbidden Kneeling vn Saturday, though they 
 •' have Fafting ; he, who kneels on that dzy, does nothing con- 
 ** trary to the Ecclefiriftical Traditions, efpecially if he does it 
 •* through a motive of devotion ;" Balfamon, I iay^ ) obferves 
 upon this, ('ViJ'' that the holy canons were the rule by which 
 •♦ thofe Bifhops meafured thc^ir authority i and that they might. 
 ** notimpofe upon theii people a yoke unknown to their predeccf- 
 *' fors, they were far from raaking .7 /.77u of a thing, wfiich the 
 ** Canons of the Church had left quiie free," But what I would 
 
 //; De i'Anvicrir.c Cci/umc Je p'.-'?' O-.tcut : t'-rr., '< r. iiC 
 
oo The LATMAN's APOLOGIA 
 
 have here taken notice of, is, that Balfamon fays pofitively ; (n) 
 *' As our fathers have always looked upon Saturday with almoi} as 
 ** much veneration as Sunday, xhty f;unijh thofc who/iz/ on that 
 " day." Now this fame French author plainly ihevvs, as Mr, 
 Bingham indeed does alfo, that the Orientals made Saturday as 
 well as Sunday fuch a Feftival, that, to fpeak according to the an- 
 cient cullom, they adembled and communicated on it, as well as 
 on Sunday ; that it was fo received throiighQut the Eaft ; that the 
 Greeks do Irill exadly obferve it ; that S. Ignat!us the martyr fpeaks 
 of it ; that the Apoftolical Canons, Balfamon, and all the Greek 
 authors fpeak of it in the fame manner. { o ) Hitherto, pray, 
 where appears the preference, except with regard to the matter of 
 the devotions ? 
 
 2. Before the Imperial laws forbad labour, where does it appear 
 thac Chrillians thought themfelves obliged to abilain wholly from 
 working on Sundays ? Vv''ere they to rell any otherwife than as 
 ChrijVians? And was that any more than tonfiemblc and commu- 
 nicate, that is, to attend the ferviceof the Church ? No reft, but 
 fuch as that, was infilled on by the Church for more than fix huiK 
 cred years. 
 
 S. Jerom, in his funeral oration on the Lady Paula, as I find 
 hin^ cited (/) by Dr. White, EifhopofEiy, reports" that herfclf, 
 ** with all che widows and virgins who lived v/ith hsr in a cloifter in 
 " Bethlehem, repaired duly to the Church or houfe of God upon 
 '* the Lord's day ; and after Jier return irom thence to her own 
 ** lodf!r.:g:, fce herfelf and all her company/<?///o n.Kork^ and everf 
 *' one performed their tafk, which was making of clothes and gar- 
 '* ments for therniclves and others, as they v.'4;re appointed." 
 
 In Gregory the Great's time it was accounted " Antlchriilian 
 do6trine to teach, tkat 't was a fm to work on S'-ndays ; thofe who 
 taught it to be unlawful to labour, wereeileerncd teachers of An- 
 jichrift, who at his coming, it was believed, would caufe the day 
 to be kept by abftaining from labour." 
 
 S, Auguilin, I lind has thefe words \{q) *' Let any one there- 
 " fore tell me, what there is in thofe ten commandments, except 
 " the obfervation of the Sabbath, that is not to be obferved by a 
 *' Chriftian," And again ; (r) '♦ of the ten commandments, thisar 
 " lone is fpoken figuratively." 
 
 Even 
 
 (r.) Ibid p. 410. f<?) Ibid p. 119. {p) See Dr. Franc. White's Tre?.tif« 
 of the Sabbath-day, p. 2X9« edit. 3d. London, 1636. where he cites S. J. rom, 
 ep. 27. ad Euftoch. p. iSi. and Greg. Mng. 1. 11. ep. 3. ('^J Auguilia dc Sp. 
 i^ht.c. X14, fr^-Id, Qucft. in Exod. 1. 2, q. I7V 
 
Chap. XV. O//^^ Roman Church, 
 
 gt 
 
 Even Beza himfelf owns, (/) «' that there was no command ia 
 
 the time of the Apoftles, for Chriftians to abftain from their daily 
 " labour for any longer time, than what wasfpent m the p^blick 
 " affemblies ; and chat no longer forbearance of it was obfervedp 
 
 till the times it was commanded by the Chrifiian Emperors, and 
 
 not sven then nicely obferved." 
 
 «t 
 
 s t 
 
 I had forgotten to mention S. Chryfoflom, who (zys exprelly, [t) 
 that after the difmiiTion of the congregation every man may ap- 
 ply himfelf to his lawful bufmefs.** 
 
 And thus much with regard to Mr. Bingham^s notion about the 
 preference of Sunday to Saturday in the matter of reft. To return 
 then to our point ; 
 
 And now from what has been hitherto advanced, it may fairly 
 be concluded, that Saturday was at iirft an high Feilival in the 
 Chrillian Church. 
 
 The Marcionites, indeed, and fome other Hercticks, changed 
 this Feftival into a Faft ; and though fome of them did it for the 
 exercifeof an Afcetick life ; yet the Church would not allow themi 
 jn their practice. 
 
 Nay, the Council in Trullo, A. D. 692, fu) cenfures the Ro- 
 man Church for fading on this day, and orders them to correft 
 their pra£lice : " Forafmuch as we underftand ( fays the Canon ), 
 " that in the city of Rome the Sabbath in Lent is kept as a Fad, 
 ** contrary to the rule and cuftom of the Church ; it feems good 
 ** to the holy fynod, that in the Roman Church lilfo the Ancient 
 :" Canon fhould be revived and enforced, which fays. If any 
 '* Clergyman be found to faft on the Lord's day or on the Sabbatb, 
 ** one only excepted, let him be deprived ; if a Lay-man, let him 
 /* be excommunicated." 
 
 Nay, further ftill : " There are ( fays Mr. Bingham ) fome 
 *' learned Men of the Roman communion, who think it was 
 " [obferved as a Feaft] originally in the Latin Church alfo." 
 Aibafpinaeus, he fays, is clearly of this opinion : And Binghani 
 fhews, that it is next to irapoliible, that the Sabbath (hould have 
 ^een a Faft: in the Roman Church, when the acute Tertullian wrote 
 his book 0/F^y?/«a-, which was A. D. 217. or betwixt that and 
 235. However it is certain, that fome time after a charge was 
 M 2 made 
 
 {f) Benin Cant. horn. 30. p. 603. {() FfoiHt $• 1" MatS, X. ^ .^-'>- * 
 i^oni. 3, («) Concii, Trull, can. 55. al. 56. 
 
^2 The L AY M A ^ ' /IPO LOG 2'. 
 
 TO^dc in the Roman and fomc other Latin Churches ; bur then the 
 \efy mannrrof ihc change futfit. vcr. the iiovtity of it. 
 
 a'hc CouV.cil of (nv) HIibcris, *vl. :roauccd ihc Saturday- 
 
 inlt into Spain, plainly intiniarcf. that ii \v.n5 not obftrvcd ihcrc 
 beJore. S. Anguliin (x) lonp after clearly dikovcrs, ih*, only 
 the Roman nnd lonic ol the Wcllcrn Churches, not all rf then, 
 kept the Sab'jaih a FjU: And he notes (y) more particularly i.i 
 Atfick, how ih«'y were divi'-^cJ in their pr.n6icc. But at M:;au, 
 which w-a^ a much nearer nci-hbour to Rome, the ancient curtom 
 lh!l continued of keeping b.iturdr^y r.lvva)-s a Icltival : So I'.ai rvcn 
 jn Lent, as S. Anibrofc /^z^ hia.fc^/ .-.llurcs uf. not oul* the 
 Lord'idjy, but all Sahhath Jari,c\Cc/i the great Sabbath before 
 KnlUr, were obfcrved ;'5 f'cftivals and days of relaxation. And for 
 this rcafon, as ihcauthorof his lifctellius he ^vn. ufco to dire 
 upon Saturday, as \nc11 is the Lord's day. 
 
 And thus wc have tlic evidence for the ftfiivity of Saturday, 
 which uc will now fum up, and then fee what is to be (aid for 
 tlie oppofitc J r li'^ice of making it a Faft. It appears therefore, 
 Pirfl. That llu re is a high probability, that it was rppointcd ( y 
 God to be obfcrvcd a^ a Fcllival from the beginning of the 
 world, and wai \'o obferved by the Patriarchs in memory of the 
 Creation ; Secondly, I h.u it was above 2000 years after the 
 Creation, that i^ forty years after the Ilracluei had been brought 
 out of I'gypr, ivl en (ind by his fervent Mofes ccirm-irded ihcm to 
 oblitvc 1: with the r'Jdiiicn \ order of reftirg from fhcir Irbour, 
 in loktn of ih.t grea delivcrjicr : Thirdly. T" h by the 
 
 con)ing of Chrill, ihti ceremonial Jcwifh rert • ,; cd, yet 
 
 the firit and bell Chnllians thought thcmfelves obb^td to conti- 
 ruc the obfcrvaiion of the fiill inllituicd Sabb.ith, and according- 
 ly did fo oblcrvc it, nppoiniipg C-non Laws to tr.force the 
 obrervancc of it ns a Fcftival, and to punifh ihofc who tarncd it 
 into a Fall i Fourthly, That it was obfcrvcd as a Fcaft, and is 
 lo continued to this 6iy in the Greek Church, and was continu- 
 ed alio in the Latin for fomc time, nay in Jome parts of the La- 
 tin Church to the days of S. Ambrolc. And furcly, this is at 
 >art a llrong preU^mplion in favour of that Church which (hall 
 be found I'o doing. 
 
 And row, what is the evidence that is brought againll it ? 
 Truly r.o more than this ; Some br^mches of the Latm Church 
 had introduced a cor.irary ctllcm, bad turned it into a Fail ; 
 
 and 
 
 ir(^L') Concil. E!:i). cjn. :b. Vid. Concil. ^fr'hfn». can. la. (.t) Au- 
 
 fultm. ry\{\. 86. ad Calulonnm. ^ y^ Ibid, j,, i^g, (g^J Aa- 
 
 b; !. 4c Elt» »V jeunw), c.^p. lo. 
 
Cliap, XV. Of the Roman Church. 93 
 
 and S. Auguflin's mother Mnnica, with Tome other?, being ftag- 
 j;ered at this }-Trrirg practice, ' enquired how it was to be recon- 
 ciled ? And S. AuguUin, to^fatisfy his pious mother's fcruples^ 
 tonfults S. Ambroie about' it, who concludes that it was matter 
 f Dijciplhse. 
 
 \ow the quefiion is, whether the teflimonles produced above, 
 v\! .' II ccnfurc it's being turned into a Fafl under fuch dreadful 
 jciuhiti, together with the przidice of all the Eaft to this day, 
 and a pan of the W eft for more than four hundred years ; or 
 the piivate fentiment of S". Augullin, iho' founded upon S. Am- 
 brofc. at the latter end of the fourth century, (hall be the rule 
 o^ a Chrifiian's or of a Church's pra^lice r Reader, choofe you 
 \%heiher. 
 
 C H A P. XVL 
 
 Of difre(rcird}?^g the frcduefday Tajl. 
 
 As one Innovation is the parent of another, {o the in-. 
 lroduv.'\ion of the Saturday - Fall into the Roman 
 Church, has in procefs of time delhoyed the obferva- 
 tion of that of Wednefday, which, as we faid in the 
 iart Chapter, lays claim to the fame venerable authority as the 
 Friday-Fall docs. Thefe two were called by the Ancients 5/^ 
 thf.i and HalfFa/is ; and the Apo'P.olical Conftirutions thus 
 fpcak of them .• [a) •* Chrill commanded us to fad on ihQ fourth 
 *' and fixth days of the week ; the former on account of 
 •• his being betrayed, and the latter on account of his pafiion. [b) 
 
 •• Wc enjoin you to fall on every fourth day of the week, 
 
 *' and every day of the preparation ; and the furplufage of your 
 
 *• fall bellow upon the needy ; [c] becaufe on the fourth 
 
 •• day the condemnation went out againll the Lord, Judas then 
 *• promifing 10 betray him lor money ; and you mult fall the 
 
 (») Cc:^ait. Apoft. B. 5. t. ly (^J B 5, c. 20. To" ^ ;- 
 
94 Tht LAY MAN'S APO LOG 1. 
 
 *« day of the preparation, becaufe on that day the Lord fufFered 
 " the death of the crofs under Pontias Pilate." 
 
 The 69th Apoftolical Canon runs thus : " If any Bifliop, or 
 ** Prefbyter, or Deacon, or Reader or Singer does not faft. — the 
 " fourth day of the week, and the day of the preparation, let 
 ** him be deprived ; ex€ept he be hindred by weaknefs of body : 
 •* Bat if he be one of the Laity, let him be fufpended [from 
 ** communion,]" 
 
 Hermas (d) in his Shepherd makes mention of the Sta- 
 tions. 
 
 Clemens Alexandrinus defcribiiig his Gnofiick or perfefl Chrif- 
 tian, fays : [e] " He underftands the mydcries of the Fall of 
 " thefe ^fourth and fixth ] days, which are called by the names 
 '* of Mercury and Venus among the Heathen." 
 
 Tertullian refuting feme in his days, has thefe words: [f ) 
 " If the Apoftle has wholly cancelled all obfervation of times and 
 *' days, and months and year?, why do we celebrate the Pafch 
 *' in its annual return and revolution ? Why do wc fpend the 
 *' fifty days after in perpetual joy? Why do we ftt apart x.hc fourth 
 ** and fixth d.iys of the week for our Stations, and Parafceue 
 " [ Friday ] for our Fails ?" 
 r 
 
 So Ojigen : (^j " We have the feafon of Lent confecrated to 
 " fading : we have the fourth and fixth days of the week, on 
 '* which we obferve our lolemn falls." 
 
 Peter of Alexandria in one of his Canons written about A. D. 
 306. fays : '• No one can blame us for obferving the fourth day 
 ** of the week and the day of the preparation ; whereon it has 
 *' been juil'y ordained, according to tradition, that we fhould 
 " faft: for the fall ou the fourth day is becaufe the Jews con- 
 *' fpired to betray our Lord, and on the preparation becaufe our 
 " Lord fuffered for as. 
 
 Epiphanius obferves, {b) " that Acrius [the Heretick] forbids 
 ** failing on the fourth day of the week, and on the day before 
 
 ** the 
 
 ri)Hfrmas, Sirr.il. c;. § i, -, (^^ CJem. Ale-zand. S^rom, 7, p. 
 
 y6. as cited by Mr. Whifton ; but p. S77. in the Oxford edition cited by 
 Mr. B.ngham. (/; Tcrtnll. ds jeiun. c. 14. (^; Qrigcn. 
 
 -*ioin. 10. iaLcvit. torn. j. p. 153. \h)3. 3. ?rcf. p. 809. 
 
Chap. XVI.. Of the Roman Church v^ - 
 
 •' the Sabbath." Again: (i) " Who is there that does not 
 " agree, that in all parts of the whole world, xht fourth day of 
 " the week and the day before the Sabbath ate daysof fafting, 
 «* determined in the Church ? and if there were occafion to alledae 
 " it. theConPitation of the Apoftles is plain, how they have c^'r- 
 " dained a. perpetual fad on the fourth day and the day before the 
 
 " Sabbath. Moreover, if the Apoflles themfelves had not 
 
 " fpoken in their Conllitution about this matter, of the fourth day 
 " and the day before the Sabbath, we could otherwife demonllrate 
 ** the fame from all forts of evidence. But they write accurately 
 " about it." Oncemoie, (ij •* ThcafTemblies for worfhip are 
 " appointed by the Apollles on the/ff«nV^day of the week and 
 
 " the day before the Sabbath, &c. — And on the/o^^^/A day 
 
 •• and the day before the Sabbath, they arc continued till the ninth 
 ** hour, becaufe early in the morning on the fourth day cur Lord 
 *' was feized on, and was crucified on the day before the Sabbath ; 
 " and theApoiUes have delivered it to us, that thefe (hould be days 
 
 •• of failing. And this fafi is obferved through the whole 
 
 *' year in the fame Holy Catholick Church ; 1 mean, that of the 
 *' fourth day, and the day before the Sabbath, till the ninth hour, 
 *' &c." Tims Mr. V/hilton quotes Epiphanius ; f/J and Mr! 
 Bingham to the fameeffea, only after the words through the whole 
 year, come except in the ffty days of Pentecof, whiciris agreeable 
 to the anonymous French author oi ^Ihe ancient czf.om of praying 
 Standing, who alfo cites this paiTage for his purpoie, and 1 might 
 have broughc it into the Chapter upon that fubje«^. Take his 
 French Tranflation thus in Hnglilh ; (m ) *' The Church ufes to 
 *' fail all IVednejdayi and Fridays in the year till threeof the Clock 
 ** in the afternoon, except the fifty days of Pcntec^ll, on v.'hich 
 •' we kneel not nor oblerve any fall, becaufe we lock upon them 
 " as days of rejoicing and fellivity." He then gives us the paiTage 
 in Latin, and adds i ** This pailage is taken from a treatife of S. 
 •' Epiphanius's, at the end of his Panarium or Hiilory of Herefies, 
 *' S. Epiphanius fays, that he has fet dou-n in that woric cnly fuch 
 •• practices or culioms, :x'-:.vj eve generally a^id unlv erf ally ohfermed 
 •* in the Caiholick Church, having purpofely omittcid ih^ particular 
 ** ufages, which were received in Jo??:e churches only. It fhould 
 " give great weight to the cultom of praying Standing,'' ( con- 
 tinues this author, and, let me add, to the oblervation of the f^ed- 
 nefday¥A^j ** that this Father places it in the rank of cuiloms gene- 
 '* rally and univcrfally obferved in the Catholick Church." 
 
 Venerable 
 
 (i) Heref. 75. § 6. p. 910. (k) Brev. expof. fid, § sr, 22, 13, p iro^ 
 
 JJ07 (!) Sfie WIj icon's S Clement's and S. Irenaus's vindicatioa of 
 
 the Apoftolical Conititiitioas, p. 4s 47, and Bingham's Antiquities^ B, 
 
 21. c. 3 . (tr.) Ds T' A'.ctcnn; Coiitunn,e ^e erisr debcut. f.orn. i. p. 63, 
 
95 The LAYMAN'S. APO LOGT. 
 
 Venerable Bede, who was born A. D. 673, and died A. D. 
 ^3^, [n) mentions this cullom among the Saxon Chriftians in 
 our own ifland : And Odo Archbifliop of Canterbury, who pub- 
 lilhed his Conflitutions A. D. 943, in the ninth {0) fpecifying 
 the times of Fading, fixes them to Lent, the four Ernber-weeks, 
 and every Wednefday and Friday* 
 
 The above-cited French author alfo quotes a book called 
 Microlocrus^ the author of which he determines muft have lived 
 about the time of Anfelm Bifhop of Lucca, who lived A. D. 
 1077. I fay, he quotes (/;) this book to fhew, that the author 
 of it did not deny, but " that people ought to kneel often on 
 •* Wednefday fy becaufe our Savic-ur's paflion was honoured on 
 " that day." 
 
 Thus we h^ve evidence for the obfcrvation of Wednefday as 
 a Fait for almoft eleven hundred years : What {hall we fay 
 then of thofe ChriiHans, thofe Churches, who pretend to follow 
 Antiquity, and yet have laid afide this ancient cullom ? 1 fay 
 Churches in the Plural: for befides the Church of Rome, (by 
 which I mean all thofe Churches, which are 'ti communion with 
 the Bifhop of that city) there is a certain Reformed Church, 
 which I am afraid will not be found fo Primitive, as Ihe is 
 fometimes pretended to be, either in the matter treated of in 
 this Chapter, or in that of fome preceding ones ; the particulars 
 of which charge I muft, with great grief, proceed to mention, 
 and afterwards fpeak of fome blcmiihes in her, from which the 
 Greek and Roman Churches are free. 
 
 I had here clofed this Chapter, but that I have juft opened 
 a book, called The Hifiory of Popery, vol. L in Quarto, p. 100, 
 loi. where I find it thus written : ** Pope Sylvelier \. is faid 
 •* to have been the firft, that appointed every Friday to be a 
 *• Fafl, in memory of our Lord's pulTiori ; and every Wednef- 
 ** day too, becaufe (is Jacobus de Voragine tells u?) on that day 
 *' they conceited Judas^ betrayed [or fold] him." Now not to 
 infift upon the Apollolicai Conflitutions and Canons, the former 
 of which there is good reafon to fay were compiled before A, D. 
 150, and the latter before A. D. 200 ; and not to mention Her- 
 mas's Paftor (where he certainly intends Wednefdays and Fri- 
 days by his Sia^:o7is) which v/as written A. D. 95, or before : 
 I have fhewn the reader, that Clemens Alexandrinus faid his 
 Gnofcick underftood the myflery of tliefe two falls, in a hook 
 which he wrote A. D. 193, which is 122 years before Pope 
 
 Sylvefter 
 
 ( « ) See Collier's Ecclcfiriflicril Hifiory, vol.* i p- 93. ( * ) Ibid p. \?Q. 
 ip) Di I'Ancienne contumq de prier dcbcutj torn. i. p- 325 ■ - > — 3^9. 
 
Chap. XVI. 0/"//^.^ Roman CnuRcri. ^yj 
 
 Sylvelier pofreiTed the fee of Rome, and confequently, t fuppofe, 
 before he was born. Origen alfo, whom I havg produced, was 
 made CatechiH of Alexandria A. D. 202. and wrote as above 
 abouc A. D. 2^9, where as it was A. D. 315. before Sylvcucr was 
 Bithop of Rome. 
 
 I have jaR taken notice of this, to lliew how little this fort, of 
 pciffionate and prejudiced authors are worthy of credit, and what 
 harm thsy do to Primitive ChriHianity by their unGcilfuI, if not 
 unfaithful, nianner of oppofmg Popery. For they take the diredl 
 Way to promote the latter. When a Fopifn Priell niews an en- 
 quirer, how the Protcilants mifreprefent the Primitive Church, 
 he is in a fair way of perluading him to beco:ne his profeiyte* 
 Away then with this fort of writers, who under pretence of cp- 
 pofmg Popery, are in cfFe6t the promoters of It. 
 
 Gf the Church of E n g l a n Do 
 
 CHAP, XVIL 
 
 Gfthe Church of ET^GL.dND, 
 with regard to the Errors cenjured 
 hi the lafl Eight Chapters. 
 
 ROM what has bsen hicherto {aid, I am much n-iilta- 
 kcn, if it does no: evidently appear, that th< Greek and 
 Roman Churches have each dep?ricd from tiic d.cdrinc 
 and pradics of the Catholick Church, as Cathoiick fig- 
 nifies Orthodoxy as well as Vninjerfal both with regard to rime 
 and place. For [a } " according to the opinion of the moll: 
 " learned, the word Catholick me-ns and dcfigns obedience to r.il 
 " the commands of God." 
 
 But tbo' the Greek and z^oman Churche-; are thus blemifiied, is 
 t\Ql the Reforioed Church of England without fpot^. or nurinkU, di- 
 any fuch thing ? li not Ihe fcrfetl, and vot at ail deficient or 
 
 jNj ivantiti^ 
 
 (a) S. Pucian, epi:i. u torn, J. Bibl. ?^Xi 
 
yS The L A I MAN'S APO LOGT, 
 
 njijtinti^ig in any rcfpeFi ? It ought not to appear very P.range to 
 her Father?, nor yet to her Chilr'ren, if upduan ijnpartial enquiry 
 Ihe Ihould be found not to deferve (o glorious an Elogium ; be- 
 caufe file is fo hv from pretending to an Infallibility in her 
 determinations, that £ne exprefsly declares in her Articles of Re- 
 ligion, that General Councils may err and ha-ve erred. Be fides, 
 experience every day teaches us, that it is not an eafy matter to 
 keep the golden mean, but too too common to run from one 
 extrcnie to another. That our Reforfi)cr3 did fo in an efpeciiil 
 manner, when they iliook ofFthe fiipremacy of the R.oir.an Biihop, 
 v.'i!l too evidently appear in the next Chapter, when we co.Tie to 
 treat of the Ecclefiiilical Supremacy attributed to the King by 
 she Church of Er.giarid. . 
 
 And indeed the fcads ran fo high, and the qiiarrel v.-is car- 
 ried on with fo niuch unchriilian heat, on hoih fides, at the time 
 of the Reformation ; that as it is diEicult to diitinguifii which 
 iv\f:. exceeded in the indecency of llieir language and treatment 
 of each other, fo it is the lei's wonder, th.^t being devoid of cha- 
 rity, boi:h parties (hould mifs the truth, by flriving to get as far 
 Jis polhble from each other. And yet, the Church of England 
 having been for fo mariy c'enfaries in communion with that of 
 Ko;ne, prejudice in favour oi fame cuftoras mighty at the fame 
 time, be an oCcahon. even, of their agreeing in fome errors. Be- 
 iides, they were not at that time fo well agreed, as they have 
 been fmce, about the genuine* and fptirious copie?. of (oiTiQ Fa- 
 ubers ; which will be fome excufc for them in general. 
 
 That the Church of Eng^^^d h in fa6l cha»-geable with the 
 errors (for fuch they mui!: be called by the Rule that we go by) 
 c«nfurcd in the lail Eight Chapters, ia what I novv proceed to 
 i^ew. 
 
 And, FIrft, fne reje^ls Infant Commonion. *' To the end 
 "' (fnys {b) fhe) that Confirmation may be miniflred to the more 
 *' edifying of fuch as fnall receive it, the Church hath thouglit 
 ^* good to order. That none hereafter findl be confirmed, but 
 *' fuch as can fay the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, and the Ten 
 ** Comm indmenti, and can alfo anfsver to fuch other queftioi!;', 
 
 ** as in the Short C^itechifm are contained."- (c) *' Ai;d 
 
 " there fhall none be admitted to the Holy Communion, until 
 ^ luch time as he be confirmed, or be ready and dehrous to 
 " be confirmed." 
 
 Secondly J 
 
 fi-] Preface to ths Oidsf cf Confirmatiorr. I c ] Kubrick after 
 
Chap. XVII. Of i^ Church of Emglanu. 99 
 
 Secondly, (he inak^s the eonfecration of the Euchariil to can- 
 fift in the words of InlHtution. «' If the conlecrated Bread oj 
 ** Wine be all fpent, before all have communicated, ((he (d) 
 ** fays) the Prieft is to confecrate more according to ihe forna 
 *• before prefcribed : begirt ning at [Our Sa^viour Chrijl in tht 
 " fame night, &c.] for tne b'elling of the Bread ; and at \_lihe- 
 *' n.mfe after Juf per, &c.] for the biefling of the Cup." " Thu«? 
 ** (as Biihop Collier [e] fays) the Conkcrating form is ^ivhollj 
 ■ * comprehended in the words of IriHtution, without any preced- 
 '* ing or following prayers :" Indeed^ as he fays in another place, 
 (/ ) ** ThzYC Tiva r\o follonjcin'T pjayers in this inftance ; for after 
 *' the words of Inftimtion are pronounced, the elements are im- 
 '* mediately received. And as for the />r^2)'^rj following the dif- 
 '* trii)ut!on, which way can the Holy Euchariil be affedled with 
 ** them ? How can the Bread and Cup receive any io\ce, of Coq- 
 " fecration from thofe prayers, when they are eaten and drunk^ 
 ** before fuch devotions are pionounced ?" 
 
 Thirdly, fiie impofes the Till o que : for flie has adopted the 
 Confedian of Faith, commonly called the Creed of S. Atliana- 
 iius, and appointed it to be u fed thirteen times in. a year. She 
 has alfo enforced the Nicene Creed with the Roman interpolation 
 ^nd the Son, which ihe impofcs-every time that t!ie ofncc, com- 
 monly called the Second vService, is faid. And the article of tbalCreed 
 relating to the Holy Ghol], runs thus : ^' 1 believe in the Holy 
 *' Gholl,- who prcceedcth from the I'athcr and the Soi', &c." 
 
 Fonrthlv, She does not ufc; Trine Immerfion in Baptifm : for 
 fhc does not require her MiniAers, not even in ordJTinry cafe.?, 
 Jd to immcrfe the perfon to be baptized. ** If they [the God 
 *' fathers and Godmothers] fhall certify him [the Prieft], tha: 
 *' the child may well endure it, he fhall dip it in the water dif 
 '^ erectly and warily, faying, &c. " fays the Rubric'; in the Mi- 
 niftration of Publick Baptifm of Infants : And in that of Baptifm 
 of fuch as are of riper year?, it is ordered, that '* the Priefl: fliail 
 " dip hiir. m the water^ cr pour water upon him fayirg, &c." 
 
 Fifthly, file orders Kneeling on Sendays, ts u evident frci-.^ 
 rnany of her R.ubricks : Nay, fne appoints a gsne}-al Confeffic:u 
 ?ven on .S«;7.V^7jj' as well as Wednefdavs and Tridays, to he faid 
 of the whole congregation, aii kneeiirig ; which is certainly the 
 
 N 2 moft 
 
 [,/•] Rnorick after ths ^iC-rlbution, in the Order for ths adminiftration o£ 
 th- Lord's Supper. [--] Defence of tli; P.eafons, p. 109. See aifo Bu.;. 
 
 Bi-ett's DJOertarion. on the'Lit-irgifSj §15. f /] Yin4^atio.7_ of ti-A 
 
 fel'-'iisaae Defence^ part 3. '-'. I4.t, -.;?,. 
 
100 The L A TM A I^s, J P O L G T. 
 
 woft ^proper poflure for ConfeJJioni as it is for faying the Litany : 
 Bat why iTiouW this be done on the joyful Feilival of cur Lord's 
 gTorions Reuirreilion ? For Sunday was always the Weekly, s,s 
 Eafler was the Yearly commemoration of it, as has been flievvn 
 ziove. 
 
 t 
 Sixthly. She is chargeable with permitting her people to ea 
 Bloaci- For, nctwithftandine; Dr. Delany, and Mr. Boyer, and 
 perhaps fome mo'.e of her Priefts and People, being fully con- 
 vinced of its being their duty, do abilain from it ; yet, forafmuch 
 :i5 many more Prieils tesch the No-neceflity offo abilaining, and 
 the greateft part of the People do aflually live in the conftant 
 vio'ation of this divine precept, the Church never cenfuring them 
 for their difobedience, fne hns reafon to fear, that if fhe does 
 pet repent, [g) He rjcho hath th^Jharp fword ^uoith /'vjo edges^ 'will 
 fg'tci agai/ifl her -c^hh the Jzvoi d of his mcuih. 
 
 Seventh'y, She viohites the Saturday FfJIi-L-al or Chrifnan Sah- 
 haih, as the Frimitive Church called it. For, tho' (he does not 
 in.^l'e c: eyy Saturday a day of abUinence, as the Church of 
 Kome do;^.% yet fhe retains much favour of her leaven, in that 
 fne arjpoiiitr, (oot only the Vigil before Eaftcr-day, which fiie oaght 
 lo OQ, but rilfo)thi; Vigils before theFeaff of the Nativity of ourLord 
 iKi-A fourtei^n other Feiiival,=, to le obferveJ as fail-days, even 
 tho' they happen on a Saturd.-^y. (b) " If any of the^e feall-days 
 " (fays (he), full upon a Monday; then the Vigil or Fall-day lliall 
 " be h.ept on the Safu?-d..7y next before." Moreover, " the forty 
 '■'■ da>'3of Lent, [including the Saturdays, } the Ember-days at 
 *' the four fcafoiis, being the VVcdnefday, Friday, and Saturday 
 *' after the firll Sunday in Lent, the fcall of Pentecoft, September 
 •' 1 4.th and Decenaber i jrh ;" are made by the Church of Englar>d 
 <p:.ys of Falling or AbUinence. 
 
 Eighuily, She has regleaed the Wednefday - Fafl, which the 
 Jdoly Church ihrcughout the tvortd once acknowledged to be of 
 pcrpstucl <:ib\\%zucv\. I fljall only juit obferve, that the French 
 nuihor for!T->erjy quoted arid our own country-man Mr. Bingham 
 tjl agree, that; Fcpe Leo about A, D. 450. is the firft who 
 jpeaks formally of thefe Falls of the four feafons, and th^t 
 sne Grtuki have theiii not. 
 
 In 
 
 IZ] Rev. ii. 72, 16.. [f] See her Tsbl^e rf VigHs. f/] De 
 
 J .na.enn.cAutrjn.. de prier debccc, v,m, i, p. ^67. Bingham's Anu.= 
 
Chap. XVII. Of the Church of England. loi 
 
 In a word, whnt has been fald in the Eight foregoing Chap- 
 ters, is fufficient to fhew, that the Roman and Englifh Churches 
 have both departed from their own Rule ; and confequcntJy an 
 impartial Enquirer will be glad to meet with a purer Church 
 than either of thofe, where he may find a more firm adhefion 
 to the doftrine and pradicc of the Ancient and Univerfal Church. 
 But I hafteji now to fpcak of the particular errors of the Church 
 of England, which are not chargeable upon that of Rome. 
 
 C H A P. xvin. 
 
 of the Ecckjiadical Sup'cmacy^ attrl^ 
 buted to the King hy the Church of 
 
 E N G L A N D. 
 
 I Come now to prove what was hinted in the laft Chapter^ 
 that our Reformers in Shaking off the Supremacy' of the 
 Roman Bifliop, ran from one extreme to another. They 
 rightly diverted the Pope of his ufurped power, but wrong- 
 fully gave it to a Lnyman, who was not qualified to receive it. 
 To any one, who has confideied the nature of Church power, 
 it muft appear a (hocking thing to phxe the Supreme Go^jern- 
 pient of a Church in the hands of a Lay-inaHy even fuppofing 
 him to be in full communion wiih her. But 1 hnflcn to my 
 proof J and here I muit acknowledge my obligation to tiie wor- 
 shy author of the following Difcourf^, wjiich v/as begun to be 
 printed in a Pamphk-t, entituled, ^I'he Publi/her ; cantaviing curi- 
 ous and 'valuahle "raf'sy never before printed : ¥!u7nh£r IF. 
 pag, 167. Lajidon^ '745' But this PuhUjher proceeding no fur- 
 ther in his dcfjgn, no more than one Third of this Difcour?'^ 
 was printed : And tho' it be in reality a lliort one, yet I ac- 
 knowledge that in proportion it is too long for this place : Not- 
 withftanding, as \t is not now likely to appear any where elfe 
 in grint, I fhiill t^'ike the liberty to prefent it here entire to the 
 
 A SHORT 
 
[ I02 ] 
 
 A SHORT 
 
 DISCOURSE 
 
 UPON THE 
 K I N G's EccleMaftical Suprem:iC\% 
 
 As it is maintained by the Church of 
 
 E N G L AN D. 
 
 IN tre.itinj^ of this Sii'ojc'51 I .Inll tike it for grnntcd, that the 
 Doftrinc of the Independency of the CInirch upon the State, as 
 to its purely fpiiitualPowers, is both true and fundnnientaliy 
 necefT.iry to the Being, as well as Well-being of the Chriftian 
 Church : I (-iy, I fhall take this for granted, becaufe it has been 
 proved to a Dcmonftration by Co many » AutJiors, that it is need- 
 Icfs here to repeat th^ir Arguments. What f pretend to in this 
 PJace, is to (licw, that the Church of Efi'rjarui maintains and impo- 
 fes fuch a Regal Ecclefiailical Supremacy, as is utterly inconfittent 
 \vith and deP.ru£live of that fundamental Doctrine ; and if this be 
 iier unhappy Cale, the Size and Danger of her Error in this Piirti- 
 cularwiil be fufliciently obvious. 
 
 Her Canons madev^. D. 1603. are her aiithentick and Handing 
 Laws to this Dzy : Now the 3d. afiirrns the Church Oi England to 
 be by Law etlablil^ed a«i/f»-the King's iVIajclcy ; and the jih. ex- 
 plains her Meaning more fully, where Ihe excommunicates thofe 
 \yho affirm, *' That the Gove; nment of the Qh\x\z\\o^ Et2g!and un- 
 
 der 
 
 I See Loi^'.'Z; i: pi- n Church PcAvr, and hi'; Hlftorical Colle£lIons. Jiod- 
 ^jedV% Vindication cf the deprived B.iaops, and lii's Defence of the fame. hrj» 
 //fi's Cafe of the Repie, and h:s Rehearfal". Hicf:es'$ Anfxypr to the Rights, 
 a-ci his Cor.aitiirioB of the Catholick Church. Collier'^ EccleCsftical Hif^orv,• 
 
 -. ; h': Z'J-^' 'T-n 'h?. 0:nc» of ?. Chaplaiij. Erctt\ Indf-pendency ofli?s' 
 
Chap . X VIIL Of the Church ^/England. i o^ 
 
 *' dsr his Majelly hy Archbifhops, Bifhops, Deans, ArcIiJeacons, 
 ** and the rell that bear Office in the fame, is antichriltian or re- 
 *' pugnanc to the Word of God.' I believe, that it will appear 
 plainly to any impartial Perfon, who will fairly conlidcr what {hall 
 be hereoiFeied upon this Subject, that this Cajaon fuppofcs the 
 Church o^ England to be governed under the King by Archbilhops, 
 Bifhops, ^c. as truly and properly as the Kingdom o^' Englaiu-i h 
 governed urJer the King by Judges, Sheriffs, Jullices of the Peace, 
 iind other tennporal OfScer's. By the 36th Canon all Clergymen 
 are obliged to fubicribe, *' That the King's Majeily under God is 
 *' the only Supreme Governor of this Rcidm, as well in a// Splri- 
 "' tual or Ecclefiaflical Things or Canjes, as Temporal :" Tha 
 fame mail: be (worn ( as appears from the Ordinal ) by every one 
 who is ordained Deacon, Priell, or Bifhop ; as alfo, " That he 
 *' will allift and defend ^// Jurifdidlions, Privileges, Pre-eminences 
 ** and Authorities, granted or belonging to the King's Highnefs, 
 *' his Heirs and SuccefTors, or united and annexed to the Imperial 
 ** Crown of this Realm." Thislail Particular ib exactly agreeable 
 to the 2d Canon, which excommunicates all Perfons, " Who Hiall 
 *' impeach any Part of the Regal Supremacy in Caufes Ecclefiafti- 
 *' calrcltored to the Crown, and by the Laivs of this Realm there- 
 *' in eilabiillied." And thus it appears, that the Church of E?iola7id 
 has unhappily incorporated all the Afts ofParliamcni relating to the 
 King's Ecclefiaftical Supremacy into her Confiitution, and {he is as 
 jaiily chargeable with any Error contained in thein, as if Ihe had 
 decreed it in fo many Words in her Canons. We mud now there- 
 fore take a View of the feveral Statutes, which have been made to 
 eliablifli and enforce the Regal Ecclefiallical Supremacy : Ar^a be- 
 caufe the Hiftory of the Times when Laws were made, is the belt 
 Interpretation of them, we (hall likewifegive a particular Detr.il of 
 the Proceedings, of our Sovereigns, in their Government of the 
 Church of England^ in purfaance of thefe Erallian Acts of Fariia- 
 ment. And this we ihall do froin Mr. Callier'i fecond Volume of 
 his Ecckfiallical rliitory, both beci.uie l»e cites his Authorities for 
 every thing delivered by him, and becaufe he has given us a mors 
 impartial Account Qii^ii^ii Affairs than auy other Author, eithi'V 
 Popilh or Proteilant. 
 
 The firfl Aft of this Kind { 25 Hen. 8. cap, 19. } ties up the 
 Clergy from making any Conltitutions without the Royal AiFeriC. 
 The Preamble runs thus : " V/here the King's iiurnble and obcdi- 
 ** ent Subjeds the Clergy of this P.ealm have not only knovvledged 
 ** accordmg to the Truth, that the Convocation of the fame CI r- 
 *' gy is, always has been, and ought to be airembled only b^ ^Lo. 
 ** King's Writ, but alfo fubmitting to the King's F^Iajelty, have 
 *' pronaifed in <verho Sacerdotiiy that they will never from hence- 
 ^* forth prefume to attempt, alledge, claim, orpuiinUre, ena^i-, 
 " promulge or extcate, cd)y new Canons^ Cor5i^i;utions, Ordinance 
 
 *• Piovincial 
 
104 The L ATM dl^'s JPO LO G T: 
 
 ** Provincial or other, or by whatrqever other Name they ihall be 
 *' called in the Convocation ; unlefs theKing^s nioft Royal AlTent and 
 *• Licence may to them be bad, to make, promulge, and execute 
 " the fame, and that his Majefty do give his mod Royal Aflent in 
 *• that Behalf." This Submiffion is paffed into an Ad ^ . Mr. 
 Ci;^/>^- juftly obferves that the Penner of this Preamble did not 
 coniuk the ancient Pra*5lice : For nothing is more certain, than 
 that the Convocation met frequently by the fole Authority of the 
 Archbifhop, and that ihe Clergy infifiedupon this Method of Sum- 
 mons, as one Branch of the Liberties of Holy Church : And that 
 they were thus fummoned, we have tv.'O Inflances, even in this 
 Rei?n. It is certain, that the Clergy in Convocation had acknow- 
 ledged what the Preamble fets forth ; but then that thi? Acknow- 
 ledgment was accordhig to the Truthy as the A£l declares, is more 
 than what appears. Now, with all due Submiffion to the Legiila- 
 tive Authority, I hope it is no Difregard to fay, that thofe who 
 draw a Bill may be fomewhat unacquainted with Hiftory, and mif- 
 taken in Matter of Fad 3 . 
 
 To go on with the Ad : It is afterwards enaded, " That the 
 ** King ihall have Power and Authority to aflign two and thirty 
 ** Perfons, fixteen of the Clergy and fixteen of the Laity, to ex- 
 ** jynine, abrogate, or can firm the Canons, as they thought fit." 
 Father, *' All Appeals to Rome of what Kind foever were prohibit- 
 '"^ed : And, that the Methods of Juftice might not be defedive, 
 *' the Parties grieved had the Liberty to appeal to the King in 
 ♦• Chancery 4 ". And thus we fee, that inftead of abolifhing the 
 Papal Power, and relloring it to the College of Bifliops, the fame 
 Ufurpation was continued ; but with this Aggravation, that it was 
 taken out of the Hands of the firi^ Bifhop of Chrijlendom, and placed 
 in thofe of a Laynian, a Subjed of the Church. 
 
 The next Ad ( 25 Ben. 8. cap. 20.) fettles the Eledion of 
 Bifnops ; " The King, upon the Vacancy of the See, was to fend 
 ** his Conge d' Elire to vclQ Dean and Chapter, or Prior, or Con- 
 ** vent ; and in cafe xhty delayed their Eledion above twelve Days, 
 *' t:'.e Crown was imptwered to nominate tlie Perfon by Letters 
 ^' Patent: 5 ." 
 
 In this Parliament there pafTcd a private Ad for depriving the 
 ^'{{t'.Q^iO^ caiifiury zvAV/orceJier. This depriving of Ei (hops by 
 an Ad of State wasuniDrecedented in this Kingdom, and this is the 
 lirll Inftance : Willi cm the Conqueror, who Vi'eat far theft in the Ex- 
 
 difc 
 
 a CdViCT'^ ccclefiaftlcal Hiftory, Vol. 2, Pa^e 83. Column 2. 3 p. %U 
 
 c. a. 4 ibid, 5 Celiier'i EcsUiiaftical jHiiigpy^ vol, a, p, 84. c. z, 
 
Chap. "XVIII." Of ihe Cbiircb of EKGi.A^iD, 105 
 
 crcife of the Regale, difplaced no Bifliops without S) nodical De- 
 privation 6 . 
 
 The next A£l that I Ihall cite ( 26 Hen. 8. cnp. 1. ) is very re- 
 markable, for it gives a farther EltabliOidtent to the King's Ecclefi- 
 ailical Supremacy in thefe Words ; ** Albeit the King's .MJel^y 
 *• julily and rightfully is, and ought to be. Supreme Head ot the 
 *' Church oi Engicotd, and is fo recognized by the Clergy of this 
 ** Realm in their Convocations ; yet neverthelefN for Ccrroboriuion 
 ** and Confirmation thereof, and for Increafe of V'ir:ue \v\Chri/r% 
 ** Religion within this Realm of England^ and to rtprefs and ex- 
 *' tirp all Errors, Hcrefies, and other Enormities and Abufes here- 
 *' tofore uied in the fame : Be it enafted by the Authority of this 
 ** prefent Parliament, that the King our Sovereign Lord, his Heirs 
 ' ** and Succeflbrs, Kings of this Realm, (hall betaken, accepted, 
 ** and reputed the only Supreme Head in Enrth of the Church cf 
 " England, called Anglicana Ecclefta, and Ihall have and enjoy 
 •* annexed and united to the Imperial Crown of this Realm, a', well 
 ** the Title and Stile thereof, as all Honours, Dignities, Jmmuni- 
 •* ties. Profits and Commodities, to the faid Dignity of Supreme 
 " Head of the faid Church belongingand appertaining : And that 
 ** our faid Sovereign Lord, his Heirs and Succeflbrs Kings of this 
 *• Realm, fhall have full Power and Authority from time to time, 
 *' to vifit, leprefs, redrefs, reformj order, correct, reflrain, and 
 " amend all fuch Errors, Herefies, Abufcs, Contempts and Enor- 
 ** mities, whatfoever they be, which by any Manner of Spiritual 
 •' Authority or Jurifdiction ought or may lawfully be reformed, 
 «* reprefTed, ordered, redrelTed, corredled, retrained, or amend- 
 ** ed, mofl to the Pieafureof Almighty God, the Ircreafe of Vir- 
 •* tue in Chrijl's Religion, and for the Confervation of the Peace, 
 •* Unity, and Tranquillity of this Realm, any Ufage, Cultom, 
 *' foreign Laws, foreign Authority, PreCcription, or any thing or 
 *' things to the contrary hereof notvvithflanding 7 ." This Acl, 
 WC fee, gives the King Jull Poiuer and Authority to infit, order^ 
 and reform all Herefies, Abufes, &c. 'which by any Manner of Spi- 
 ritual Authority or Juri [diction may lan.vfulh be order r:d and refer m- 
 ed. This Claufe, as Mr. Collier truly obferves, declares the King 
 Supreme Ordinary, makes his Majelty, and^ by Confequcnce thofe 
 commifTion'd under him, Judges of Herefy, and puts the Eccie- 
 fialUcal Difcipline in their Hands. Befides, the Emperors De- 
 cius and Dioclefian were as abfolnte in the :Roman Enipi.e, as 
 the King and Parliament are in England ; and the Grand otigr.icr 
 has llie fame Extent of Authority in lurh '• The Q^iellion there- 
 fore i». Whether by the Grounds of this Ad thelc Princes might 
 
 O no^ 
 
 2, p. 
 
io6 The L A TM J ^Ts ^1 P L G T, 
 
 rot be Judges in Matters of Faith, and manage the Government 
 of the Church at Plc^iTure ? The next Queliion is, Whether up- 
 on this Scheme the Be^ng of the Chrillian Religion does not lie 
 at the Mercy of the Civil Government ? And then the l:ifl In- 
 terrogatory will be, Whether the Eifhops are not bound in foir.e 
 Cafes to make a ft.ind upon the Regale, to break through an 
 Aft of this Nature in Defence of their Creed, to run the l.ft 
 Hazards, riither than throw up their Comn^.ifiion and dcfert the 
 Intereft of Chrillianity S ? 'I hefe Queries of Mr. Collier^ will 
 be eafiiy anfwered by any unprtjudic'd Ptrfon. 
 
 To proceed : Bv another St:itute, [26 He;i. S. cap. 6 ) ** An- 
 *' natei, or the Firll-iruits of all Bentfces, Offices, Dignities, 
 *' f5?V. Spiritual were grant-ed to the King, his Heirs and Suc- 
 *' ceffors, togethtr with the yearly Revenue of the tenth Part» 
 ** of all fuch Livings. The BiOiops of each rcfpeOive Diocefs 
 ** are charged wirh the Collcdion of the 'I etiths, andmridean- 
 *' f.verablc for N^n Payment." Thi- Revenue, as the Preamble 
 fets forth, was granted to the King partly in Confequtnce of his 
 b^ing fuprenx Head of the Chuich 9 . 
 
 The next Thing that prefents itfelf, is K. Henry Vlllth'i 
 granting a Commifijon to Secretary Cyomn.>:e.l, by which he con- 
 ititure-: him his Vicar-Gencral, Viceeercnt, fpecial Commidary 
 and official Principr.l in all Ecclefi^llical Matters. By infpecling 
 the Inllrument it appears, that Crom-ivell had an intire Delega- 
 tion of the King's Supremacy, and Authority to vifit all the Bi- 
 {hop5 and Archbifiiops m the Kingdom ; he v.-^.s likewifc autho- 
 rised to coniliture Deputies for a V'ifitation »«> ; and they were 
 furni(h'd with a Plenitude o\ Power to vifjt all Archbifnop*, Bt- 
 /hops, and the veil of iho inferior Clergy, and to corrc<fl and re- 
 form, and exercife all Manner of Difcipline which belonged to 
 Ecclffiallical [urildiclion ; they had likewife Authority to con- 
 firm or null the Eltdliors of Prelates, to order Inil^ilmcnts, to 
 give InRitutions and Indudions, to fequeller the Fruits of Liv- 
 ings, to deprive or fiifpend Archbifhops, Bifhops, C-:V. to convene 
 Synods and prcfCde in thc.ii, and to make fuch Reformations and 
 Orders as they fnould dni k expedient ; they had likewife Au- 
 thority to try ail Ecclefullical Caufes, and to exert the Cenfures 
 of the Church upon rhot?, who refiifcd either to appear or to 
 abide by their Sentence u. And now the Time for the Visi- 
 tation drawing on, the King iflued out Letters of Inhibiticn ?o 
 the Archbifliop of Canterbury, charging him and his Suffragans 
 liot to vifit the Clergy or Religious, till the Regal Vifitaiion was 
 
 ever. 
 
 8 p. ?9, c. X. 9 p. 94- c. z, lo p. io», c. \. 11 p» 
 
 XO5. 6. X- 
 
Chap. XVIIL Of the Church of England. 107 
 
 over, meaning that which was to be managed under the Vicar^ 
 General CVff/rrtt'f// ; And thus, as Mr.- Collier with his ufual 
 Sincerity oblerves, all Epifcopal JurifdiO'on was laid allecp, and 
 almolt tlruck dead by :hc Regale, during the King's Pieaiure ^2. 
 And yet all this was authorized by the A61 of Parliament cited 
 above, [26 Hen. 8. cap. i.) which conliituted the King fupreme 
 Head of the Church of England. But this Sufpei^rion of the 
 Jurifdidion of all the B;{hops was afterwards taken cfF; the 
 Reafon aifigned in the Inllrumcnt for this Rcl^ixation is fome- 
 what fir.guiar : It was done, it feems, becaufe C;o/7>^t';^//wa'; em- 
 ployed ill Matters of Stare. Had this Minifter not been bufy, 
 fays Mr. Collier with proper Pungency, he might have been 
 folc Ordinary for the Kingdom ; and the Epifcopal Chamber in 
 both Provinces had, it may be, been difabled to Infignificancy 
 for this whole Reign 13. 
 
 The Year following, when the Convocation met, Crom^iven, 
 lately made a Baron and Lord Privy Seal, appeared among the 
 Prelates, and by the Strength of his Vicar-Generallhip took 
 Place of the Archbifliop of Canterbury: The Figure thjt Crom- 
 Kvell made in this Aflen>bly, was fomevvhat fingular ; efpecially 
 fince he had neither Birth, Learning, nor Charadtr to bear him 
 out. ** For an ignorant Layman, fays B fhop Godt'jin, to pr ^ 
 *' fide in a Synod of the inoft learned B.fhops that ever were 
 •' in England, was but a moll fcandalous Sight.'' And, as M-, 
 Collier goes on, if this Function could have been executed by 
 o:ie of the Laity, the King would have done much better in 
 Perfon ihan by fuch a Proxy. However, Ciomnvell had Cou- 
 rage enough to fupport his Commillion, and reprefenied the 
 King up to ail Points of State and Ceremony. He appear'd firft 
 in the Upper Houfe by his Proxy Dr. Petre, who claiff^.ed Pre- 
 cedency, and had it, upon the fcore of his Deputation: About 
 a Week after Crom^vell came thither himfelf H. 
 
 The King went on with the Exerclfe of his Eccleriaflica] 
 Supremacy : To give an Inllance, becaufe of the Unufualnefs of 
 it of a lower Kind : It is a Licence to preach, granted to 
 Roland raslar, Doctor of Laws, and runs thus : - Henry the 
 •' EiPhth by the Grace of God, King of England and France, 
 '' Lord of ^ Ireland, and under Chrifi Supreme Head upon 
 ♦* Earth of tiie Church of England, to our faithful Subjeft I^o- 
 ** land Taylor, Doaor of Laws, and admitted into the Order 
 " oV Deacon, Greeting. As nothing is of greater Moment to^ 
 «' wards eradicaiing the Corruption of ibe Chrillian Religion, and 
 
 O a ** leftorin^ 
 
 1* P.io). c. i,. ii p. ii«. c. <. »4i ?• '9'^*'»^ 
 
J03 TUt LJTMJN's APOLOGT. 
 
 *' relloring the pure Faith of Chrift, th.^n a (Jiligent Explication^ 
 *' the Holy Scripture ; the Fruit of which the n>oreour Subjt(^ts 
 ♦• partake of, we make no doubt the more acceptable will ihey 
 *♦ he to Almighty God. and the more obedient to our Royal 
 ** Government; Therefore we grant Licence, and give full Power 
 " ro pre?.ch the Word of God in all Churchts and other pro- 
 *^ per Places, wherefoevcr fituated within our Kingdom of Evg- 
 ^' lafui, to Thee, in whofe Zeal for the Gofpel of C/;;-/// (even 
 •* according to Knowledge) Integrity of Life and Manners, Pu- 
 ** rity of Confcicnce, and indulUious CircurafptdVion, we much 
 *' confide. In Tcllimony whereof, isfc 15 " 
 
 In the next A^ of Parliament which we fhall take Notice of 
 (;i H<?/-/.-3. cap. 10.) we meet with a Recital " Of the King's 
 '* beiniF Supreme Head of the Church of England', and ihjit for 
 ** the "good Exercife of the faid jnoll Royal Dignity and Of- 
 " fice, his Highnefs hath n)ade Thomas Lord Crom-ixjell and 
 *' Lord Privy Seal, his Vicegerent for good and due Admini- 
 *♦ ilration oi^ JuRice, to be had in all Caufes and Cafes touch- 
 *♦ ing the itccli fialiical Jurifdidtion, and for the godly Reforma- 
 *' ti'Tn and Redrefs of all Herefies and Abufes. in the faid Church." 
 And in Confcquence of this Delegation, the A61 gives Crom'well 
 place of the Archbifhop of Canterbury i5. 
 
 The next Particular that occur?, is the BiHiops taking out 
 firanze Cf-n^mifrions fmm the King, impowcring them to exerr 
 cifc tie Epifcopal Function ; And here we (hall tr^nfcribc ike Conr 
 tcnt> of Bifhop Bonu:r\ Lifirument, which, no doubt, was the 
 fjifTie with the reil ; and after the taking of which, as Bifhop 
 Burpet jullly obfervej^, he might ivell hanje been called one of 
 the Kingi Bi-ljops. It fets forth, " That the King is the Foun- 
 *♦ t^in of all iVIar^ner of Jurifdidtion and Authority, as well ^c- 
 ^' cleft dlical as Secular ; and that thofe who formerly exercifed 
 " this Jurifdi<5iTon, did it only in a precarious Manner and upon 
 *' Royil Courtefy, and that therefore it ought to be returned, 
 *' whenever his Majedy fhi.ill pleafe to c^-ill for it ; and that fince 
 *' the Loid Crom^.vell^ Knight of the Garter. Vicegerent and 
 *' Vicar-General to prefide, manage, and diretl in all Eccleii. 
 ** aflicsl C;iufes, was fo far employed in Matters concerning the 
 *' State, that he was not at Leifure to difcharge the Function 
 *• of a Vicegerent, and manage the Ecclefiallical Jurifdiiflion 
 *' wholly delegated to him by the King, Supreme Head of the 
 '* Church of Engla^ndy Si^. bccaufe Crom'wsll was thus bufy, 
 
 •• and 
 
 35 P. 143- c. ^ 16 p. i6o, c. z. p. ?6i. c. I. 
 
Chap. XVIII. Of the Church efE^GLAT^T). 109 
 
 *' and could not be every where, ror execute the Office of an 
 ** Univerfal Superintendant ; for this Reafon the King, as the 
 *' Jnllrument continues, gives Bonner a Commiffion to execute 
 '• ail the Branches of the Epifcopal Authority under his High- 
 *• nefs : For the Purpofe, he has a Royal Licence to ordain 
 ** within the Diocefe of London^ to vifit the Dean and Chapter 
 *' of St. ?aur%, and all other Colleges, Hofpitals, Monafterics, 
 *• CJergy and Laity wiihin his DiUri£l ; he has likewife a 
 *' Power given him to hear Caufes and to give Sentence in the 
 ** Spiritual Courts, to exercife Difcipline, and ir.fliifl Cenfures 
 •• according to the Directions of Law and the Degrees of the 
 ** Criminal's Offence ; ani in (hort, to execute every thing be- 
 " longing to the Authority and Jurifdidion of a Biihop." And 
 after the king has thus declared himfelf Patriarch in his Domini- 
 ons, claimed all Manner of Spiritual Authority, and pronounced 
 the Bifhops no more than his Delegates at Pleafure : After this» 
 thefe Words are thrown into the Commilfion, to give it the 
 more paffable Complexion, Bejtdes and o'ver and abo^e thofe thingr^ 
 *which are kno^n to be committed to Thee from God by the Holf 
 Scriptures ^1 . Now^, with Submiflion, as Mr. Collier clofely 
 argues, this Claufe feems to come in too late, and is utterly in- 
 cohfiilent with the former Part of the Commlflion. For if the 
 King is the Fountain of all Manner of Ecclefiaftical Jurifdi^Jlion ; 
 if his Lay Vicegerent might lawfully fupply the Room of all 
 the BiPaops in England, provided he were ac Leilure, and able to 
 do it in Perfon ; if the Biftiops, in the Execution of their Of- 
 fice, are only the King's Reprefentatives, and revocable at Plea- 
 fure : If thefe Affirmations are all defcnfible, as the Commiffion 
 fets forth ; then, without queftion, the Hierarchy can have no 
 Jurifdiftion affigned in the New Teftament, nor any Authority 
 derived from our Saviour. But if the Church is a di^ind and 
 entire Society ; if in pure Spirituals fhe is conftituted indepen- 
 dent on all the Kings upon Earth ; if (he is furnifiitd with 
 Powers fufhcient to anfwer the Ends of her Charter ,• if thefe 
 Powers were fettled by our Saviour upon the Apollles and their 
 Succeflors to the World's End '. If the Hierarchy can make cut 
 this Title, then I mull crave Leave to think, that thofe who 
 fuggefted the Draught of this Inarament, were no great Di- 
 trines i^'. 
 
 The laft Statute in King Benry Vlllth's Reign relating to the 
 Regal Supremacy ( 37- Ben. 8. cap. 17. ) fets forth, *' That 
 ** ArchbiO.ops, Bifhops, Archdeacons, and other Ecclefiallical 
 " Perfons have no Manner of Jurifdiftion Ecdefiaftical, but by, 
 
 " undcr^ 
 
 17 P, 369, c, a, p. 170. e, I, »8 p. 170. f. 
 
no The LATM AKTs APO LOG r. 
 
 *• under, and from his Royal M^jcfty ; and that his Mitjefty is; 
 
 ** the only undoubted Supreme Head of the Church of England 
 
 " and of IrclciJid, to whom by holy Scripture all Authon:y and 
 
 ** Power is wholly given, to hear and determine All manner of 
 
 " Caafes Ecc!ef:allical, and to corred all Vice and Sin whatfo- 
 
 ** ever, and to ail luch Perfons as his Mi-jelly ftiail appoint there- 
 
 •♦ unto 19." 
 
 But before we leave this Prince, wc muft tnke Notice of two 
 of his Proceedings, not mentioned by Mr. Collier in his Hillory, 
 but an Account of which we have in Dr. Huies*s Treatife, en- 
 tltulcd, The Dignity of the Epifco^al Order. The firll is his 
 fitting forth a Latin Bible, not long after the p;'fling of the A^l 
 of Supremacy ; In his Preface, which is infcnbtd '/o the Pious 
 Reader in pfntral, nre thefe following Words, the like whereof 
 ( Uys Dr. Hickei) were never ufed by any Chriltian King be- 
 Sore, fnd whxta foutid fometliing like thofe, in which the King 
 of AJfyiia faid in his Heart, / 'u.lll exalt my Throm abs've the 
 Stars of God. 
 
 «* We, therefore, confidering that Part of our Duty towards 
 " God, by which we are knovvn to have undertaken, that we 
 *' (hould be in the Kingdom like the Soul in the Body and the 
 *' Sun in the World, and th^t we fnould excrcife Judgment in our 
 ** Kingdom in God's Place; and hiving all Things in our Pow- 
 *' cr with Reg ird to jurifdi^lion, fhould diligently ru^e ard pio- 
 •* ted the Cnurch itl'elf in the Room of God ; and whether its 
 ** Difcipline be improved or dcliroycd, we m-jik give an 'Ac- 
 •* count to him, who iiurulled it to u^ ; and nding m it in God's 
 " Stea 1, and having the I nnge of God : Whnt othtr Thought 
 «• could v»e entertain in our iVIind, thin that we iViould fly thi- 
 *' thcr, where certain Knowledge might be obtained. Itft we 
 ** fiiould do any Thing ourftlves, or prtlcribe any Thing to be 
 ** done by others, but what can be proved not to fwcrve fo 
 " much as a Tittie from this Law of God io." 
 
 The fecond Particular is, that this Royal Lay Pope was fo fond 
 of his Ecclefiartical Suoremacv, that he caufed a golden Medal to 
 be ftruck, with his Effigies half faced in his ufual Bonner, furred 
 Gown, and invaluable Collar of Rubies, which was iince fold 
 abroad to give the Roval Family Bread. It is engraved, accor- 
 ding to Dr Sloan "^ Original, in Dr. Hitkes^ Treatife abover 
 mentioned : The Infcription round his Head is in Latin, pnci 
 takes up a double Circle ; in the outward Circle, Henry th^ 
 Eighth^ King of England, France^ and Irelandf Defender of the 
 
 faith, 
 
 19 P. i07, <, X. ^o H:ckc5-> Dignity cf ibf ifpifcops! Order; p> 78, 
 
Chap. XVIII. Of the Church of Exglaxd. m 
 
 Faith* and , within the inner, under Chriji, Supreme Head upon 
 
 Earth of the Church of EngUnd cjid Ireland^ On the Reverfe is 
 
 the fame Infcnption in Greek ^\\6 Hebre^j^-^^. Thefe were the n a 
 
 EfFc^as and Confequences of the EucA i<i» ili< i il Supremacy fettled ^^C^J 
 
 upon the K-ng by Ad of Parliament fv\nd thus did ihisMonarch,."^^^ 
 
 as Dr. Hickes feverely, but moil jultly, takes Notice, triumph in'^ — *" 
 
 his new Stjie and Title, making an Jnfcription of it in Letters of 
 liebn^LV and Greek and Lati?i, as Pilate did that over our Lord 
 upon the Crof?, This is the King of the Jeivs. I never yet heard 
 (continues Dr. Hickes) any Ivian talk of this Medal, but who 
 made this Obfervation, that King Henry Crucified ihe Church, as 
 PiMte did her Snviour, with the Solemnity of three Superfcripti- 
 ons ii. And with this Remark vve fhall take Leave of Kins: 
 Henry VJIL ^ 
 
 His Son Edxvard VL fjcceeded to All his Fath-er's Titles, 
 as well as Dominions. And hrre the firA Ecclf fiaiiical Step, 
 which this New Head of the Engli/h and Irijh Churches took] 
 was to grant frcfh CommifiionMo the Bilhops, empowering them 
 to exercife their Epifcopal Fundions. 1 hat of Bifiiop ^Bonner 
 (and fiO doubt the Reft were of the fame Tenour) fees forth, that 
 he had made Appiication to King Edtvard for an Authority to 
 exercife Ecclefialtical JurifdK^tion : As to the other Things, the 
 Jndriunent runs in rhe fanje Form with thofe taken out by the Bi- 
 ihnps in the late Reign. Thefe Comnnffions were granted only 
 during Pleafure ; (o that the King might recall their jurifuidtion, 
 an<l llr^kc their CharaOer dead, when he pleaicd : And it is cer- 
 tain, that the B.fhnps through the v. hole Courfe Oi K\t\<g Ed^zvard^^ 
 Kcign were upon their good Behaviour fir fheir Cffce, and hsd 
 the e^tprcis Clai.fe oi'^s long as they Jhait heha-ve themftl'ves njcell 
 put in their Patent. It is true, the C lauie in the Conjmifiion, be- 
 fidet and Q'ver above fhofe Things 'ivhich are knoi,vn to be committed 
 to thee from God by the holy Scriptures, does import a divine Au- 
 thority : but thrn this Acknowledgment is To weakened and con- 
 fined, as to the Exercife, by other CI lufes in tlie Letters Patenf, 
 that without the King's Licenfe the Powers in the Epifcopal Cha- 
 radler would fr^nify lifje. To fpeak clearly, the CommilTion 
 fccms embajraHcd and JnconHflent : for it is plainly isffirmed in 
 this Initrument, *' that all Manner of Authority and Jutifdiftion, 
 •* as wellEcclefir-tflical nsCiv]l,is originally derived from the Crown." 
 Now if this Afiertion hold?, the Power of ihe Keys niull be - 
 lodjjcd with the Secular Magifcrste : And if (Oy what independent 
 Right can the Bifhops have for the Plxerciie of their Funclion ? 
 How can they make any Claim to a Charter of Government from 
 Oar Saviour ? Or what Pretence can they havn to sdniit to or ex- 
 
 clude 
 
 L 
 
 %X Ibid. pa2- So. a^i Appendix, p. Ixlr. r.-:; Jbi-f- p. %:. 
 
112 The L AT man's A P O L G T. 
 
 dude from Church Communion upon this Foot ? And if their 
 Pretenfions to govern mult fail thus far, the Powers fappofeJ by 
 the Letters Patent to be given them in holy Scripture, mult be 
 of flender Confideracion. It has been faid, that by this Jnilrunient 
 the Perfon* appointed were no other wife named, than as Lay-Pa- 
 trons prefent to Livings ; but this is fomewhat furpriz'ng : Fur 
 <Jid ever Lay-Patrons pretend to give a Commillion in their Pre- 
 sentations for the Exercife of the Prieft's Fundion ? Does the Clerk 
 govern his Cure, and execute his Office, in the Patron's Name, 
 and by Vertue of his Authority ? U this cannot be made good, 
 the Cafe is by no Means parallel ; for the Bifhops by the Letters 
 Parents were to give Orders, and exercife all other Branches of 
 Spiritual Jarifdiclion, as the King's Delegates and upon the Strength 
 of his Authority *3. 
 
 The next Thing which occurs, is a Regal Vifitation : for the 
 Privy Council projeding a farther Reformation, refolved upon fend- 
 ing Commiflioners into all Parts of the Kingdom -4. But before 
 the Vifitors fet forward, the Archbifhop fent his Mandate, by Ver- 
 tue of the King's Letter, to the Bifhop of Ltndon : It was to give 
 Notice to the Provincial BiQiops, not to vifit their refpetlive Dio- 
 cefes, nor exercife any Spiritual Juril'diiflion, nor preach any where 
 but in their Cathedrals ; nor that any of the Clergy (hould preach 
 in any Place without the King's Liccnfe, excepting in their own 
 Collegiate and Parochial Churches. The King's Letter of ^his 
 Tenour was diredted to the Archbifhop of York. Befides the Re- 
 icraint of this Mandate, there was a particular Inhibition, diredled 
 to the B-.ihop of London b/ the King's ComrnifTionfrs for a General 
 and Regal Vifitation. By this Inhibition the Bifhop's whole Ju- 
 rifdidion is laid aflecp, and himfelf ferved with a Citation to ap- 
 pear before the Vifitors : And, whicli makes the Cafe fomesvhat 
 more extraordinary, the Vifitors nte moft of them Lay- men. They 
 Jiave a large Ccmpafs of Jurifdidion in their Inftrument, and are 
 impowered to vifu the Clergy and Laity, to have all forts of Fa- 
 culties, Licenfes, and Endowments laid before them, to examine 
 the Clergy's Tides, and to enquire into the Pradice of the Spirl- 
 tii;il Courts, and infpeft as it were every part of che Bifhop's Func- 
 tion as. 
 
 In this Reign we meet with a Statute, (i Ed. 6. cap. z.) which 
 makes .1 Change in the Manner of choofing Bilhops, and transfers 
 the Election wholly froia the Deans and Chapters to the Crown, 
 The Preamble fets forth, " that the former Elcdions are in very 
 •• Deed no Eledlionr, bu: only by a Writ of Corgi d'Elire have 
 
 •* Colour.% 
 
 13 Collier's Ecclcfiaft. H'tft-. vol. a, pag. «iS. col* 3, p. 2if. o I, 24 
 Ikid. p. 221. C« Z. 25 p. 224. C* S. 
 
Chap. XVIIL Of the 0:urch < Fngl and. 113 
 
 *" Colours, Shadows, and Pretences of Eledion ; that they reive 
 
 to no Parpofe, and -feem derogatory and prejudicial tathe King's 
 
 Prerogative Royal, to whom only appertains the Collation and 
 
 ** Gift of all Arthbifhopricks, Bifl.oprick?, and SufFragan Sifhops 
 
 *' within his Highneflcs Dominions : It is therefore ena«^ed, that 
 
 for the future no Conge d" e/Iire fliall be granted, nor any Eieflion 
 
 *^ be made by Dean and Chapter, but that the Archbifiioprick or 
 
 Biihoprick (hall be conferred by the King's Nomination in- Ijffe'^ 
 *■* Letters Patents 26 ;'» Jt is alio enaded, " that all Summons, Cl- 
 " tations, and other Procefles of ArchbilLopsand Bifhops, which 
 uled to be fent out in their own Names, ftall be made in the 
 *' Name and with the Style of tlie King, as it is in Writs Original 
 " or judicial at the Common Law, and that the T^Jje thereoflhali 
 " be in the name of the Archbiiliop or Bifhop ; and that every 
 " Bifhop or Perfon cxercifing Ecclefiafcical Juriftiitriilon, fliali have 
 ** the King's Arms engraven on their Seals of Oilice 27." The 
 A61 likewile fets forth, *' that all authority of Jurildidicn, Spiri- 
 ** tu:il and Temporal, is derived from th? King's MJefty as Su- 
 ** preme Head oftheie Churches, and that Ail Courts Ecclei'ialti- 
 ** cal v.'ithin the two Realms are kept by no ocher Power and Au- 
 *■ thority, eiclier Foreign or within the Realm, but by the autho- 
 " rity of his excellent Majelly 28 ■" Now fome er^deavour to elude 
 this Erajlianilrn thuF, e'>abli(hed by Acl of Parliament, hy urging 
 that the Ecc'eU.Tftical Of.ices are Divine in the Inllirution, iho' Se- 
 cular in the Conveyance ; that the Power of the Keys is from our 
 Saviour, but the Exerciie from the Civil M^gidrate. But this is 
 nothing but a meer Evafion, and gives up the Authority which it 
 appears to maintain. For, upon this Principle, what does the Di- 
 vine Inftitutlon of the Sacerdotal Fundion lignify, if it lies wholly 
 under the Controul of the State ? What fignifiesa Commiflion, if 
 a Man cannot a^ft upon it without Leave from a third Hand ? 
 What is a Man the better for having a Key, if he has no Liberty 
 to turn ~it, to lock and unlock, without a Foreign Permiffion? 
 Power, without a Right to ufe it. looks like a Contradidion, and 
 is at bcft but a Notional Advantage. It is a precarious Privilege .; 
 and, as to Pradlice, lies perfedly at the Pleai'ure of another. For 
 the Purpole : If the Hierarchy cannot execute their Divine Cojai- 
 miflion without a Licenfe from the Civil MagiRrate, then the Ma- 
 giltrate may lay an Embargo upon their Funciion, and (top the 
 Exercife of their Character, as long as he thinks fit. Thus the De- 
 fign of their Miiiion, and their Authority from our Saviour, may 
 be wholly defeated, and turn to no Account ^9. 
 
 The next Inilance of King Elzvavd VFs exercifing his Ecclefi - 
 P ajaical 
 
 :;„6D.2 36.-r. i„ zyp. 237,0, i, jS Ib'd c, ::, 2-9?. ^-5- 
 
114 The LATUAW^ APOLOGT. 
 
 ailical Supremacy, is his iffuing out a Proclamation in tlie ye.ir 
 3 548, to bar the ufe of the Pulpit throughout the Kingdom ; And 
 tfius thofe Pi-eachers, who were licenied before, had an Embargo 
 laid upon them 3^. 
 
 And now the King is refolved to (hew, that he Is Head of t^e 
 Church indeed ; for, by Vertue of the Supremacy declareo by Act 
 of Parliament to belong to him, he takes upon hirn 10 dcp : 
 jiiuDQs, and begins with Bonner Bifhop of London, ■> 
 
 had preached an exceptionable Sern,on upon the firft of ^epter.ber 
 is49- Upf'U this a Conini'.lTion was ?flufd out to Aichbii' .» 
 Cranmer^ Ridley EiQiop of P^ocheftery Sir William Petre ano ' ' 
 Ihomas hmith^ Secretaries of S::.te, and to Dr. Mavy Dean Oi : 
 PauViy to examine the Matter. I'he Comnniiiioners are imp-^'^ r • 
 cd to fufpend, exconimunicute, ordepriv^ Bii>;op Bonnsry or u.'? 
 any other Cenfure Ecclefiartical. Any turee of chem are lik^^v i'e 
 authorized to pronounce Sentence: from whence it foUo.vSv ihc iii 
 Caie ot Diveriicy of Opinion, Petre, iimith, and May Dodlor ^^( 
 Civil Law might have over ruled A rch bifhop G-a^/;/rr and V-id- 
 IsyZ^. After fevera! Hearings before the ConimifTioners, th^y 
 finding the Bifhop wholly unmanageable, proceeded 10 Judgii^em^ 
 and pronounced him deprived of his Bilhoprick. But whetiic ihis 
 Deprivation were either Valid or Canonical, I leave any one to 
 judge, who will confider that the whole Proceeding was grounded 
 upon a Commiffion from the King, and that Secul .r IVlen were 
 Jiiixcd with Clergymen in the Ceniure of a Bifhop. I know indeed 
 that it h.as been pleaded, that the Sentence being only of Dcpt ivati- 
 on ffom the See of London, it was not fo entirely an Ecclefiaflical 
 Cenfure, but was of a mixed Nature, fo tnat Laymen might join 
 in it. But this An v>'er feem? fhort of Satisfatlion • For which 
 way is a Dcpriv;ition from the See of London not entirely an Fccle- 
 f:aUical Cenfure? Is not the Epifcopd OfHce an Ecclefialtical 
 Charge ? Js not the Bnliop's Jurifdidion over his Diocefe a Spiri- 
 tual Auihoricy ? ^y being deprived therefore of his See, he ib de* 
 privcd of his Spiritual Jurifdidion, and by Confcqucnce the Cen- 
 fure mull be properly EccltfialUcal 32-. 
 
 Gardiner Bifhop of l^''lnchejle.r was afterwards deprived in the 
 /ante manner 33 ; and fo were Hea/h Blihop oi Worccfier, and Day 
 Bifliop of Chichejier for no oiher Reaibn, but refufing to take 
 down Alrars and fet up Tables in their Room. The two Jall were 
 deprived by a Commillion diredl d to "S^'w Robert Cholmley CWxti 
 Baron of the Exchequer, '^\r Richard Read, Richard Gooderick, 
 *Johii Gojnoidy "John Oliver, Richard Ryal ', ail Laymen 34. 
 
 And 
 
 3op. 36>,. C.2. 3ip. i78.c.i» 32p. zSi, C.2, 33r»3°j'^»-* 
 ,3-1 p. 3IZ. c.a. 
 
Chap. XVIII. Of the Church ^/England. i i j 
 
 And fince the King (hewed, that he was vefted with the Pler.i- 
 tu.'e of Spiritual Power by taking upon him to deprive BiOiop^ 
 it is n^) Wonder that he fiiould grant a Licence to /^^rt'/V); Earl of 
 Warnvick, his Countefs, and ramily {or eating Flefh in Lent and 
 on ail oiher Days of Abflinence : It was to continue durinc; the 
 Earrs Life, and fet afide all Ads of Parliament and Canons to the 
 contrary 35. 
 
 The next Thing that prefents itfelf, is a Statute, (^ ^ 6 E^. 
 6,itTp. 4..J which enails, *' that if any Perlbn fh.ail fmiceoriay 
 ♦* any.. violent Hands upon any other, either in the Church or 
 " Church-yard, that then ipfo fado every Perfon fo offending {hall 
 *• be deemed Excommunicate, and be excluded from the Fellow- 
 *' fhip and Communion of CZ'r//?V congregation.'" BythisAci\ 
 the Reader may obferve, the Direftion of Spiritual Jurifdi<5iion is 
 managed by Parliament ; and, which is more, the Penalty of the 
 Statute reaches to the moll folemn Exercife of the Power of the 
 Keys 36. 
 
 In the year 1552 the Bifhop ^{Durham was deprived by a Com- 
 mifSon37. 
 
 And thus we have taken a Tiewof the Ecclefiadical Proceedings 
 of the two Lay Heads of the Church of England. g| 
 
 Queen Mary fucceeded her Brother ^'-a'au/^r/; but The having 
 continued a Member of the Church oi Rome to her Dench, I fruill 
 take no Notice of any of her Actions relating to Church affair?, or 
 of any Statutes pafled in her Reign, becaufe they cannot be iuily 
 charged upon the Church of England. 
 
 But her Sifler Qiieen Elizabeth's Reign, like thofe of her Father 
 and Brother, will aiiord us Matter fufncient. And here the f.rll 
 Inrtance that occurs of her exercifing Ecclefinftical Jurifdid^ion, is 
 her putting out a Proclam;ition for filencing the Pulpit, and com- 
 manding all Difputes between the Popilh and Reformed Parties to 
 be forborn. And thus for fome Time none were allowed to preach, 
 without a Licence under the Broad Seal 3^. 
 
 Li thefird Sefiion of Parliament in this Reign was pafled the Su- 
 
 fremnc^;Piill,for refloringto the Cro-ivn the ctvclevt JiirijdlBion o-ver 
 
 the Stats Ecclefiajlical, and aholi/Jsing all joreign VonKcr repugnant 
 
 P 2 (^ 
 
 7,5 Ib'v? I'reiVcT, r. 3tW. XV, 36 p. ^22. c. i -;7 ?. 326. 
 
iiG The LATMAN's APOLOGI. 
 
 h the fame. By this A<51 (\ E/iz. cap. \.) ** fuch Jurifdidlions, 
 ** Privileges, Superiorities, and Preeniinences Spiritual i.nd Eccle- 
 "' ij^llical, as by any Spiritual or Ecclefiarticcil Power or 
 " Authority hath heretofore been or may lawfully be e.\- 
 ** ercifed or ufed, for the Vifitation of the Ecclefiaftical 
 "* State and Perfons, and for Reformation, Order, and 
 *• Correi^lion ofthef-me, and ol all Manner of Errors, Herefje?, 
 *' Schifms, xAbufcs, Offences, Contempts, and Enormities, fna!! 
 '' for ever by Authority of this prt-fent Parliament be united and 
 *' anntTxed to the luiperial Crown of this Realni." Then follows 
 the Ciaufe for inipowering the Queen and her Soccellbrs to erect 
 rhe fiigb Commillion Court for the Excrcife of Ecclefjat^ical Jiirif- 
 tjjction. And by this Branch the Queen and her Succeflbrs are 
 enabled to J'fiign by Le;t< rs Patents under rhe Great Seal fuch 
 Ptrfons, and io\ f) long tirnc, a? thiv fi-.all think fit ( provided they 
 are natur.il born Subjedls ) tor the exercfing under the Crown all 
 Manner of Spiritual or Eccltfiallical Jurifdidion. Paitic.larly, by 
 this A'5l the Conmiiirioners are inipowered " to vifit, reform, re- 
 ** drefs, order, correct, and amend all fuch lirrors, Kcrefje?, 
 " Schifms Abufes, Ofrcnces, Contempts, and Enorn^itie' what- 
 ** toevtr, which by any Manner of Spiritual or Ecclefiallical Power, 
 ** Authority, orJarifdiOion can or may lawfully be reformed, or- 
 *' cered, redreff' d, corrtdled, ieflra:ncd, or an endfd. '"Nothing can 
 be irore corn pre hen five than the Terms of this Ciaufe : The whole 
 C'jrnpafs of Church difcipline fcems iran'-fcrrcd upon the Crown. 
 And thus by the Quecn'n Letters Patents pnfied in the iSth year 
 of i^r Reign, her Ecdtliallical Commillioners are authorized to 
 vif^ reform, corrfiT^, as weU in Pl;ices exempt as not exempt, all 
 Errors. Herclies, Scliifms, iS.c. by Ler.fures Ecclefi'^rtical, Depri- 
 vation, or othcrwife. And, which is particularly remarkable, 
 iiotwith!>anding the (^)een, and her Succcflbrs King James and 
 King Charla the fi ll, joined Church men with others in the Ec- 
 tfefiarticn? Commiflion, yet by this Branch of the Statute they arc 
 impowered to have made ufe, if they had fo pleafed, of none but 
 Lay-men. For the better Maintenance of this Acl, the Oath oi 
 Suprennacy is annexed : And here the Subject fwears ** to defend 
 '•* Ail Jurifdii^lion'-, Prcviledges, Preeminences, and Authorities 
 *' granted or bi'ion(.;ing to the Queen's Elighnel*, her Heirs, and 
 *' Succeilbrs, or united and annexed to the Imperial Crown of this 
 ** Realnn" And here it n»a) be obferved, that to make the Ai!l 
 more inoffenlivc, the Title ot Supreme Head was changed into 
 that of Surreme Governor 39, Nvhich feems to be a nice Diilinc^i- 
 on without any real Diftorence. By \''ertue of this Aft, the Queen's 
 Comnuliiorers depnvtd for rcfufing ihe Oith of Supremacy four- 
 teen B;fliops, three Biihops eledt, twelve Deans, fourteen Arch- 
 deacons, 
 
 39 p, 4Z0, C.2. p. 42 1. c. 1, 
 
Chap. XVIII. Ofthe Church of E^oi^A^D. jiy 
 
 deacons, fixty Canons or Prebendaries ; befides inferior Clergy j^o, 
 
 - To take ott the Era(liainf,n of this Oath of Supremacy, the 
 37ih Article ofihe Church of ir;?a/^W is pleaded, which run? thus; 
 41 ♦♦ The Qucerrb Mojelly hath the chief Power in this Realm of 
 *' England and other her DoiDinions, unto whom the chief Go- 
 "wej-nmen: of all EUates of this Realm, whether they be Eccle- 
 ** fiMllical or Civil, in All Caufes doth appertain, and is not nor 
 
 ought to be fubjed ro any foreign Juriidiftion. Where we at- 
 ** tribute to the Queer/s Majelly the chief Government, by which 
 ** Titles wc underiland the Minds of fome flanderous folks to be 
 ■* clTended : we give not our Princes the miniAring of God*s Word 
 '* or of the Sacrament?, the which Thing the Injundions alio fet 
 
 forth by Elizabeth our Queen do molt plainly telHfy ; bac that 
 " only Prerogative, which we ieo to have been given aLvays to 
 *' all godly Princes in holy Scriptures by Gocl himfelf, that. is', that 
 *' they Ihould rule all Kltates and Degrees committed to their 
 ** Charge by God. Vv-hether they be Ecclefiailicai or 7>mporaI, 
 ** and re:irain with the Civil Sword the Ihibborn and evil Doers/* 
 The Pafl^ge in the JnjunOions referred to in this Article, is as 
 
 follows : 42 " The Queen's Majelly would that ail her !ov- 
 
 " ing Subjects fhould underfcand, that nothing was, b, or flsall be 
 *' meant or intended by the fame OcUh, than was acknowledged 
 *' to be due to the moH noble Kings of famous Memory K. Henry 
 •• VIII. or K. Ed-ivard V [. And farther her M.jetty forbiddcth 
 •' ail manner of her Subjects to give Ear or Credit to fuch perverfc 
 " and malicious Perfons, which moil finifter'y and malicioufly la- 
 " hour to notify to her loving Subjedh, how by Words of the faid 
 ** Oath it may b.-colleded, that the Kings or Queens of this 
 *' Re:i]m, PoiUfTors of the Crown, may challenge Authority and 
 ** Power of Minjitry of divine Service in the Church, wherein her 
 *' faid Subjecls be much abufed by fuch evil difpofed Perfons. 
 " For certainly her Majelly neither doth nor ever vjill challenge 
 " any Aufhority, than that was challenged and lately ufed by the 
 " f lid noble Kings of fimous Memory, K. Henry VJII. and K. 
 ** Edward VI. which is and was of ancient Time due to the Im- 
 *' perial Crown of this Realm, that is, under God to have the 
 " Sove?eig'.)ty and Rule over all manner of Perfons born vvithin 
 " thefe her Realms Dominions, and Countries, of what Eilate 
 *' either Ecclcfiaflical or Temporal foever they be, fo as no other 
 ^' foreign Power (hall or ought to have any Superiority over them." 
 And in an Aft of Parliament made in this Reign (^ Eli^. cap. \.) 
 it is provided, 43 that the Oath of Supremacy ifiall *' be taken 
 ** and expounded in fuch Form, as is fet forth in an admonition 
 
 " anne:;ed 
 
 40 p. 4"?r. c.z. 41 Sparrow's CoileGbicn, p, 105, 42 Ibid p. S3; 
 4', CoiruM-\i ^:.cz\(. riift. vol. z. p. 4^5 1, r, z-. 
 
ii8 rhtLATMJN's A P L G T. 
 
 ** annexed to the Queen*s M;ijeft)'s Ipjun^iion? ; thnt i? to Gy, 
 ** to confefi and acknowledge in her M,.jelly, htr iieirs and St.c- 
 •* ceflbrs, none other Authority than th it wa^ challenged am; K.fe- 
 ** ly ufed by the noble K. Henry VIII. and K. Edixard^i- as 
 •' in the fsid Admonition more plainly may appear." Now upon 
 thefe Paffages let it be obferved, i . That if thiy were ever fo full 
 and exprefs, they relate only the Oath of Supremacy : here is «0 
 Interpretation of any Ail of Parli iment, but al' the Eraftian Sta- 
 tutes ftand in full force ; and i.s tht^ Church of England has adopt- 
 ed them into her lecond Canon, (he ii lUll chargeable with what- 
 ever is contained in them. 2. All that is difcl timed here, is the 
 Po'.ver of performing divine Offices : ive ginje not our Princes the 
 tninljlring of God's IVord or of the Sacraments, fays the Aicsck : 
 ihey may not challenge Authority an.i Ponjoer of Minifry of divine 
 Service in the Church, fays the Quetn in her Injunttion?. NovV 
 we do not charge the Church of England ivith giving Princes tnis 
 Power, ( and I fuppofe that the Performance of thefe divine Of- 
 fices is what is meant by that Ciaufe in the Bifhops Commiffions 
 mentioned above, be/ides and o^jer and aho<ve thofe Things^ njohich 
 are knonvn to be ccmmitted to thee from God by the holy Scriptures) 
 but we charge her with making the Crown the Fountain of all Ec- 
 clefiartical jurifdidlion, with afcribing to the King the fane Spiri- 
 tual Supremacy over Bifhops and the Church, as the Pope had for- 
 merly ulurped : And therefore I obferve 3. That this is fo far from 
 being difclaimed here, that on the contrary it is plainly afllrtcd in 
 the Paffages above cited. Even the Article gives the Q^ieen '* the 
 *' Chief Government of All Ejiates [ as well as Per Ions ] of ciiis 
 ** Realm, svhether they be Eccltfiaftical ox Cinjil, in AtlCtiufes^'* 
 And both tliC Injund\ions and Act of Parliament exprtfly chalitnge 
 the Jame Authoi ity, that was challenged and lately ufcd by K. 
 lls^nry VIII. and K. Ed-^vard VI. And what that was, has b'.:^ n 
 already 'cen. Thi- is alfo confirmed beyond all Exception by (he 
 very Statute of Queen Elizabeth, which eilabliflies the Oath of Su- 
 premacy, in which it is added, " that the Branches, Sentences, 
 •* and Words of the feveral Adlsmade in King Henry V Ill's Time 
 ** touching Supremacy, and every one of them, fhiU be deemed 
 ** nnd taken to extend to her Plighnefs, her eirs and SucctfTors, 
 ** as fully and largely as ever the laid Ads did extend to the late 
 *' King Henry MWi^^ All thefe confiderations being put together, 
 \vlll I am afVdid fhew too plriniy, that the Article, Injui clions, 
 and Statute qaoted in this P.iragraph, will not excufe the Cnurch 
 or England trom the Charge of Eraflianifm ; in tiiC fdriher Proof 
 of WiiiCh we now proceed. 
 
 In the Year rg^q the Queen figned Comm-fTions for a P^v^l 
 Viiitation all osxx England, One of them, for the /^'■f hb f!vp 
 and Province of York, is direded to Francis Earl of Uhre-i<.jbuyy 
 and thirteen others. The Inlbumcnt fets forcli in the Ucgi; .- •. 
 
 *' ih ? 
 
Chap. XVIII. Of the Cburcb of E^cLA-^u. 119 
 
 *' that the Queen could not faithfully difcharge the Bufinefs of her 
 " Station, without making a Proviiion for the Worlhip of God 
 *' Almighty, and the prop.Agating the true Religion :" From hence 
 (he proceeds to declaie her Royal Power abfolute, with refpeft 
 both to Church and State : IFe therefore in refped of our "Royal 
 and Abfolute Po'^er^ committed to us in this our Kingdom, fince <we 
 have refolded to 'vifit both the States of our Kingdotn, as ivell the 
 E.cle/iajiick as the Laick, and to prejcribe them certain Rules of 
 Piety and Virtue, have confiituted the ajorefaid ^rznzis Earl of 
 Shrewfbury, &c. Amo iglt ihefe 14 Cou.miilioners there is never 
 a Clergyman, except one Sandys Doctor in Divinity, unlefs ano- 
 ther who has the 1 itle of Dudor in Law was in Orders, which is 
 fomewhat unlikely. Notwithitanding this, any two of thtm are 
 authorized tovifitall Cathedral, Colltgiite, and ParochialChurchcs; 
 and all Degrees of the Clergy, the Bifhops not excepted. 'Ihty 
 are empowered to exan.me them upon the Articles of theif Belief, 
 the Qualifications of their Learniiig, and their Behaviour as to 
 Morals ; and in cafe they £nd them defedive, heterodox, or irre- 
 gular, they are to proceed aguinil them by Impriibnment and Ec- 
 clefiiftical Cenfures. Farther, their CommilTion empowers them 
 to deliver new Irjunftioos ; to declare Spiritual Promotions void, 
 to allow competent Penfions to thofe who quit their Livings ; to 
 examine Letters of Orders, to give Inilitution and Indudion j to 
 convene Synods and receive Synodals, and to excommunicate thofe 
 who refufe to pay ; to give Licci.c s to preach to thcfe whom the/ 
 judge qualified ; to difcharge Perfons committed to Prifon upon 
 the Score of Religion, to try the Caufes of Deprivation, and to re- 
 ftore fuch av have been illegally difplact^d : In Tnort, their Com- 
 mifiion takes in t tie whole Com pr.fs of Ecclefi-Ilical Jurifdidion, 
 and reaches to every part of the Epilcopal Fundion, excepting 
 Ordination, coniecrating of Churches, and cfficiaiing in Divine 
 Service. And, which is ibll more fingubr, ^^xw^/ the Clergyman 
 is not conliituted one of the ^or urn, but any two oftheLay- 
 CommilTioners are authorized to tranfad all this extraordinary Bu- 
 finefs, and to exert the highelt Cenfures of the Church. This, 
 Bifhop J?f/r77^/ obferves, was more th^n fome People linderflood, 
 and feemcd a great Stretch of the Queen's Supren>iicy. But he 
 appears itichned tojultify the Ccmiuiliion : for he fubjuins, •* It 
 *' was thought that the Queen might do that, as well as the late 
 '• Chancellors did it in the Ecclefiailical Courts :" So that ore 
 Abufe was the Excufe for another. But it is to be feared, thac 
 this Plea will not hold ; for the Imitation of an ill Precedent is no 
 lufTiCient Defence : Befides, Liy Chancellors, tho' thty fome- 
 time. judge what Crimes deferve Excommunic:uion, yet they never 
 pronounce the Sentence ; that foiemn Part is always performed by 
 a Pnclh Bat thefc Commiflioners w. re not tied to the Rules or 
 EcciefiaRical Courts^;: their Juril'didion was unconfined and para- 
 mount ; and therefore, as far as it appears thty might have pro- 
 pounced the Sentence of Excommunication, without exceeding 
 
 thd 
 
120 The LAT MAN'S APOLOGIA 
 
 the bounds of their Deputation. And laftly, the Chnrcellors a£l 
 in the Bi{hop*s Name, and by Vertue of his Commifl on ; of the 
 Bilhop, I fay, who has undoubtedly a Right to admit to the Com- 
 munion of the Church, and exclude from it. Bat thefe fourteen 
 Comirniflioners managed purely upon the Strengch of the Regale ; 
 They had no xAuthority but what they received from the Queen, 
 who was without Quellion a Lay-perfon, and by confcquence could 
 make out no Claim to any Share of the Sacerdotal Charafter, nor 
 produce any Warrant from our Saviour for the Exercife of the 
 Keys 44. 
 
 The next Thing remarkable, relating to Ecclefiafiical AfFiiirs, 
 is an Aft of P.^.rliament, (i Eliz. cap. 2.) by which it is prcvidco', 
 ** that in Cafe of Contempt of the Rites of the Church, the Queen's 
 ■* Mikity may by the Advice of the Conimi-Tionersfor Hcclefialii- 
 ** cal Caufes, or the Metropolitan, ord.iin and publifh fach farther 
 ** Ceremonies and Rites, as may be mod for the Advancement of 
 " God's Glory, the edifying his Church, and the due Reverence 
 •* oi Chriji's holy Myfteries and Sacramenti45." 
 
 In- the Year 1573, the Q\ieen in order to give a Check to Puri- 
 taniftr., ordered the Lord Treafurer Burleigh to make a Speech in 
 the ^tar Cha?}iher \:^^ox\ this Subjctft, and prefs the Execu:ion of 
 the Laws. Among other Things he Cells the Lords of that Cham- 
 her, that '* Her Majelly commanded him farther to ncquain: 
 ** them, that being empowered by ACft of Parliament, fae had at 
 ** feveral Times by the advice of her Clergy publifaed Injunctions 
 ** and Orders for the uniform Governirient of the Church, and 
 ** given the Execution of thefe Orders in Charge Co the Bifhops and 
 ** other EcclefialUcal Ccmmillioners and Minillers of Juilice46." 
 
 In the year i 577, Grindal Archbifiiop of Canterhury rcfuHng 
 aft in the fupprelHng oi Frophefyifigs, was confined to his Houfe, 
 and fcquellred from his Jurildiition for fix Months. This Re- 
 i!raui£ was clapt upon him, when he was going on with his Metro- 
 poiOl Vifitation. It ivas done by the Lords in the ^itar Chmnhery 
 whS it is to be fuppofed pailed this Sentence in Vertue of their 
 Ecclcfiallick Commilfion4:'. 
 
 In a SefTion of Parliament held in the 25th year of this Reign, 
 the Commons voted thu they had Authority to appoint a Faft, and 
 fixed upon a Day ; but before itcaine, liie Speaker declared him- 
 (elfforry for the Error of tliis Refclve, and that her Majelty was 
 much difpleafed with their Proceedings: Upon this the Houfe vo- 
 ted 
 
 £0 
 
 4.4.^.435. -2( 45p.496,c.:, 460.546.0.1,2. 47 P^ 559- 
 
Chap. XVIIL Of the Church of "E^GLA-^D. m 
 
 ted a Submiffion, which the Vice-Chamberlain acquainted the.-n 
 the Queen hnd accepted ; that fhe hoped for the future they would 
 move more warily ; that ihe did not dillike their inclination ior 
 Falling and Prayers ; that it wys the Manner which diibbliged ; 
 it was their preluming to appoint a Fall, without pre- acquaint- 
 ing her Majelly, and receiving her Orders for that Purpofe ; and 
 that this was no leli than plain Encroachment upon her Ecclefialli- 
 cal Authority 4S. 
 
 In the Year 1585, Queen Elizalfeth made a Speech to borh 
 Houles at the Prorogation of the Parliament. She takes Notice, 
 ** thit lome People had been buly in finding Fault with the 
 •• Clergy ; that a Cenfure oi this Kind retlei^ted upon herfelf : for 
 *• fince God had made her an Over-Ruler of the Church, her Neg- 
 •* ligence could not be excufed, if any Schiftn or HereTv was con- 
 ** nived at. She grants, that there may be Ibme Mifbehaviuut* 
 •* and GinifTion amonglt the Body of the Clergy, and that fuch 
 *' Mifcarriage is common to all confiderable OfHces. A'/l ivv/c/j, 
 ** continues her Majelly, i/ My Lords of the Clergy Jo not amend, 1 
 ** mean to depofe you : Look you therefore tveil to your Char<res,'''' 
 Now it is plain by this Speech, that the Queen was led into a iVIif- 
 pcrfuafion concerning the Regale : fhe delivers herfclf, as if flis 
 had an Apollolical Commifllon wiihin her Dominions, and as if her 
 Power was paramount to the Epilcopal College 49. 
 
 At the Trial of one Vdallsi Nonconformifl Miniller, it was re- 
 folved by the Judges, •' that thofe whofpeak againil her Majelly's 
 ** Government in Cafes Ecclefiaftical, her Laws, Proceedings, or 
 " Ecclefiallical Officers who ruled under her, did defame the 
 «* Queen S^." 
 
 Afterwards another Caufe relating to one Caudrey was argued at 
 Length by the Council at the Bar, and by th^ Bench ; who having 
 confulted the Judges of the other Courts, came at lall to this Relo- 
 lution, " That the Ad of 1 Eliz. cap. 1. concerning Ecclefiallical 
 *' Jurifdidion was not a Statute introdudory of a New Law, but 
 " declaratory of the Old ; that this Ad does not annex any Jurif- 
 ** diilion to the Crown, but that which in Truth was, or of Right 
 *' ought to be, by the Ancient Laws of the Realm Parcel of the 
 *• King's Jurifdldion, and united to his Imperial Crown, and which 
 ** lawfully had been or might be exercifed within the Realm/' Ic 
 wasrefolved farther by ail the Judges, ♦» That if the Aft i Eliiz. 
 *' cap. 1. had never been made, the King or Qiieen of -England 
 ♦* for the time being may make fuch an Ecclefiadical Comniilfion 
 ** fas iJ^ai Ufur:e'v:hsn the Cafe ^jjas argued J by the ancient Pre- 
 Q *' logaiiv^ 
 
 ^c. :- /., AOr, rnr, V. i. 500.6: 
 
123 The LJTMJNhAPOLOGT. 
 
 *' rogative and Law of England^ Their Ground is, ** That by 
 *' the ancient Laws of this Realm the Kingdom of England 
 *• is an abfolute Empire, confiiling of one Head, which is 
 ** the King : and that this Kingly Head is furni(hed with 
 *• plenary Power, Prerogative, and lurifdi^lion to render 
 "* JuHice to every Part of this Body in All Caufcs Ecclefiallical 
 •' or 'i'cmporal/* 7'heir Reafon is, " Bccaufe otherwife he 
 *» fhould not be a Head of the whole Body." After this, they 
 con\e to a Recital of the Caufe?, which by the Laws oi EngianJ 
 are to be tried in Ecclefiailical Courts. In this Lift thiey reckon 
 *' Blafphemy, Apollafy from ChrilHanity, Herefies. Schifm, or- 
 *' dering Admifijons, Inliitutions of Clerks, Celebration of Di- 
 *♦ vine Service; Rights of Matrimony, Divorces, General Baftar- 
 •' dy, Subtradion and Rigut of Tythes, Oblations, Qbventions. 
 ** Dilapidations, Reparation of Churches, Probate of Teftamen,ts, 
 *« Adminiftration and Accounts upon the fame. Simony, Inceils, 
 ** Fornications, Adulteries, Solicitation of Chaftity, Penfions, 
 ** Procurations, Appeals in Ecclefiaftical Caufes, Commutation 
 ** of Penance. 7'hefe, and fuch other Caufes as do not belong 
 ** to the Cognizance of the Common Laws oi England, are to be 
 ** determined and decided by Ecclefiaftical Judges according to 
 •* the King^s Ecclefiaftical Laws of this Realm." In this'Rcfo- 
 luiion there are feveral remarkable Things maintained by thefe 
 Reverend Judges: i. That an Authority to ojft^n Juch natural- 
 horn Suhjefii, as the King or f^een Jhall think jit, for the exer' 
 dfing all Manner of Ecclejiajtical furifdiclion^ and for the re- 
 forming and cor reeling all Maimer of Herefcs, SchifmSy Offences, 
 &C nxhich hy any Spiritual or Ecclefafical Ponver or Authority 
 tan or may he laiv fully reformed or ordered \ that fuch an Autho- 
 rity ^ru^j, or of right ought to he, hy thi nncient La-vjs of this 
 Realm, Parcel of the King's Jiirifdicliony and united to his Im- 
 ferial Cro^-vn ; and avhieh Iwvjftdly had heen^ and might he, ex* 
 srcifed ^.vithin the Realm. Now by qualifying their Affcrtion 
 within this Di<jund^ive, that al) this had lanvfully been or migbl 
 he exercifed, it is plain that the Judges were fcnfible the Regal* 
 had noi been always carried out to this Extent r unlef* they knev^ 
 tiiis, we muft fuppofe them ftrangely ufiacquatnted with the Hif- 
 tory of former i'ime^. 2. It is refolved by all the Judges,, that 
 if the St^iute of i Elisc. cap. \. had never been enaded, the 
 Croan might have maoe luch an Ecclefiaftical Commiffion, and 
 ereOed fuch a Court as gave Judgment ?.gainft Caudrey. And if 
 fn, this Acl /or reftoring the ancient JurifdiSion to the Crcwn 
 ictms, as to this Branch at Icaft, altogether unnecefiary. Upon 
 the whole, it muft be faid that this Decifion declares ftrongly fot 
 the Prerogative. 3. The Reverend Judges found this Force and 
 Extent of the Regale upon the Abfolutenefs of the £nglrfb Mo- 
 narchy ; they make it a Crown-Jewel, and a Quality eiiential to 
 Civil Sovereignty. Now it ia well ksowc, that the ^amein Empe- 
 ror* 
 
Chap. XVIII. Of the Church (/England. 123 
 
 rors were much more abfolute, than the Kings of England have 
 besn at leail for fome laie Centuries. Therefore if the Regale, 
 with the Compafs above-mentioned, is a neceffary Branch of the 
 Prerogative Royal, it will follow by inevitable Confcqnence, that 
 al! the Heathen Emperors from Tiberius to Conjiantine the Great, 
 had a Right to exercife all Manner of Ecclefajiical Jurijdiaion^ 
 and to "jifit, reform^ and correSi all Hertfies, Schi/rns^ Offences, 
 6cc. <ii'hich by any Manner of Spiritual or Ecclejlajiical Pcwer or 
 Authority can^ or may he laix: fully executed or redreffcd. And 
 thus thofe Princes, who are no Members of the Spiritual Society, 
 muft be Heads of it ; and thofe. who profefs their Difbelief of the 
 Chriftian Faith, have the whole Government and Difcipline of the 
 Church lodged in their Hands : And by this Reafoning, il^ey may 
 credt a Court of Pagan Commiffioners to exert EcclcfiaRical Cen- 
 fures, and pronounce in Cafes of Herefy and Schifm. Now 
 whether this Way of arguing can be reconciled to the Ccminif- 
 iion granted by our Saviour to the Apoftles and their Succcabrs, 
 to the Praaice of the Primitive Church, and to the Perpetuity 
 of the Chriftian Religion, the Reader muft judge 51. 
 
 The laft Aa of Q: Elircaheth^ Regal Ecdefiaflical Supremacy, 
 which I {hall take Notice of, is the Suipenfion of Marmaduke Mid- 
 Meton BiOiop of S. Danjid's from his Office and the Exercife of Ec- 
 elefiaftical Jurifdiaion by the High-Commiffion Court 5?. 
 
 And thus wehavefeen, that this Female Supreme Governor 
 of the Church of England exercifed EcclellaPucal Jurifd.a.on as 
 iully, extenfively. and Papally, as ever her Father and Brother 
 )iad done before her. 
 
 The only remarkable Inftance of this Kind that I meet with 
 in he Reign of King Ja,nes I. is h.s Majelly's p.(penfa. on 
 granted to Archbiftop Mbc. on the account of any I'^g^lar. y, 
 I iofpicion of Irregularity, that might be charged upon h.m for 
 hai.nrhad the Misfortune to commit a cafua Hom.cde. By th-s 
 inH,^^,ent the Canons, in cafe there was Need, are over-rulcd and 
 }nltru.v.CTi > o(Ahhi>l'% CharaSer is revited, and he 
 
 f:S refto,^d-to the" Exercifes of his Funaio. This is a won- 
 derM Relief from the Crown, and fuppolis a Patriarchal at leall. 
 5f not a Papal. Authority veiled m the Kmg S,. 
 
 ..:1 54 p- 735. c. *, 
 
1-24 The L A TM A ISTs APOLOGY''. 
 
 ** bernacle, E/IJIm in the Waters, Zacharlas in the Temple 5 
 " give him Peter's Key of Difdipline, and Paul's Dodrine. '* 
 
 J^tfof Archbifhop of CTnterhury having fallen under the King^s 
 Difpleafurc, his M.fjcfty AiTpended him from his Archicpifcopal 
 Fundion 55. But it nuifl be confefTed, that this Revocation of 
 the Powers of the Hierarchy pa rely by the Force of the Re- 
 gale, looks like a Modern VVay of Proceeding. The Difcipline 
 of rhe Ancient Church was conveyed through another Channel. 
 7"he Council of Antloch mentions a Synod as a proper Judica- 
 lijre for the I'rial of a Bifhop, as to Spiritual Caufes ; neither 
 doe? it fo much as fuppofe there could be any other. And by the 
 Coa'«;cil of C^^/v/'-r^f it is decreed, that in cafe a Bifhop is re- 
 ported a Criminal, and a Synod cannot conveniently be called, 
 he fhall be tried by twelve Bifiiops. By the way, both thefe 
 Councils were held under Chrirtian Princes, and yet the Fathers 
 ordered, that the Proceis againic a Bilhop (hould be managed by 
 thofe of his own Order. It was not then the Cultom for Princes 
 10 lay any Penalties upon BiHiops unlefs for Crimes againtt th^ 
 State. '^\M 35 to Failures in their Fun6lion, Ecclefiafticks only were 
 to take Notice of fuch Matters. Thus, for Inlhince, S. Chryfo- 
 
 Jlom was depofed by a Synodical Sentence. Arcadius the Empe- 
 ror, iho' willing to get rid of him, did not think fit to arreft 
 his Jurifdiction, or filence his Preaching, by exerting the Regale. 
 •Sue!) Proceedings were altogether unprecedented in that Age : 
 
 • Tj)e Church at that Time of Day would have been extreamly 
 furprized to fee a Prince fuperfede a Spiritual Commiflion, unde- 
 rivcd from him 56. 
 
 before the King hid publiilied his Proclamation for introducing 
 the Liturgy in Scotland, {ome of the Scotch Bifliops wrote to /,^7^^ 
 Archbifhop o^ Canterbury to folicit his Ma jelly, that the publifhing 
 the Book might be poi^poned to a more feafonable juntiure : But 
 o'the-s of them were more fanguine, and wrote to the Archbifhop, 
 p'-efiing for Execution and Difpntch. Upon this Laud procured a 
 Warrant from the King, commanding the Scotch Biihops to go for- 
 ward ivirh the Undertaking at the utmoll Hazard ; threatning them 
 withal, that in Cafe they moved languidly, and threw in unnecef^ 
 fary Delay?, the King would remove them, and fill their Sees with 
 Men of more Zeal and Refolution 57. 
 
 About five Months after the Refloration of King Charles II. his 
 MajeUy puDiillied a Declaration concerning Ecclefiaflical Affairs, in 
 which befides promifing feveral Alterations in the Government of 
 the Church, he difpenfes with the Sign of the Crofs "in Baptifm, 
 V/Jt]) bowing at the Name oi Jifus, the Ufe of the Surplice, the 
 
 Subfcription 
 
 55' ?• 74^- c. -• ^6 p. 741 cv;i, 57 V. 773. c, s p. 771. c. j^- 
 
Chap. XVIIL Of the Church of England. 125 
 
 Subfcription required by the Canon, and the Oath of Canonical 
 Obedience. Thus did this Declaration carry the Prerogative to an 
 extraordinary Extent, and feems to reach ii;to the Eufinefs of Sy- 
 nods, over-rules the Canons, and difables the Difcipline of the 
 Church 5S. 
 
 And, laftly, in the Reign of King J^rw^/ II. ( for I (hall carry 
 this /Account no lower ) it is well known, thatCompfort Bifhcp of 
 London was fufpended from his Office and Jurifdidlion by the High 
 Comnjiflion Court, which aded merely by Vertue of Royal Au- 
 thority. 
 
 From all that has been fild, I think it plainly appe?\rs, Firfl, 
 That according to our Conftitution and by the Laws of the Realm 
 
 1. All Manner of Spiritual Jurifdiftlon, formerly exercifed in 
 
 Englandy does now belong to the King. 
 
 2. All Spiritual Jurifdidion exercifed by any Subjeft in En^- 
 
 landy is held and exercifed from, by, and under the 
 King. 
 
 Secondly, That the Church of England having incorporated all the 
 Laws of the Realm, relating to the Regal Supremacy in 
 Caufes Ecclefiaftical, into her Caoons, is juftly chargeable 
 with the two foregoing Pofition?, which are therefore 
 to be looked upon as herpubllck, flated, and authorized 
 Poitrine, 
 
 But to this is objeaed the following QueRion in the Ordinal of 
 the Church of England, put to Bifhops at their Confecration : 
 
 *• Will you ■ and fuch as be unquiet, difobedient, and cri- 
 
 ♦• minous within your Diocefs, corred and punifh, according to 
 *• fuch Authority as you have by God's Word, and as to you fhall 
 *' be committed by the Ordinance of this Realm ? " From 
 hence it is argued, that the Church of ^V-^w// maintain?, that 
 B.idtiops have Authority by God*s Word to corred and punilh, that 
 is, that they have by Divine Right Power to excrcife Spiritual Jurlf- 
 didlion'; that the Ordinal being confirmed by Aft of ParliamenC, 
 this is confeqaently agreeable to the Law of the Land ; and there- 
 fore that the Dodrine both of Church and State is not Eraftian^ 
 but Orthodox. But this feeming inconfillency is eafiiy reconciled 
 bv ArchbiOiop Laud's Words in his Speech in the Star Chamber, 
 lune i6th. 1637. " Our being Bifhops by Divme Right takes 
 ^ •'' " nothing 
 
 5? p. 874; S75, S76.. 
 
126 The LATMdN's APOLOGX. 
 
 *! nothing from the King's Power and Right over us ; For tho* oiir 
 " Office be from God and Chriji immediately, yet may we not cxer- 
 ** cife that Power either of Order or Jurifdiftion, but as God hath 
 ** appointed us, that is, not in his Majefty*s or any Chriftian King's 
 '* Kingdoms, but by and under the Power of the King, given us 
 " (o to do 59." And this muft needs be the true Senfe of the 
 Church of England i for otherwife (he muft be fuppofed to maintain 
 both Sides of a Contradidion ( and confequently mull be hecefTarily 
 Erroneous ), and to excommunicate Pcrfons by her fecond Canon 
 for what (he is guilty of herfelf in her Ordinal. But this Diflindion 
 of Ecclefiaftical Offices being Divine in the Inftitution, tho' Secular 
 in the Conveyance ; of the Power of the Keys being from our Sa- 
 viour, but the Exercife from the Civil Magiftrate ; has been con- 
 iidcred above, and fhewn to be merely evafive, and not capable of 
 removing the Charge of Eraftiani/m, efpecially when taken in 
 Conjundlion and Reconciliation with fo many Afls of Parliament, 
 which the Church oi England has made her own by her fec-ond 
 Canon. And indeed fhe has ever aifted agreeably to the Eraftian 
 Dodlrine, which fhe has taught ; For has Ihe not always fubmitted 
 to the King as Supreme Ordinary ? Do not all her Bifhops in their 
 Oath of Homage confefs, that they hold the Spiritualties, as well 
 as Temporalities, of their Bifhopricks from the Crown 60 ? And 
 has Ihe not, from the Reformation to the Revolution, yielded ta. 
 All the Lay-Deprivations of Bifliops without Remonftrance, and 
 acknowledged the Intruders ? 
 
 Upon the whole, the Doftrine of the Church of England upon 
 this Point has been here proved to be entirely inconfiftent with and 
 contrary to that of the Independency of the Churchy which in the be- 
 ginning of this Difcourfe was laid down to be a Fundamental Truth, 
 And as the Doflrine of the Papal Supremacy in the Church of Rome 
 is erroneous and dangerous, the Pradlice of it Ufurpalion, and the 
 Impofition of it afufficient Ground for Separation ; fo, I am afraid, 
 the Doftrine of the Regal Supremacy in the Church of England is 
 equally erroneous and moredangerous, the Pradlice of it Sacrilege 
 as well as Ufurpation, and the Impofition of it a good reafon for 
 withdrawing from her Communion. I pray God reform both 
 Churches, in all Refpeifts, agreeably to ihe Ancient and Univerfal. 
 that is, the truly Catholick, Church of Chrift. 
 
 Arnica Ecclefia Graeca, 
 
 Arnica Ecclefia Romana, 
 
 Arnica Ecclefia Jnglicana, 
 
 Sed raagis Arnica Veritas. 
 
 31ft May, 1745. 
 
 PHILALETHES CATHOLICUS. 
 
 59 P- 774- «• s« ^fci<i» I*eco^d«» P* 53. ^' »• 
 
Chap. "XVIII. Of the Church of England: 127 
 
 Thu? far the Difcourfe upon the King*s Ecclefiaftical Suprema- 
 cy, which, I think, has fufficiently proved the error charged upon 
 the Church of England in the beginning of this Chapter ; and 
 therefore I fliall fay no more upon the Subject, but proceed. 
 
 CHAP. XIX. 
 
 Of the \tiecelJIty of the Mixture of JVlyie 
 \. muUFatcr in the Euchariftick Cup. 
 
 f W\ HAT the Reformation of the Church of England 
 8 from that of Rome in the reign of K. Edward VI. was 
 
 B^ far from being compJeat, is but too evident from the 
 "^ lalt Chapter. Bur, alafs ! giving that exceflive ftretch 
 of power, which was then taken from the Biihop of Rome, to a 
 Lay-T^Ian, was not the only inftance, in which our Reformers erred. 
 It is true, they reilored the Cup to the Laity, but did they not re- 
 ject the Mixture of the heavenly Wine f Since feme have pretended 
 that they did not, I willdifcuis that point in the next Chapter : in 
 this I will enquire, whether it ought not to be retained by the 
 Rule, whicfe w? are to be governed by. Certainly it ought r for 
 
 .^5r^.e Eucharift is a Sacrament generally ncceffary to Salvation, 
 
 ,: jhc Matter of the Eueharift is necefiary to the Eucharift. 
 
 Thofe elements are the Matter of the Eucharifl, which our Sa- 
 riour inflituted lo be fo. 
 
 Thofe elements, which our Saviour ufed at the inflitution of 
 the Eucharift, which he confecrated and delivered, are the ele- 
 ments, which he inftituted to 6e the Matter of the Eucharifl. : Do 
 THIS (fays he) in remembrance of me. 
 
 Bnad htiectffiry to the Eucharifl for this reafon. 
 
 fyine is a nsceflary ingredient of the Cup for chis reafon. 
 
 ; ? . ' And 
 
1^7 i:\it layman's apologt. 
 
 And if it can be proved, that our Saviour made Ufe of PFater, 
 as well as IVitif ; then IFaUr will be a neceflary ingredient of ihe 
 Cup for the fame Reafon. 
 
 Now, that the Cup, which cur Saviour u/ed at the Inftitution 
 of ihc Eucharift, confifted of Wifze mixed nvith IVatsr^ will ap- 
 pear from the following confiderations. 
 
 It was, and is, the cufiom of that country where our Saviour 
 lived, and of the other Eailern countries, to drink their Wine 
 mixed. 
 
 Our Saviour inftituted the Holy Eucharift, when he was cele- 
 brating the Jewifh PalTover, and fettled the former upon a refcm- 
 blance with the latter : He made ufe of the Pakhal Cup upon 
 this occafion ; for he calls the Euchaiirtick by the fame name in 
 S. Matthew and S. Mark, by which he calls the Pafchal Cup in 
 JS. Luke, and S. Paul calls it the Cup of Blejjlng^ by which name 
 the third Cup in the PalTover was peculiarly called. This was 
 never dil'patcd, not the contrary ever ?.flerted. The Pafchal Cup 
 was tnixedy as is plain from the body of the Jev/ifh laws, and 
 from the writings of their Rabbies, and the reil of the learned 
 world. And all thefe particulars are acknowledged, declared, 
 and proved by fome of the moil eminent Divines of the Church 
 of England : from whence it follows, that our Saviour's Eucha- 
 rillick Cup muil necellirily be mixed. 
 
 Let us now fee what the Scripture fays coacerning this Mix- 
 ture. 
 
 Chrift is called fey S. Paul (a) the Wifdom of God: And the 
 Holy Ghoft in the Old Tellament fpeaking ot this eternal Wif- 
 dom, and of that difpenfation of religion which he was to infti- 
 tate and elbbliHi in the World, fiys ; (b) " Wifdom hath 
 *• builded her Houfe : ihe hath hewn out her (even pilUrs j Ihe 
 *•' hath killed her beads ; llie hath mingled her Wine ; fhe hath 
 
 *' alio furnifbcd her Tabic ^fl?e crieth Come, eat of my 
 
 " ^rv'ad, and drink of the Wine which I have mingled/* Ex- 
 pofuor-: refer thefe texts to the Chrillian difpenfation, and more 
 pariiculariy to the Eucharill. 
 
 The next text which I flu^ll quote, is taken from the Inftitu- 
 tion itfelf, where our Saviour fiys of the Euchariilick Cup : (c) 
 
 - This 
 
 (>>) I Cvr, i, 24, (b) Prov, ix, i, i, 3, ;» (c) S, Mauh.. 
 
Cliap. XIX. Of the Church of E n g l a n d . 129 
 
 " This is my Blood of the Nevv'Tc-ilament, which is died for 
 " many for the-remifiion of litu." We ail know, tijai ore chief 
 dcfign of this Hoiy Sacrament was to give us a lively figure of 
 Clirilt's pajfTion and death upon the crofs : The Bread reprefcnts and 
 exhibits to iis his Body brol^en or pierced for us ; the Cup his 
 Blood, not as flov^'ing in his veins, but as efFufcd for us on the 
 crofs. This is wy Blood JJjed. Now all the accoant thnt we h.'ive 
 in ScriptHre of his Blood being fhcd on the crofs, i§ this : (d) 
 " One of the foldiers v^ith a fpear pierced his fide, and forthwith 
 ** came thereout Blood and Water." And the Ch-arch of Eng- 
 land in her office of Pablick Saptifin of Infa.nts declare?, " that 
 *' Chrifc did 9rx(;^ out of his moll precious fide both Water and 
 *' Bloof! for the forgivenefs of fins." Since therefore his Natural 
 Blood, which was fhed for the reinifiion of fins, v,as accompanied 
 with Water ; and fmce his Sacramental Blood was to reprefent his 
 Natural, as (hed upon the crofs : it follows plainly, that the 
 latter was, like the former, accompanied with Water; that is, 
 the Euchariilick Cup at the Inftitution confided of Water as well 
 as Wine. 
 
 This is further evident from S. Paul, who f^iys : [e] " As often 
 ** as ye eat this Bread, and drink chiS Cup, ye do {hew the 
 •* Lord's deaih, till he come." 
 
 The lart argument, which I (hali urge from Scripture, is c r 
 Saviour's calling the Euchariilick Cup (f) the fruit of the Hjint^ 
 And here it mull be confidered, that our Saviour was a Jew, was 
 fpeaking to the Jews, and was inftitiuing a facrv-ment upon a rc- 
 femblance with tbe Jevvifli paflover : Now the Jews called V/ine 
 and Water the fruit of the ^jine ; and particularly at the PaiTover^ 
 after they had mixed the Pafchal Cups, they faid, BlclTedari thou^ 
 
 Lord, n.vho created the fruit of the ^ine. Thisj's acknowledged 
 by the Learned Divines ot the Church of England : and accord- 
 ingly we find, that our Saviour cal'ed tne Pafchal Cup, which (as 
 
 1 obfcrve) was mixed, (g) the fruit of the 'vine \ and foon after he 
 calls the Euchariilick Cup by the fame Name; What th°n could 
 he mean but the fame Thir:g ? that is. Wine and Wacer, for 
 I'hat was the Pafchal, Cap and the fruit of the 'vine- la the Jews 
 
 language. Since then the Pafchal Cup was mixed ; fmce 
 
 tha'c mixed Paichal Cup was called the fruit of the ^ine ; fjnce th.ac 
 phrale in the Jewiih language Hgnificd Wi;ie a^id- Water ; fmce cur 
 Sav'joar called his mixed rcTlchiil Cup and his EucnariiUck Cup br 
 
 R that 
 
 (c) S. Matth. xxvi. ^3: 
 
 (d 5. John, xir, 34. (^^; i Go- r. xi. »6 
 
 (f) o. Malih. >:xv:. 29. ( 
 
 M S. Luke, xKUc J8« 
 
130 Th^ LjrMjrrs jfologt. 
 
 ^hat very term ; and fince in faO his Euchsriftick Cup wa? niixed^ 
 ^s appears from what I have faid and (hall fay : it plainly follow?, 
 that by fruit of the 'vine our Saviour mufl neceffirily mean Wint 
 and Water, and coald not poflibly mean Wine alone. 
 
 Thus much for the Scripture part of the argun:)ent : I cfcme 
 now ro tiie do(!hine and piaflice of the Primitive Catholick 
 Church, as to our Law and our I'efliniony. 
 
 . S Juuin Martyr, in his Apology pi efentcd to the Emperor in 
 *the name of the Chrhiians, gives this account : [hj " Then we 
 '*\a.ll rife up together, and pray : and prayers ben:)g over, Bread 
 .*' i-& brought and Wine and Wet sr \ and the Prclu'-ent fends up 
 **• prayers and thankjgivings v/ith all his might, and the people 
 •** conclude with the joyful acclamation of Jmai. Then he con- 
 •' fecrated tiemcnts are diUributed to, and part-'ken oi by, all 
 " that are prefenr, and font to the abfcnt by the hands of the 
 ** Deacons." And a little before in the Tame Apol< gy he fpeaks 
 thus: *' The Euchr.riliick ofhcfc or Conftcration being thus per- 
 
 •' formed, thofe we call Deacons, diilribute to every one 
 
 " prefcnt to partake of the confecrated Bread and Wine and Wa- 
 *' ter ; and then they carry it to the ablcnt. This food we call 
 ** the Eucharill^' 
 
 S. Ircr.?eus copfutirg fome hereticks, fays : (ij «* How could 
 '* the Lord, if he was the Son of another Father, than him bjf 
 ** whona we wf re created, take Bre<^d and declare it to be his 
 •* T>Oi\y, nnd affirn: the Mixture of the Cup to be his Blood >'■ 
 An-1 fpeaking of the Ebionite?, another fort of hereticks, he fays : 
 " (,';' For t hi':- renfon they reject the Mixture of the heavenly 
 ■' Wiivr, and only make wi^ of Water, excluding God from their 
 '• rvi;;:tiirt'/' And again (/) " The mixed Cop and the Bread 
 ** after coniecration become the Eucharill of the Body and Blood 
 *' of Chrifi/' 'ihe lail p^fl^^ge here to be produced from S. .Ire- 
 n:car, rTers to the text, where our vSaviour callb the Cup the fruit 
 oj'the^ine: " This alfo (fays this Saint) was taught by our 
 '■' Lord, when he pror):fed, that he would drink the mixed Cup 
 "■ Ti's\\ with his dikiples in his kingdom (7//).'* 
 
 S. Clement of Alexandria declares cxprefly, (n) '* That the 
 ' Legos or eternal Son cf God ordered the blood of the grape 
 
 ** to 
 
 (h) Jufl. Man. Apol. i. §87. p. 131. edit. ^rr.b. (/; Iren. sdvers, 
 h.Arrcs. 1.4. c. 57. {h) 1. 5. c 1. (i) ibid. c. 2. {m) 
 
 .lb.i. c. 56. [v) Clem. Ale::, radag-^g. 1. a, c. a. p. 65. edit. S>i- 
 
 bu'.g. vol, I. p. 177, c<;it» Potter^ 
 
Chap. XIX. Of the Church of En gland. 131 
 
 *' to be mixed nvlih iva/e^^, as his own blood has hanpineCs or 
 
 " falvation incorporated with it." After which he gceVon thus : 
 
 ** Now the blood of our Lord is twofold ; d.e one carnal by 
 
 " which we are rcdeeoied from death, the other fpirituaj where- 
 
 " with we are anointed : and to drink the blood of" Chriii, is tx) 
 
 *' partake of our Lord*s immortality. For the Spirit is the iifc- 
 
 " giving principle of the Logos, as the blood is of the ilVa. As 
 
 *• then the Wine is mixt n,vith the Water, fo is the Spirit with 
 
 ** man : The one, namely the Mixture, leads us into faith; buc 
 
 •* the other, which is the Spirit, conduits us to immortal jif^j.,— ^..^ 
 
 *' Now the mixture of thefe\wo, the Drink and the Log^^ll"''^.^. 
 
 " named the Eucharid." ^r "-^^I^X 
 
 J he holy Martyr S. Cyprian wrote an epiflle againfl theScp^?^^ .>4.^5 v 
 mous pradJce of fome few Bifhops., who for fear of being dlfc-o^^lA3V*^' 
 vered by the fme'l of Wine, adminilticd the Cup in the morning 
 v^'ith Water only. In this epiUIc are the following p.-^iTages, which 
 alone are enough CO put this matter beyond all ciifpute, the' the 
 Father wrote this fpiille only to (liew the Neccffity of Wine, {o) 
 •* In offering up the Cup (fays he) let the Lord's tradition be ob- 
 *' ferved, and let the fame thing be done by us, as cur Lord £rll 
 *• did for us, that i?, let the Cup which is offered in commem©- 
 " ration of him, be offered mixed with Wine." Afterwards 
 ipeaking of Melchizedeck^s bringing cut Bread and Wine, he fays : 
 ** (p) Which thing our Lord perfcrmed and fulfilled, when 1^ 
 *■' offered Bread and a Cup mixed with Wine." And then quo- 
 ting the tfxt in the Pro-rej-bs xix. i 5. whUlli 1 mentioned a- 
 
 bove, Wifdom hath huilded her houfe ; Jl.^e kath he-ivn out her Je^ven 
 pillars ; jhe hath killed her heajls ; the hath mingled her njjine ; 
 
 Jhe hath lalj'a furniped her table ; ■ — J}:>e crieth ■■ " ■ Come, eat 
 
 of my Bread y and drink of the Wine ivhich I hwvs minoled i he 
 fays : [q) " The Holy Ghofl dtTigned this for a type of our 
 ** Lord'o facrifice of Bread and Wine. The mingle^ Wine de- 
 •' cl.ires, that is, prophetically points at our Lord's Cup mixt 'ucitb 
 ** Wine and Water^ that it may appear, that the fame thing was 
 ** adeu at our Lord's paffion, which was before foretold." And 
 again '- { r ) *' Chrill both by his pradice and command taught, 
 *' that the Cup fhould be tnixed nvith Wine afid Water."'* And 
 then referring to the inftitution of the Euchariil mentioned by S. 
 Matthew, and quoting the text of the fiiiit of the njine, he fays : 
 ** (s) In whicii paii'cige we nnd, that it wa? a mixed Cup, whicl> 
 
 •* our Lord oflered. Our Lord's facrifice is not rightly con- 
 
 •' fccraied and ccIebraLed, unlefs our oblation and facrifice anfwcr 
 
 R 2 to 
 
 fo) CvprJan. cpiiT-. ad C.-scil. p. x49>. edit. Oxon. (p) Ibid. p. 120. 
 
 ■fy ^^•'^' (--; i^id. p. 115. (0 p. J 59' 
 
3;2i Tat Lj^r MAlSI's AFOLOGT. 
 
 *' to his priiTion. But bovv fliall we drink new wine o/" r/:*/? ftuit 
 *' 9^ /^^i? 'z;/w with Chrili in his Father's kingdom, if in the facri- 
 *' fice of God the Father and Chrilt we do not oiFer Wine, nor 
 " ?;7/^ the Cup accorcir.g to the Lord's tradition? For if it be 
 " commandc'd by our Lord, and the iame thing be confirmed and 
 ** delivered by his iApofiles, that as often as we drink in comme- 
 " morationof our Lord, we do what our Lord did ; then we 
 " cannot be faid lo obferve what he commanded, unlefs we cio 
 *' the fame thing which our Lord did, and by mixing the Lord's 
 " Cup as he did, recQaa not from his divine command." Again : 
 '* {i) The conjunfcion of IVater and Wifie is fo mixed in our 
 *' Lord'^f. Cup, that That Mixture cannot be divided, nor the 
 things fepnrated fro^n each other. In fandlifying the Lord's 
 Cup, as iVins along may not beoiTered, fo neither may Water 
 
 ;-']one. —The Cup of the Lord is not Water alone, nor 
 
 IVine ahne^ but both mixed together. If in the f'Crifice-" 
 
 which Chnll offered, none but Chrill is to be followed, we mull 
 then hearken to, arid do what Chrift did, and what he com- 
 ** manded to be done." Again : [u) " If Jefus Chrift, our Lord 
 **" ard God, is himfelf the h:gh-priett of God the Father and firft 
 offered himftlf a fxr-.-fice to the Father, and commanded, this 
 '* to be cone in commemoration of him ; certamly that Prielt 
 who iiiiir.ates what Cbrii: did, performs his office rightly, and 
 ** {l?.v,n'^ in Chriu's place, '6.vA then offers to God the Father a 
 true and full facriiice :»• tiie Church, when he otFers what Chrift 
 hiniu;if ofr'er«?u." Again: f-i'j) " After fupper our lord of- 
 fered a «/.vt\v Cup : and becaufe we make mention of his Paf- 
 fjon in all our facrifices (for the facrifice v^hich we offer, is our 
 Lorc]\« Padion), we ought to do the fame that he did. For the 
 '* Scripture iays, Ai offert as ye eat this Bread andd^rink this Cup^ 
 "' je do fcQnxj the Lord'' s deaths till hz come. As often therefore 
 a" we C'fter the Cup in comir.emoration of our Lord and his 
 Pailion, let as do wJiat our Lord appears to have done." The 
 \d\y Father concludes hk epi/tle thus: [x) " It is therefore 
 '*■ mod agreeable to our Religion and godi) fear, and to the place 
 ** find office of our prieilhood, u\y dear brother, to preferve the 
 *' truih of our Lord's tradition \'y tJiixing-aSid. offering the Cup, and 
 reform upo.n divine admoi'.i.ion the error into^ v.'hich fome have 
 fallen, t,hac when he fi-iall corns in his glory and heavenly majclly, 
 be may iirid us abiding by what he has direi5ted, obierving 
 what 'he has taught, and practifmg^ what he has prailTtiled 
 '* himiclf." 
 
 Afccr this, it feems ahr.oft needlefs to produce S. Bafil, S. Au- 
 guili-n, and Thcodorct, the council of Carthage an, 397, the 
 
 fourth 
 
 (0 p. 154. (v) p. .155. (.y) p. J. 6. (:,^ p. j^.. TLl! 
 
 tuiiic bcgiusat p. 173. in Di. MarfaaU's ifigllfh Xranflation. 
 
Chap. XIX. Of the Church of England. 133 
 
 fourth council of Orleans an. 541, the fourth of Bracara an, 675. 
 However I fhall quote the Qainifext council in IVulIo, the fixth 
 General Council, held in the year 692, at which two hundred 
 Biihops were prefent. The thirty fecond canon is a decree againft 
 the Armenians, for ufing Wine alone in the EuchariAick Cup. 
 And here I defire the reader to obferve, that the only people who 
 ever pra<5iifed in this manner till Calvin's time, were condemned 
 by a General Council for doing fo, in thefe words ; 
 
 ** Forafmuch as it is come to our knowledge, that among the 
 *' Armenians they >vho perform the office of the unbloody facri- 
 ** £ce, oifer Wine alone upon the holy table, 7iot mixing Watsr 
 ** with it, and quote that Dodor of the Church John Chryfo- 
 *' flom fpcaking thus in his exp^fuion of the gofpel according to 
 ** S. Matthew : Wherefore did he not drink Water after he rofe, 
 *' hut Wine ? whereas he wrote to dellroy another impious he- 
 ** refy. For as there were fume who ufed Water in the myfte- 
 " ries, he Ihewed that our Saviour, both when hf delivered the 
 " mylteries, and when ?hitr his refurredion he partook of a com- 
 *• mon meal without the myfteries, ufed Wine, of the Jruit of 
 " ihen)ine^ fays he, but the 'vine produces Wijie not Water. And 
 ** whereas the Armenians think this paffage of the Doctor con- 
 ** demns the adding of Water in the holy facriiice ; that they 
 " msy not from this time henceforth be kept in ignorance, we 
 ** do orthodoxly declare the opinion of the Father ; Now there 
 ** was a wicked anci?nt herefy of the Hydroparallats, w\io in- 
 *^ Head of Wine uied only Water in their facriiice; and the di- 
 ** vine man is confuting the impious dodrine of this herefy, and. 
 ** fiiewing that it is diredly contrary to Apoftolical Tradition, 
 *' when he fays what is mentioned above. For in his own 
 " church, where he exercifed the paftoial adminiftration, he de- 
 *' livered down the pradice of rnixing Water with the Wine, 
 *' when the unbloody facriiice was to be ofiered^ as reprefenting 
 **: the mixture of Blood and Water flowing from the divine and 
 *' precious fide of our Redeemer and SavioUr Chriil -our God» 
 •* ^hich was fhcd for the redemption of the whole world and ths 
 *' cleanfinc» of fms. And in all churches, where the fpiritual lu- 
 ** minaries have fhincd, this divinely delivered order is obferved. 
 *' For both James, Chrift our Lord's brother according to ths 
 ** flefh, who iirft fat upon the throne of the church of Jerufa- 
 ** lem, and B^f}! Bifhop of Czefarea, whofe glory is fpread over 
 " all the world, have in their written Liturgies directed the holy 
 *' Cup to be mixed with Wine and Water. And .the hoi/ 
 " Fathers, who met at Carthnge, have exprefly declared, that 
 " in the facrament of our Lord'5 Body and Blood nothing more 
 ** fhall be ofrered, than what the Lord hiinfelf delivered, that is, 
 ^' Bread and Wine mixed with Water, U then any Bifliop or 
 • "" ■ ' ' ♦' Prdbyter, 
 
1^4 The LATMAlJ's. APO LOGT. 
 
 *' Prefbyter does not officiate according to the Apoflles Ap- 
 
 *' pointment, if he does not mix Water with the Wine, whea 
 
 " he oiFers the unblemifhed facrificc ; let him be depf.^fed, as 
 
 ** one that reprefents the myllery ioiperfeftly, and innovates 
 
 ** upon what was delivered." 
 
 Let it fuffice to have produced thus much from Fathers and 
 Councils ; Now let us hear the Priefts of Jefus fpeakirg or ra- 
 ther addrefling to God Almighty in the highell circumibnces 
 of folemnity, when confecrating the holy Eucnariil, 
 
 " Likewife alfo having mixed the Cap vvith Wine and V/ater, 
 *' and bleffed it, he gave it to them, fa) ing, Drink ye ail of it, 
 ** This is my Blood, &:C." Clementine Liturgy^ as ii Jfands in the 
 Apojlolical Conflitutions, 
 
 *' Likewife after fupper he took the Cup, and mixed it with 
 '■* Wine and Water, and looking up to heaven, and prefenting it 
 ** to thee his God and Father, he gave thankf, fanCiified, iind 
 •' blefled ic, and iilled it vvith the Holy Gholt, and g.:ve it to his 
 *' difciples, faying, Drink ye all of this. This it- my iSlood of 
 *'' the New Teiiament, &c." Liturgy of S. James fy). 
 
 If the Englifh reader Is defirous of feeing more of the Ancient 
 Liturgies thus fpeaking, let him confuh the L'olltcljon of Litur- 
 gies, publilhed 1720, with Bifhop Brett's DifTt-Tt.'! ion upon them, 
 where he will find anfwers to the obje<?iions thai have been made 
 againll their Authority. 
 
 I will only jufl obferve, that both the Eaftern and Wellern 
 Churches do ftill, and have all along continued to ufe the Mix- 
 ture, and declare it to have been our Saviour'.' pradice. Nay, ma- 
 ny learned Divines of the Church of England have acknowledged 
 the Mixture to have been the pradice of the Caiholick Church, as 
 the inftitution of Jefus Chnll {z). I think we have fufiiciently 
 proved it to be (o : And who then fhall give us eierjtal life, ci?;d 
 raifs us up at the laji day, upon other terms than thole which oar 
 Saviour has been pleafed to appoint ? 
 
 ( y) The Learned Scottlfh Prelate mentioned above in Chap. xiii. who leic 
 behind him this Ancient Liturgy with an Englifh Tranflation and nofes, hiis 
 fhewn the genuinencfs of this pafiage, and freed the Liturgy from all later ad- 
 ditions See alfo 5/>. Collier's Defence of the Rtafons, p. 105, ic6. Mr. 
 W.T£fta{fe's Neteffity of an Alteration, p. 64, 65. Bp, Collier's Vindication 
 oiR-afonsand Defence, part I. p. 28, 29^ (7i) See DifTertation on the 
 
 Liturgies. 
 
 C H A ?. 
 
[ ^35 ] 
 
 CHAP. XX. 
 
 That: the Church c/ Engl and rejeuis the 
 Afuxkire of JV]7ie and fVakr in the 
 Ezichariftkk Ci^j\ ■ 
 
 VERY one knows, that the prefent Church of England 
 p~*i has no where given any direction for this Mixture ; and 
 therefore ker Clergy have no more authority to put Water 
 to the SacrnrncTitai Wine, than Milk or any other liquor. 
 But this i& not al' •: Tne has not only omitted, but abiblutely rc- 
 jefled it : For in Uie iirfl Engliih Liturgy printed in the rei^n of 
 iCing Edsvard VL there was a Rubr'Ck ordering thus : •* Then 
 *♦ fhali the MiniRer take To much Bread snc! Wine, as fhall fuffice 
 *^ for the perfons appointed to receive the holy conin;union, Jay- 
 ** ing the Ert':,a upon the Corporas, or elfe in a Paten or in fome 
 ** other comely thing prepared for that purpole ; and putting the 
 " Wine into the Chalice, or clfe in fome fair and convenient 
 ** Cup prepared for that ufe (if the Chalice will not lerve}, putting 
 ** thereto a little pure and clean Water: and fetting both the 
 ** Bread and /^r//?^ upon the altar, &c." But in a review of this 
 book about two years after it was firfi publifiied, many things 
 were altered in it, and one of thofe was this Kubrick, in which 
 the order about the Water was left out, and thereby the Mixture 
 was entirely rijtfted j and that '* by interelled views, by foreign 
 ** diredUon, and Calviniftical alloy ;■"{«) For, **itw£sby the 
 ** interti^ of Bucer, Peter Martyr, and Fagius, and their parti- 
 ** zans. that the Water was excluded from the Sacramental Cup 
 *• in the Englifh Liturgy (^^)." 
 
 But fome have argued, that bccnufe the word Wine in the laft 
 part of the foregoing Rubrick fignifies mixed Wine, therefore the 
 fame word may in the prefent Rubrick have the fame meaning : 
 But notwithitanding what may be pretended to the contrary, me- 
 
 thinks- 
 
 (a) Bp. Collier's Defence of the Rcafoijs, p. bU. [i>) Bp. Brett's 
 
 Diffcrtation en the Liturgies, p. kig. 
 
136 The L AT MAlSl's APOLOGT. 
 
 thinks It is plain, that " every body that will but look upon the 
 '* two rubricks, 1/72;. the firft and the prefent, will immediately 
 *' fee that they are unlike, and not agreeable with one aaothcr, 
 *' and that therefore it is fallacious to pretend to argue from the 
 •* firli in favour of the latter. For the rubrick in the firlt liturgy 
 
 *' orders the Pried to put the Wine into the Chalice^ putting 
 
 *' thereto a little pure and clean Water ; and fetting both the Bread 
 *' and Wine upon the altar y &c. Here the language of the Church 
 ** is evidently of a Two-fold fignification in the fame word Wine : 
 ** The firft word fVine is fpoken of before and 'without any pre- 
 ** vious order for IVIixinsr, and therefore is Wine unmixed, and fo 
 *' would have remained Unmixed, if no Mixture had been en* 
 *' joined ; but the IVIixture is imnnediately afcer exprefsly order- 
 ** ed, and therefore Wine next following the Mixture, muit nc- 
 *' cefiarily be That Wine mixed : So that the fiift part of that ru- 
 ** brick is of Wine unmixed, becaufe no order yet for Mixing ; 
 *' ?ind the latter part of that rubrick is of ?nixed Wine, becaufe 
 *' it was juil before exprefsly ordered to be mixed. The rational 
 ** conclufion then from this rubrick is, that when the Church of 
 *•' England in her Communion Service fpeciks of the Sacramental 
 *' Wine, having not at all appointed it to be Mixed before, flie 
 *' then fpeaks of PFine unmixed', and when in her Communion 
 *•• Service fhe fpeaks of the Sacramental Wine, afcer fhe has ex- 
 ** prefsly ordered it to be Mixed, then flie fpeaks of Wine mixed 
 *• <wtth Water, tho' fhe fpeaks of it only by the word Wine, he- 
 ** caufe Wine is the largelt quantity of the ccmpcfuion. This is 
 "*' the true State of the cafe in the fird reformed liturgy : but the 
 ** liturgies after this, particularly fmce the laft review, have no- 
 ** thing of this advantage ; for the rubrick fmce that review is 
 ** only this. When ther^i is a communion, the Prief! Jhall then place 
 *' upon the table fo much Bread and Wine as he Oo all think fuf^ 
 "* ficient. There is no order before this for Mixing the Wine 
 •* with Water, therefore this Wine is not Mixed ; (as we obferved 
 '* jufc now on the firft part of the old rubrick : ) there is no order 
 *' afterwards for Mixing this Wine with Water in any part of 
 •' this rubrick, nor indeed in any other rubrick whatfcever, there- 
 ** fore the Wine before fpoken of ilili remains Unmixed. Thus 
 ** this rubrick is diffimilar, and altogether unlike the old one, 
 "' and therefore no argument can be drawn from the old rubrick 
 ** in favour of the new : the new rubrick rejedls and throws out 
 •* the order of the old rubrick for Mixing, therefore the new 
 ** rubrick fpeaks of no other than unmixed Wine. The Con- 
 ^' vocation that made this new rubrick, and therefore appointed 
 ** tha Rite or Ceremony of placing this Wme upon the table, pro- 
 '* cured a law of the State, prohibiting to uje any ether Rite, C:e- 
 *' remof^y, ^c. open/y or privately [ i Eliz and 14 Car. If.] ; 
 *' confequcntly this new rubrick, in conjundiion with the law of 
 ** the State, prohibits the Rite or Ceremony of Mixing the Wins 
 " wiih Water openly or privately. In Ihort, when wc are 
 
 " fatisf.cd. 
 
Cliap. XX. Of the Church of Y^nGhhUD, i^j 
 
 '* fatisfied, that a Church orders ar^d praflifes the Mixture ; thea 
 ** we may rationally conclude, chnt when ihs fpeab of tfus IViix- 
 ** ture by the one word IFine, fhe does it to avoid circumlocution 
 ** or round about langu-^ge, and fpeaks of the Whole by the 
 
 ** name of the Largeft quantity of the compofition.' But 
 
 ** when we are fure, that a Church not only reje^s and throws 
 *' out all order and rubhck for the prndice of the Mij^ture, but 
 ** a;Hb procures St-ate laws to prohibit it ; then we may depend 
 ** on it, thntail h«i;iyir'gs about her S;tcramental Wine amount 
 ** to no more thafflpeaking of ipr Vntnixid Wine. The cliflcrence 
 ** between thii; nIw rubric!-: and the Old one is fo palpable, that 
 ** it needs no farther enlargement ff^.'* 
 
 Again : ** It is plain, that the Church of England's 20th Ca* 
 ** non, which appoints the Sacramental Wine to be at the charge 
 *' of the pariih, cannot be fo ridiculous as to order her Church- 
 **. wardens to buy Wine mixed with Water ; and therefore the 
 ** 'Sacramental Wine there mentioned is pure umnixedlFpie ; and 
 ** «>o other than this Wine is by that canon appointed to be 
 •* brought to the Communion Table : For the Church has no where 
 ** ordered it to be Mixed, before it is brought thither ; and fmce 
 •* after it is there,(he gives no order for Pvlixing, therefore IViixing if: 
 •* with Water at any time, eith'.T before or after, is a Breach. 
 ** of this 20th canon : Becaufe further her 14th canon requires 
 
 *' Jll Minijlers to obfer-ue the Orders, Rites^ and Ceremonies 
 
 ** prefcrihed in the book of Common Prayer in adminillring the 
 
 •* Sacraments^ ^vithout adding avy thing in the Matter- 
 
 *• thereof; her i6th canon nvithout any Alteration ; and her 24th 
 ** nxiith fuch Limitation as is Jpecified in the book of Common Pray^ 
 *' er. Now the Limitation, as fpecified in the faid bock, is 
 *' IVine \ Wine not mixed, becaufe the rubrick is 7/(?-xu Wine, in 
 ** contradiilim'lion from and rejedion of the old rubrick for 
 ** Wine and Water, which the. 20th canon, as above, alfo con- 
 *' firms. Water therefore mixed therewith is a breach of this 
 ** Limitation in the 24th canon; Water, again, mixed with the 
 ** Wine is an alteration of the Wine by Mixture, and therefore 
 *' a breach of this 1 6th canon: And laRly, Water added to the 
 *• Wine is adding fomething in the Matter, which is a breach of 
 *♦ the 14th canon: And fa all thel"e [ 14th, i6th, 20th, and 
 *' 24lh ] canons ard broken by the mixing of Water v/ith the 
 ** Sacramental Wine, whether publickly or privately ; for the 
 *' Canons make no dillindion. But the Ad of Parliament i £11%, 
 " [confirmed by 14 Carol. 11, ] is fo diiiinguifhing, as that it 
 
 S " particularly 
 
 (;■ ; Iwd-Jpenfable Obligation of minifl-ring exprrf-^y ?.nd Enanlfeftly th« 
 
 r,i£a^ Nccelf.^r(c-s of Pubi'c'? WorJ:'p> \ 5'.. >• ''■. '->: ^.a. 
 
138 The LATM aN's A P L G I, 
 
 *' particularly condemns even the Private Mixture, by threatnin? a 
 
 *^ Penalty againd thofe, y^ho jhall ufe any other Rite. Ceremony, 
 
 Order, Form, or Manner of ce.ebraiing the Lord's Supper, openly 
 
 or privily, than is mentioned and let forth in the faid book 
 
 I' And furely a Rale for mi-ing Water with the Sacramental 
 ** VVine, even pri-vatehy is.^a Rite, is a Ceremo^iy, which can- 
 " not be found mentioned in the book of Ccrr.mon Prayer : For 
 •• the Legillators by this Adt do fuppofe, that a thing done pri- 
 •' 'cv/v, js a Rice or Ceremony, as nsuch as when it is done open- 
 
 Now the' there may be (as there has been) here ?.nd there a 
 Clergyman of (he Church of England, who having a value for 
 Antiquity (but, God knows, there are many who have not] rnay 
 i<i far depart from the rules of his own Church, as to ufe the 
 Y^^XK^^,^ pri'vily, and by the help of fubtile dilhndtions perfuade 
 Inmfdf (,f fuch a thing can be) that her conllitution may be con- 
 Jtrued to allow it j how many more Clergymen are tht4 of the 
 iame Church, who are fo far from uhng the^Mixture or h^V^s^ 
 jng tnat the Church allows it, that they praihfe and' bdicve Th« 
 ci;rect contrary ? And of- thefe there are a thoufand to one But 
 luppofing the odds lay on the other fide with refpeft to Number 
 n IS not fheir pri^uate conftrucliof), but the //^/« fl-^fe, the'iv^- 
 iuk determination of the Church, that they mult itand or fall 
 bv. Now - ,f an hondi^ common reader will but ferioufly pe- 
 ^^ rufe only the Communion Service of his Common Prayer 
 
 book he may without being a Doftor of Divinitv plainly fee 
 ^^ that there IS no injundion to rni:c Water with th^Sacranfental 
 
 - Zlt ^ r f '. ' '^r''" ""^ '^"' ''^^"''■^^ "^ Clerkflnp, no 
 
 - cCt'." f r'^''''''^"\/" ^^^' artof reafoning; induilrious 
 common feme [ impartially attended to ] is enough for this 
 
 - cncovery.- -The Church of England in the P:ef.ce [o her 
 
 - ^^:^^l^r ''''- '-' '''''' " '- ^''- -' -^y 
 
 Lnglandslrcfbytenan .uverfanes have reproached her ior pre- 
 tending to be governed by the Ancient Church, and yet d part- 
 .ng from her m this very pradice : (tho^ by the way this dTp" 
 ture was as above obferved. at the instigation of thofe Pref^v e 
 mns, who were the fathers of thefe].' The B.lhop quote^the 
 
 Learned 
 
 (d; Supplement to the Indifpenfable Obligation p 06 c.t \ r v 
 
 ineSuppienK-utcominued, p. 288 -jc ^ ''''"; f" 96, 97- See farther 
 
 ■'• 183, A§4, ,j. JB ilioD pirr'. °v^ . ■ ^'^ S'^PPi^ment continued. 
 
Chap. XX. Of the Church ^/England. 139 
 
 Learned Diflenter Mr. Pierce fpeaking thus : •* As to the anti- 
 
 ** quity of our adverfaries, if they will be confillcnt with them- 
 
 " ieives, while they pretend to be directed by Antiquity in rc- 
 
 " ftoringpurity tt) religi>on, why hiive they laid afide the Mixing 
 
 ** Water with the Wine in the Cup of the Lord's Supper, which 
 
 ** Jiidin Martyr, who flburiHied in the middle of the fecond 
 
 *' century, tefiiiies was in ufe in his time, and Cyprian in the next 
 
 *' age labours to prove to be abfoluteiy necefiary ? Thus (conti- 
 
 *• nucs the Bifhop) has the Church of England, by laying afidc 
 
 ** what the Primitive Cliurch believed necefiaiy, expofcd herfelf 
 
 ** to the reproaches of her adverfaiies, for the inconfiilency of 
 
 ** her practice with her received principles. And thofe who write 
 
 *' in her defence, and endeavour tolliew her conformity to the 
 
 *' Primitive Cliurch, have their mouths flopt by her adverfaries, 
 
 •' bccaufe fhe fo «/>/«;•£«//>' w^z^z/j the things we plead for, and 
 
 *' in particular the ivJixed Cup." Thus alio the learned writer, 
 
 whom [ hrvc fo ottcn mentioned, of the P^oman connmunion la- 
 
 mei-ts hii Church : (g) " It is even grievous to fee, how the 
 
 ** her. ticks often take occafion to reproach us for the fmall 
 
 ** efteem^ that we ourfelves have for Apoftolical Traditions (which 
 
 -«' yet we fo Lbopgfy hold againil them) by the fmall account 
 
 *' that we fcrm to niuke of them, and by the manner in which 
 
 ** w.e, negiecl many, which were formerly generally received and 
 
 ** moft ilridiy held.'' Would it not then be better for, is it 
 
 ' not the duty of, both thefe Churches to return from whence 
 
 they ?x't ta'len ? Yes verily. And, in the mean time, *' Meek- 
 
 ** j>ei5 pera^iis mc to feek out for fome purer Church (^).'* 
 
 (0;) C--utume de prier deboiit. torn. i. p. 12, 13* {h) See Dr. Ham* 
 njoiio's Pradurai Catechifm, lib. 2. §. 1, 
 
 C I-I A P. XXI. 
 
 Of the SeceJ/Uy of coiijidenng the Euchd-- 
 rift as a Sacrifice ^ and of offering h 
 by Oblatory Prayer. 
 
 SACRIFICE has been the Divine Service from the time, 
 that God Almighty was pleafed to promife the MffCah upon 
 the fall of Man. 
 
 S 3 The 
 
140 Th^LATMJN's A P O L O G 2^. 
 
 The facrifices before and under the Law were all figures of 
 that, which was to be offered by the promifed Meffiah ; and the 
 facrifice of the EachariHick elements, which he himfelf inUituted 
 when he began to cfier himfeif to his Father for the fms of all 
 men, (See above Chap. X.) is a Reprefentation or Commemora- 
 tive Oblation of it to God the Father, by which he is engaged CO 
 be propitious to his Church. 
 
 That facrifice was of divine inftitution under the Law, will not 
 be denied, and therefore it will be needlefs to dwell upon it. But 
 that the Chi'ilHan Eucharift \% ^ material Sacriflcg^ was firft de- 
 nied by Martin Luther and afterwards by "John Calvin ; and 
 their fancy has been patronized by fome learned men, who have 
 belrcd to fpread it's poifonous influence further ; but this has 
 given occpfion toother learned men to exhibit iucli remedies, as 
 do effcitually expel the rancour thereof, when duly applied. 5p. 
 Hickes ^^^^ Mr. John'fcn are allowed to have exhaufled the Sub- 
 je<^l, and \th the enemy unable to reply. An Epitome of what 
 they have faid may be feen in Bp. Brett's Dijfertatioti on the Li- 
 turgies^ p. 105 — 118. See alfo the Full, 7rue, and Cotnprehen- 
 jive Vieisj of Chrijilanity^ Lof:ger Catechifm, part 2. LeJJon 55. 
 f, 240, yc. 
 
 Taking it then for granted, that the Eucharift is a Sacrifice, we 
 :*:uft enquire whether it is not to be offered bv oblatory prayer. 
 The proof tf-:.u will be brought for the NecelTity of ciFering the 
 E^chariiiick element?, the Reprtfentative. Body and Blood of 
 Chrill, by fuch prayer, will by the way prove the Euchariit to 
 be a Sacrifice : for tho' the adverfar'ies pretend, that there may 
 be a Sacrifice withouc an oblatory prayer j yet they will not fa;^', 
 that there may be a Sacrificiai prayer of Oblation without a Sa* 
 'crifke. 
 
 To the point then : " If the praftice of the Patriarchs, of the 
 *' Jews, and Heathens ; if the cuftom of the whole world be fuf- 
 " ficient to give us a jufl idea of the nature of a Sacrifice, then 
 " we may infer the NecefTity of offering it by Prayer :" for 
 this has been abundantly proved by the author of The Unbloody 
 
 Sacrifice [a].' '* The holy fcriptures exprefsly inform us, 
 
 ** that our Lord LhJJed the Bread, and the learned author oi the 
 ** Defence ih) has proved from l^um. vi. 24. that hlejjing in the 
 ^' Scripture-language mz'MXii praying for a BlefTing, and that in the 
 
 *'moft 
 
 {a) Vo], 2. p- 8i, (b) p. 103, 
 
Cliap, XXL Of the Church ^/Fngland. i ^ i 
 
 *' mod ancient liturgy in the world the Oblation and Invocation 
 " are one continued Prayer : from whence we may very probably 
 ** conclude, that the Prayer of Oblation is contained in the word 
 ** BleJJlng ; and confequcntly that our Saviour, when he gave tha 
 •* Sacrament to his difciples, did make ufe of fuch a prayer (r)." 
 And then the Neceffity of the Church's doing fo now, will arift: 
 Irdm his command Do this. 
 
 But we are agreed to be ruled by what the Holy Church through- 
 e^ut ail the ^orld acknosivisdges. Let us hearken therefore to her 
 voice. Now the author of the Vie-M of Chrijlianity has given 
 us ample {d) teftimonies to our purpofe : 1 will therefore tran- 
 fcribe from his tranflation, and refer to his Appendix for the ori- 
 ginal citations, where I fuppofe the learned reader will find iheia 
 exaflly quoted. " The Apoltolical Conilitutions liave thefe words. - 
 V The firlt high-prieft by nature, Chrill the only begotten, ofter- 
 ** ed a fpiritual Sacrifice to his God and Father before his paj/ion'^ 
 S. Jullin Martyr alTerts, " that Chrift has by tradition inilruaed 
 ** us to offer the Bread and Cup for a Memorial of his pafhon.'' 
 And S. Irenaeus affures us, *' that when he faid ^ his is my Body^ 
 •* he taught the new Oblation of the NewXeltam'ent^:" and elie- 
 where he fays : •* Thofe who have attained to the .^kiio.wiecge of 
 ♦* the fccond Conftitutions of the Apoliles, know that the Lord 
 ^* has appointed a new Oblation in the New Teilament, according 
 •' to that of Malachi the prophet." Now it is certain, that' in 
 the Eucharill he taught and appointed us to d.Q nothing but what 
 he had done in his own perfoii. S. Cyprian is VQ-iy exprefs upon 
 this point, fpeaking thus: ** Who is more a prieft of God, thaa 
 *' our Lord Jefus Chriil, who cftered a Sacrifice to God, and 
 ^' offered the fame that Melchizedeck had offered, that is. Bread 
 ** and Wine, namely his own Body and Blood ?" Again ; *' li 
 *•■* in the Sacrifice that Chriil ofFcred, none but Chrilt is to be fol- 
 *' lowed, then we are to obey and to do what Chriil did : For if 
 ** jefus Chrilt our Lord and God, the highpriefi: of God the 
 <? Father, both firlt offered up himfelf a facrifice to the Father, and 
 ** comnianded this to be done in commemoration of him; then 
 ^* that prieft truly ads as in his maker's Iread, who imitates what 
 ** Chriil did, andthen offers a true and full facrifice in the Church 
 " of God, if be begins fo to offer as he fees Chrift to have cffef- 
 •* ed before him."' Eufebius fpeaks fully to this head in the: 
 . following words: ** Our Saviour Jefus, the Chriil of God, do.':i 
 <* even in this prefent time celebrate facrifice among men by his 
 «* ininiUers after the order of Melchizedeck : for as he, being a 
 
 *' priell 
 
 (c) Necc/Tity cf an AltfrAtioji; p, 145? 14C. \d) Linger CmchJfcn^ 
 part 2, L?(r.>n 107, j>, ;ja8. 
 
142 The L AT MAN'S APOLOGT. 
 
 " priefl of the Gentiles, no where appears to have ufed corporeal 
 " facrifices, but bleffed Abraham in Bread and Wine ; in the 
 •• fame manner, firfl: our Saviour and Lord, and afcerwards all 
 ** priefts from him, celebrating the Spiritual Sacrifice in Bread and 
 •* Wine, do reprefent his Body and Blood in a myftery." But 
 the words of S. Gregory NyfTen are moft peculiarly remarkable to 
 this purp-ofe. They run thus : '* Chrid, whofe ccconomy regu- 
 •* lates all things according to his fovereign authority, ftays not 
 '* till he was under a nectlfity of being betrayed, and till the 
 •* Jews had feizcd him by violence, or till Pilate had unjuftly con- 
 ^•* demned him, and fo their malice had proved the principal 
 •* occafion and caufe of the falvation of mankind ; but by his 
 *' osconomy he prevents their feizare of him, and by a method 
 •♦ of Sacrifice which was ineffable and invifible to men, he cfFerod 
 ** himfelf an oblation and vi<!^im for us, being himfelf at the 
 •* fame time both the PrieR and the Lamb of God which takes 
 •' away the fins of the world. When was this ? when he madi 
 ** his Body eatable, and his Blood ^'ri^kable, to thofe who wero 
 *' with him. For this is manifeft to all, that the Lamb could 
 ** not be eaten by men, if the (laughter had not made way for . 
 ** the manducation of it. He therefore that gnve his Body for 
 ** food to his diiciples, manifcftly dcmonilrates, that a Sacriiice 
 ** wasabfolutely made under the figure of a Lamb; for the Body 
 ** of the ficriiicc had not been lie for manducation, if it had been 
 ** alive: therefore when he gave his Body to his difciples to be 
 •* eaten, hi^ Body was already ^facriiiced ineffably and inviiibly, 
 *' according to the will and pleafure of him, who had the cscono- 
 '* my of lais myllery.'* Thus much to (hew, that our Saviour 
 facrificcd at the inllitution ; let us now proceed to confider the 
 fubfequent dodrine and pradice of the Cathoiick Church con- 
 cerning the offering the Eucbarift as a Sacrifice ; and here let^the 
 Apoftolicil Conftitutions appear iiril, where we meet with thefe 
 words; ** On the Lord's day is performed the reading of the pro- 
 " phets, and the preachir.g q{ the gofpel, and the Oblation of 
 ** the Sacrifice, and the gjfc of the holy food.". Again : '* For 
 ** this reafon do ye alfo, now the Lord is rifen, offer your Sacri- 
 •* fice, concerning which he commanded us fraying Do this for a 
 ** Memorial 0/ Tne."' And again : *' Inilead of a Bloody Sacri- 
 ** fice, he has appointed the reafonable, and Unbloody, and myf- 
 •* tical one of his Body and Biood, which is performed to repre- 
 *' fent the Lord's death by rymbols." And in the form of con- 
 fecrating a BiOiop, the prayer runs thus : '* Grant, that he may 
 *' wmif-oStT to thee for a fvveet-fmelling favour the pure and 
 •* unbloody Sacrifice, which thou by Chrilt halt conftituted to be 
 •' the myftery of the new covenant ;" S. Clement Bifliop of Rome, 
 whofe name is mentioned in the New Tefiament, has the follow- 
 ing paffages : " Our Lord has commanded the Oblations and Li- 
 
 \\ turgies to be performed aj the appoiiU^ \im%%. They 
 
 '^ therefore, * 
 
Chap. XXI. Of the Church of England, 14$ 
 
 *• therefore, who offer their Oblations at the appointed times, are 
 
 " acceptable and bleired.— -It will be RO imall crime, if we 
 
 ** eje<fl thofe from the Epifcopal fundlion, who offer the. Gifts in 
 *' an unblameable and holy manner." S. Ignatius, who was 
 made Biihop in the time of'the ApoiUes, calls the Eucharill th 
 gift of God and the Bread of Qod, both which are Sacrificial 
 phrafes ; and four times he mentions a Material Altar in the 
 Chrillian Church, which fuppoles a SacriEce. S. Jultin Martyr 
 sfnrm?, that Chrift has by tradition inftrudled us to ojer Bread, 
 and fpcaki; of Bread and a Cup as offered by Gentiles converted 
 to Chriltianity, according to the prediOion of Malachi. S. Ire- 
 pseas fpeaking of the new Oblalion of the New Teftament, adds, 
 ** which the Church receiving frorr* the Apoiilcs, offers to. God 
 " throughout the world ;" and further fays : " We off.r to him 
 ** as iandifyiu^ the creatures." And elfewhere he fays ; " Where- 
 *< fore even the Oblation of the Eucharill is not carnal, but Ipi- 
 *' ricual, and upon that account pure. For we offer to God the 
 »' Bread and the Cup of Blcffing, giving him thinks for that he has 
 *' comiTiaiu'ed the earth to bring forth thefe fruits for our nou- 
 «♦ rilJiment." Athenagoras fays : ** V/hat need I care for whole 
 *• burntoffeiings, of which God has no need ? it is ra'licr pro- 
 *' per to offer to him the Unbloody^ Sacrifice, tlie rational fer- 
 *' vice.* Tertullian rcficdson the "pnefts of Mithra, for imi- 
 tating the divine fiCraments in offering of Bread ; and in another 
 place he has thefe words : " Many on the Stationary days think, 
 *' that they ought not to be prefent at the prayers of the Sacri- 
 *' fices, lea their fall be broken by retciving the Body of our 
 *• Lord. However by taking the Body of our Lord and referving 
 *' it, both will be fafe, the participation of the Sacrifice,, and 
 «' the performance of your dufy of falling." Origen fays : " We 
 ** eat loaves that are offered ;" and (peaks of the care that Chrif- 
 tians took in receiving the Eucharill, " kil any crumb of the 
 >* coniecrated Obintion fhould fall to the ground." S. Cyprian 
 fpeaks of offerivg H.vine in the Sacrifice of God and Chrill : Be 
 fays, neither ivine nor ivater can be offered aione i and he telis 
 u?, how Novatian was cenfured for attempting to offer facrne.gioui 
 Sacrifices in oppofition to. the true Prlcfl. And writing againll ihofe 
 who ufed only V/ater in the Euchanfiick Cup, he f^^ys : ** We 
 *♦ are given to underftand, that the Lord*s traditioa is to be cb- 
 •' ferved in cfForicg the Cup, that the Cup which i? offered in 
 " commemoration of him, is to be offered with a mixture ci 
 *' wine." And aj^ain : "The Holy GhoR by SoIoDriOn defcribes 
 *' before-hand the'fig-are of our Lord's Sacrifice, the immolated 
 *' Hoii of bread and wine." Eufebius fays, that altars xvCre every 
 ♦' where ereded for unbloody rcafoni-ble Sacriilces, according to 
 *' thenew rayfleries of the New I'eilament." And in another 
 place his words are thefe ; " We celebrate the Memorial oi this 
 ■ '^ Sacrifice on the table by the fyir'.boh of his Body and Blood j 
 " ar.d arc taught by Oiivid tQ fav, ^hu hal} prepared a table 
 
 ■' . •' hejurf^ 
 
144 Tl^e LATMA1SI\ APOLOGT. 
 
 ** before 7ne, thou hajl anointed my lead with oil, exprefsly fignJ- 
 ** fying ihe myitical Chrifm, and the venerable Sacrifices of 
 *' Chrill's table, in which offering unbloody and realbnable Sa- 
 " orifices and pleafing to him, we are taught to make an ObJa- 
 ** tion to God." And again : '*• We offer the fhew-bread and 
 •* the olood of fprinkling, the blood of the Lamb which takes 
 ** away the fin?; of the world, the expiation of our fouls." • S. 
 Cyril of Jerufalenm fays : ** When the fpiritual Sacrifice, the un- 
 ** bloody fervice is confecrated, we befeech God over that Sacri- 
 *' fice 0? Propitiation," and he fpeaks of ^ /^r^y^r (T^t'/r^/, <ii:hile 
 the holy and tremendous facrifice lies in open ^jie-v-j j and fays, iVe 
 offer Chriji /lain for cur fins. But it would be endlefs (fays the 
 author I have tranfcribed from) to cite the Fathers upon this 
 head, fo numerous are the psffagcs which might be produced. 
 The mod ancient ecciefiaftical canons of the Chriltian Church, 
 and many other canons of various CcunciK% fpeak in the fame 
 manner of the Eucharitrs being offered as a Sacrifice. 
 
 But forafmuch as fome have overhaflily concluded, that oi>r 
 Lord himlelf did not ufe an Oblatory Prayer at the inflitution, 
 to what has been jufl faid upon that fubjci^ 1 wiil add as iollows 
 from Bifhop Laurence. 
 
 " I ft. It is notorious in the inflitution, that he offered his Body 
 and Blood to his Father ; Kis ov.'n i.ffertion proves it, Ihii is 
 my Body --ivhich is given [that is, offered] for you^ &:c." 
 
 2dly. The ApoAle to the Hebrews, chap. h. ^j. 14. affures 
 «?, that he did this through the eternal Spirit ; and therefore he 
 certainly did it in the Beit Mode or Manner. 
 
 3d!y. T,., iv.oie or ?vlanner by Prayer is undoubtedly the 
 Bell, br.caufe it h the inrenfe exercife of our very Soul, by much 
 the more nobfe and perfeft part of us ; ani it is the work of our 
 Tongue too. which is the Beft member that tve have : and there- 
 f^,re Prnycr U vaftly prefer.iblq to, and more valu:ib!e than, any 
 cumb rice or ceremony whatfcever, without it; and thi-^ is the 
 fcnfe of All nations, Jeu's, Gentiles, and Chriftians, who con- 
 ilanily of?>red their facrifices by Prayer, as ihe excellent Mr. 
 Johnfon has very well proved, and to whom the author of The 
 lucefftty of an Alleration very juilly refers us for our fatisfadion in 
 this great truth. 
 
 4tr.ly. Oiir Lord*3 conflan? pra£lice of addrefiing himfelf to 
 hib F-ather by Prayer upon important occr^fions, and his {o addrcf- 
 fing to him ia this inlii-.acionj when he Eulogized or Blcfied the 
 
 clemetjis 
 
Chap. XXI. Of the Church ^^/Enqland. 145 
 
 elements by Prayer, give the highefl encouragement to believe, 
 that upon this Mcil important cccafion his devotion to his Fathei* 
 was not at all inferior, but of the very fame exnited pious nature, 
 ?nd therefore exerted by Prayer, when he offered to him at that 
 time the Sacrifice of his Body and Blocd for the rcmifiion of our 
 fins. 
 
 5tuly. The whole fcope of the infiltution demonflrates, that 
 in this great a<51ion he minidred ^«^arrf'/>/^?/'£'/v to his Father in a 
 Pul'Iick capacity ; as God-Man, the great high-prieft and media- 
 tor between God and Man ; and moreover as the moft perfeft 
 Teacher and Inilruilor of his Apoftles, /;i7w and in what «?^7;?wr 
 they and th^'ir fucccflbrs (hould offer this facrifice. His Sul^ori/ina- 
 tlon, taken in with the three lall confideration?, further enforces 
 the argument for his offering by Prayer, which is the Bell mark 
 of a Minijlerial Subordination to God in religious worfhip, it be- 
 ing the mod direv^ acknowledgment of his infinite fuperiority and 
 of our dependance upon him for acceptance: and cur Saviour's 
 miniftring in a Publick capacity for the Indtudion of his Apoftles, 
 teaches us, that he did not offer by a Mental Prayer only, buc 
 that It was Vocal alfo i becaufe the mind of the eternal Spirit, 
 throvgh ivhom he offered, is, that Publick Minillration in the 
 Church (hould be in open manifefi terms, to be underflcod by the 
 attending congregation, (i Cor. xiv.) which a Mental Prayer, noc 
 uttered by the voice, itioil certainly is not. And 
 
 6th!y. Tho' the three Evangelifis, who give us the hidory of 
 the inditution, have not recorded the particular Form of prayer^ 
 wherewith our Lord offered his facrifice ; yet S. Paul (hews, thac 
 he is '* a Prieft for ever after the order of Melchizedeck, who in 
 *' the days of his flefh, when he had offered up Frayers and 
 ** Supplications, with llrong crying and tears, unto him that was 
 •* able to fave him from death, and was heard in that he feared ; 
 •' though he was a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things 
 •* which he fuffered : and being made perfedl, he became the au- 
 •* thor of eternal falvation unto all them that obey him ; called 
 *• of God an high pried after the order of Melchizedeck." Bih. 
 V. 6— -10. Wherein the Apodle introduces Prayers 2iVi^ Supplica- 
 tions offered up- by this Pried in the days of h:.\fi(Jh^ as if they 
 were one part of his Priedly OfHce, while he dwelt among us : and 
 when more properly, than at the time of his great minijlration 
 to his Father, when he offered to him the facrifice of his Eod/ 
 i\nd Blood in the inftitution of the mbfi: Blcffed Sacrament ? 
 
 As to the particular Form, it is very obfervable ; that, as whcu 
 our I.,ord was on the crofs continuing this Oblation to his Father,, 
 lie cltofe to addrefs him in the prophetick forin rshcingto himfelf, 
 
 T ' and 
 
146 The LATMAKs APOLOGIA 
 
 Sind dictated hy the efernal Spirit [through whom he offered] in 
 the zzd pfalm, *' My God, my God, why haft thou forfaken 
 " me ?" and when he gave up the Ghoft, " Father, into thy hands 
 •' I commend my Spirit," the very form of words in P/al. xxxi. 
 5. prophetically before fpoken of him : So S. Paul, in defcrib- 
 jng the fuperior excellency of our Lord's priefthood above the 
 Aaronick, introduces him as addreffing his Father, [when here 
 on earth he offered to him his Body,] in a particular exprefs form, 
 infpived by the fame eternal Spirit, in the prophetiek words of 
 Pfa/. xl. 6, &c. which foretold the nature of his Sacrifice. Says 
 that holy Apoftle, *' When he cometh intt; the njoorld^ he Jaith^ 
 *• Sacrifice and Offering thou wouldii not, but a Body haft thou 
 ** prepared me = In burnt-offerings and facrifices for fin thou halt 
 ^« had no pleafure : Then faid I, Lo^ 1 come (in the volume of 
 ** the book it is written of me) to do thy at///, O God. Above 
 '' n^vhen he /aid, Sacrifice and offering and burnt- offerings and of- 
 *• fering for fin thou wouldll not, neither hadft pleafure therein, 
 ** (which are offered by the Law ;) then fnid he^ Lo, I come to do 
 •^ thy w/7/, O God. He taketh away the Firft, that he may efta- 
 *' bli(h the Second. By the <ivhich luili wc are fan6\ified through 
 •* the offering of the Bod^ of Jefus Chrift once for all." lieh. 
 X. 5— -lo. In the whole of which pauage it is plain, that S. 
 Paul determines the particular period of time, when this was 
 done by Chrilt, viz. luhen he cometh into the wcorld^ which is ex- 
 a£lly the fame as \n the days of his fiefh^ fpoken of in the fifth 
 chapter. The Apoltle defcribes the form of our Lord's addrefs 
 to his Father in thofe days ; he tells us upon what occafion he 
 made that add ref*, namely, when he came to do his nvill i he 
 points out what this <rvitl was, and fhews that it was our fancli- 
 lication through the offering of the Body offefus Chrift^ that fame 
 Body which his Father had prepared him • This Body our Lord 
 did offer in the Eucharift ; and therefore who is there that can 
 fay and prove it alfo, that this particular Form fpoken of by S. 
 Paul as uttered by our Lord, was not lome part of that Oblatory 
 Prayer, by which he then offered his Sacramental Bedy and Blood 
 to his Father I But enough of this, fince 
 
 7thly and laflly, the confentient pra<flice of the Primitive and 
 Univerfal Church in offering this facrifice by an oblatory Prayer, 
 Ihews that they learned it from the Apoftles, who were taught the 
 Mode and Manner How to offer it by Chrift himfelf (^)." 
 
 (*}■ Supplement (to the Indirpenfable Obligation^ &«.) contiuued, §. 77 
 SOS— 205. 
 
 C H A P, 
 
r 147 J 
 
 CHAP. XXII. 
 
 ^I hat , the Church ^England does not at 
 all offer the Eucharijiick ehmeiits^ much 
 lefs the Reprejentative Body and Blood 
 ofChrtJi. 
 
 IT appears above in Chap. XVII. that the Church of Eng- 
 land has run in with that of Rome in making the confecra- 
 tion of the Eucharill to confift in the Prieil's repeating the 
 Words of Inftitution. And I am afraid, fhe cannot be 
 fuppofed to make the Oblation of the elements neceffary either 
 to the confecration or to the valid adminiftration thereof. But has 
 ihe not, with the Roman Church in refpeft to the Bleffing, retain- 
 ed the thing, tho* fhe denies the Neceflity of it ? If fhe has done 
 fo ; when fhe difunites herfelf from State-laws and fhakes off the 
 Regale, flie may reform her Rubricks and Homilies ; and then her 
 Prayer of Oblation, if ilie has one, will be more confident. But 
 alafs! tho' fhe once had, yet now fhe has no fuch Prayer. She 
 reforms back-joard, as an ingenious {a) Priefl of her own com- 
 munion obferves of her in that very cafe of the Regale. 
 
 Some learned men within her pale, who have been convinced of 
 the NecefTity of this Oblation, have endeavoured to prove that 
 fhe has retained it . Of this number were the great Bifhop Hickes 
 and the learned Mr. Johnfon above-mentioned. But thefe coul4 
 hardly, could Not indeed, perfuade themfelves, that they had 
 proved her to have retained an Oblatory Prayer of the Rcprefcn- 
 tative Body and Blood of Chrift. They had both of them power- 
 ful mifgivings of a Better Judgment ; and, in fhort, upon that 
 better judgment fufiiciently declared the infufficicncy of their for- 
 
 T 2 inef 
 
 (•■i) Ux, Leflie's Cafs of the Rcg^^k, p, 519. edit, zd, in Qftava, 
 
J48 Tht LAI MAN'S APOLOGl: 
 
 mer arguments.: For. proof of this fee the books quoted in the 
 [b) Margin. The learned Biflicp of Meaux in France endeavoured 
 Xo expound i\Q dio€lr'mQ of bis Church in luch a manner, as to 
 rnake it more agreeable to the Proteliants, whom they were then 
 delirous to profelyce '• but forafrnuch as this BiPrtop, with all his 
 acutencfs, could not reconcile his Expofetion to the Letter and Spi- 
 rit, the Publick Ac^s of- the Church, ic would not be allowed to 
 pafs; but was obliged to undergo a Re expofitlon, to be {In the 
 fenfe of the Freuch Orthodox) reformed backward ; and poor M. 
 Iinbert was obliged to fufter perfccution from the Archbifnop of 
 Bourdeaux for teaching the Bifnop of Meaux's pri-vate dot^trine. 
 ** They object to me (fays M. Imbert to the Biihop) that which 
 *' is alfo faid againft your book, that I mollify, but that the 
 
 *' Church^ dodlrine is quite otherwife.— I durft promife ten 
 
 ** thoufand converfions, if religion \vas here pradifed according 
 '■'■ to your Expofrtion. The gentlemen of the [ Protefiant] reli- 
 *•' gion. Rev. Father, have no other objedlion againft me, but 
 *' that the Rowan Church treats both you and me as Hereticks.'* 
 And this: is the cafe here : it i» not what fome Private perfons 
 would fain think to be, but what really is, the cafe of the Church 
 of England, judging by her Publick Ads. 
 
 Now the lafl Review of her Common Prayer Book by Convo- 
 cation W3s by King. Charles ll's Commifiion, wiien it was re- 
 vifed and amended ! approved and figned by ail the Members of 
 each Houfe. They took four weeks time about this, and no 
 doubt compared it with King Edward's (which we will call the 
 piril, and this the Lail} Book. 
 
 ** Now this Convocation^faw, that by the Acts of the firll Re- 
 formed Convocation, there 'was in the firfc Reformed Common 
 Prayer Book a Prayer of Oblation, whereby the facnfice of ih^i 
 Reprefentatiye Body and Blood of Chrift was crTered to God 
 the Father immediately after the Prieft's pronouncing the Words 
 of Inllitution, according to the exprefs pra<ftice of the Primitive 
 and univerfal Church : which Great Sacrifice of that his Body 
 and Blood oar Ble-Ted Lord hi'mfelf commanded his Church to 
 cfFer, when, after he had faid of the Bread ^fhis is my Body, and 
 of the mixed Wine, This is 7ny Blaod, he enjoined This i?<7, that 
 ^s, Offer This, for a Memorial of me. But the latter Convo- 
 
 eatios;^ 
 
 {b) E;). Collier's Defence cf the Reafons, p. in, 112, 113. Bp. Lau- 
 rence's SapDlement pto his Indifpenilble Obligation, &c. ) continued, p. sio 
 —213. And in the following pages the Prelate refutes his own Attempt, 
 Vihen a Lay-man, to have provfd the Church of England's having: this Obla- 
 With regard to Mr . Johnfon, as mlfr< piefciUed in a pan.phlct of T. B '§ 
 thisfubjt^t^ ficl.bi-i. p. 347-— 351. 
 
 iion 
 
Chap. XXII. Of the Church of England. i | 9 
 
 cation reje6led this Prayer of Oblation, and would not mlmit it 
 to be ufed immediately after the words of Iniliiutrbn, hut trans- 
 ferred it to the Poit-Comnuinion in ilie Init book, eo he faid or 
 vot faid, as the Priell (liall think fit, afcer air have communicated, 
 when it mail be highly nh fur d \o rrctcn^d to clFer that Body aiul 
 Blood, after it has been eaten and drnnk by the communicantb : 
 • -7'his.act and determination of the l;-;ll "reviewing Convo- 
 cation is cxadlly conformable to the ether A<'^s of tiieir Church. 
 to which alfo the members of this Cdnvccation did fubfcribe ;for 
 by (ubfcribing to the 39 articles, they fubfcribed ro the Whole- 
 fomencfs of the Homily Doctrines. The I'Jomily dodrincs iheu 
 2re thefe ; In the firlt part of her Hcmily concerning the iacr.^- 
 ment, fhe teaches with relation to that Sacrament, " 7a/is heed, 
 *' left cif the Me?nor}\ it be made a Sacrifce ;" and again, (hew- 
 ing how v^c muU make Chrill our own, and apply his merits to 
 ourfelves, file exptefsly teaches *• Htjtin thou reedell no other 
 ** Syicrif.ce or Ohlatio77, no Sacrificing Priej}, no Mufs, nt) means 
 ** eliabliihed by man's invention." And \n the? fecond p- rt of iier 
 Hom.ily for Whitfunday, among her inlUnces of Popiih invtnuon^, 
 fhe teaches the Sacrifice to be one, faying '* Chrill commended to 
 '* his Church a Sacrametit oi his Body and Blood, but ihty have 
 *' changed it into a Sacrifice for the quick and dead." 1 hus the 
 facls of the laft book go hand in hand with thefe GO(*:h-ines in re- 
 j-dling the Sacrifice, the members of the Convocation fnbfcribcd 
 ro ihefe dodtrines, and the laft bock is the aft and -dcterminaiioii 
 of this Convocation ; and conftquently this Convocation's deter- 
 mination i?, the prefent Liturgy without this great Sacrifice, and 
 therefore that it is not provided for in the prefent Liturfzy." 
 
 ** Neither can this Convocation be faid to have provided for 
 ihis Chrillian Sacrifice, by ordering the Prieft to place the Bread 
 and Wine on the Table, and in the prayer Icr the whole Hate of 
 Chriil'd Church to pray that God ^^vould accept of cur chlatiorts. 
 For when the Piieft fo places the elements, they are not yet con- 
 fecrared into the Reprefeniatlve Body and Blocd of Chrijl ; nor yec 
 when he prays God to accept our oblaiions, for that l>cdy ai;d 
 Blood are not in any refpei^l ofi the Communion Tabic at the put- 
 ting up of that Prayer. The Oblations there prayed to he ac- 
 cepted, are the Preafi and Wine, and Money and otiier olFt-'rirga 
 of the people then on the table ; and it is as good icnfe fo fay, 
 that the Money and the other offerings of the people aie CiiriU'a, 
 Reprefentative Body and Blood, as it is to {^y , that the ur.can- 
 feccated Bread and Wij;e are his Reprefcntative Body and Blood, — 
 Thefe Oblations now prayed to be accepted, are no more than the 
 ^ommcn firii oblations, which are cffcied to God as a tribute 
 offering in acknowledgment of his Sovereignty, &c. out of whicU 
 ;iic Prir^iiiye Q'W'i.i^^.-i rook pnrt; ^fi%, Some of *Jie i^iead and 
 
 mixe4 
 
150 The L ATM J N*s' APOLOGT. . 
 
 TT)i;<ed Wine, and afterwards confecrated them into the Body and 
 B!ood of Cbriil ; referviV/g the rcll: for other pious and charitable 
 wfes. This Reprefentative Body and Blood was the great facrifice 
 offered to God the leather by the Primitive and Univerfal Charch, 
 as Chriil hiiiifelf commanded : This they offered exprefsly by 
 Prayer, after the f.rll oblations : This the Convocation has made 
 no provifion for as before is manifeft (<r)/' 
 
 Agr.in; *' The Liturgy of the Church of England appoints 
 the Offertory Service to be ufed, the alms for the poor and other 
 devotions of the people to be colledled, and the Priefl to prefen: 
 £nd place them upon the Holy Table, and to pray to God to ac- 
 cept them in theie words, " We humbly befeech thee moll 
 •' mercifully to accept our alms and oblations^'' and all this when 
 there is no Commu^iion : which demonilrably proves, that the hft 
 reviewing Convocation added the word Oblations^ with no more 
 regard to the time of Communion, than to the time of no Com;nu- 
 nion, having ordered the word oblations, to be ufed in the prayer, 
 when there, is no Communicn [d] ; and there is no mark of fupe- 
 ricr dillin^ion annexed to the word ollatlonsy when there is a 
 Communion J much lefs can it with any appearance of reafon be 
 jifnrmcd, that the Conv6cation added the word Oblations purely 
 smd only with refpc<5l to the Bread and Wine, when there is a 
 Communioii ; for, if they had fo rejirained and lifnited iho. ufe of 
 that word, they would doubtlefs have appointed it to be omitted 
 when there is no Communion, which we fee by their rubricks they 
 have not done, and tliat confequently they have not added the 
 
 " Nay farther, 6y di^ly weighing that Convocations /^ds, in 
 the rubricks the word Oblations appears to be added, only for the 
 fake of the Ahns and other devotions of the feople in a decent hajiny 
 to be placed by the Prieil on the holy table : becaufe the Convo- 
 cation not only calls the^n in the prayer Oblatio?2s, when there is 
 no Bread and Wine at ail on the table ; but further yet, becaufe 
 the fame Convocation fuppofes, that even when there is a Com- 
 munion, there may happen to be no alms or oblations: for the ra- 
 brickv are theie, *' When there is ^Communion, the Prieft iliall then 
 f* place upan the table fo much Bread and Wine as he fliall think 
 ** fuiHcient. After which done rhe Prieft fhail fay. Let us pray, 
 
 • « ^c.-—— dlmighty and et'er lining God, H,ve humbly be- 
 
 *-^ Jeech ihee JHoJi mercifully {^to z.QQt^t our alms and oh\^x\ov\s] if 
 *' there be no akms or oblations, then fhali the words \_of acceptin'T 
 
 ** our 
 
 [fj Indifpcnvablc Obligation, p-. 29, 30, 31. [d] Seethe courfe of 
 
 ebc rubric!;s, from iuit btilore the fentences of the Offertory to the end of the 
 yrsytr for tbetvbvlfi/hte of Cbrlfr Church, militavt here in earth -^ and ally \\\% 
 IniA rubi'.ck 3Ker lUc C;»ilcd= b; the end of the Cynimiinion Service, 
 
Chap. XXIL Of the Church of England. i -i 
 
 ** our alms and ohiations'] be left unfaid." Thefe are tlie Convo- 
 cation's rubricks when th^re is a Communion ; wherein it is niani- 
 fcft, there is a cafe and rule to omit-the words alms and ohiations, 
 the Bread and Wine beirg at the very fame time then preleiu on 
 the table : which plainly fuppofes in this cafe, that tho' Breaa 
 and Wine are there on the table, yet Oblations are not there for 
 want of the alms for the poor and other devotions of the people 
 in the bafm, which want may happen by ihc great po'vert y of ilie 
 Prieft, and when none but fuch poor people as himftJf do com- 
 municate with him, as in feme cafes of ficknefs, pcrfccution, ;ir,d 
 the like, for which no doubt the Convocation makes this provili- 
 on : and thereby fuppofes, that tho' Bread and Wine are pn the 
 table, yet there are no Oblations there, by reafon of no coHedioq 
 having been made in the bofm ; confecjueniiy it dues not appear, 
 that there is any Convocation ^Oi or Rule, vvhuh gives theiule of 
 Ohlations to the Bread and Wine.'' 
 
 ** There is another remarkable thin;?,, which prefcnts itfclf tr» 
 our view : it is- this, that the Convocation does exprefsly honour 
 the Devotions of the people in the bafm with the term of Obuiti- 
 onst when placed alone without any Bre.nd and Wine on the table ; 
 but never j^jves the title of Ohlatiovs to the Bread aru Wine, 
 when placed there alone, without ihe Alms and other Devotions 
 of ^he people in the bafin : And it is further obfervrihlc. ihni tjuj 
 Convocation makes a confiderable difference between the foltnm 
 manner of j!)/-^"/}?//'/;/^ Alms and Oblation?, and but no more than 
 placing the Bread and Wine on the table : 'i'he rubrick punclualiy 
 enjoins, " the Deacons, Churchwardens, &c. concerning theaUns 
 *• and other devotions of the people in the bafm, tiiat they fnail 
 ** reverently bring it to the priell, who (hall humbly prejent and place 
 ** it upon the holy table," and then prjy Gcd to accept tlun) ; 
 which are folemnities fuitable to all Oblations made to Almighty 
 God : But as for the Bread and Wine, there are no Deacon.^, 
 Churchwardens, ^-c. ordered rei'erently to bring them to the 
 Priefi, nor is the Priell app-jinted by any rubrick humbly io ptejcnt 
 them ; no, no, this re-verence in bringing, and this humbly pre- 
 Jenting them as Oijiations to God, are wholly omitted, not the 
 ieali word of any fuch profound Reverential folemnities relating 
 to Oblations, nor fo much as any order at all to prejcnt them as 
 fuch : All that the rubrick enjoins, is no more than thi?, that the 
 Priell rnall//^(:^ upon the table fo much Bread and Wine as he 
 ihail think fufficicnt:" It is no higher an act than barely to place 
 them there, which falls vai"I:ly fhort of prefentlng them, and mucli 
 more Hiort of humbly prefenting them, as the ofTerings of Gcd 
 ought to be/r^/^v7/^^. So that upon a due conhderritior? of r.li 
 the rubricks relating to this matter, and of that Convocation's h"v- 
 jng fubfcribed to the do<^irines, which oppofe the Sacra.Tient's be- 
 ing a Sacrffce j it is maniftft, thit :he word Oblations, as :': Ibnds 
 
T 52 The L AT M A iVs APO LOG 7\ 
 
 Jn their Litur<^y, regards not the Bread and Wbie, but the monev, 
 &c. in the balin ; nncl thnt confequently the Church A6ts of thr.t 
 Synod tio not, in fa<5l, order the Priell to pray Go;^ to accept of 
 any OblHti(?n3 of Bread and Wine. Thefe Publifk Ji^s of the 
 Church of England are an over-balance (fays Bifiiop Laurence, 
 from v.'hom 1 now irarifcnbc) againft iht pri^vatejudgvient of Mr. 
 Laurence, by which at any time before no-w he ha;' been led to fup- 
 pofe or gr?>:u [.vithout Charch-proo{], that the eltablifned Liturgy 
 makes to God an Oblation of the Eiead and Wine : for, fmce the 
 Church of Enghind herfcif has, by her Publick x'^ch, determined 
 lio otlser than the uvoney, &c. in the bafin to be the Oblation<=, 
 a'^d hk'i no where determined the Bread and Wine to be fo ; all the 
 n.Tertions of Private Judgment, that the Bread aud Wine are by 
 her appointed to, be Oblation?, are without any ground or fourida- 
 lion of her Publick A6ts : Much Icfs 90 tbofe Atu determine, that 
 the BVead ni-.d Wine are the Sacrifice ofChrifls Bepre fen faille Bo- 
 dy and Blood, at tjhat moment of time, when the Prielt is ?.ppointed 
 ro pray for the Acceptance of \\\q.\x Alms and Oblation s^ at which 
 time the Bread and \Vine are nor, by any confecration whatfoever, 
 r.;adchis Reprefcntative Body and Blood (e). 
 
 Nor doe?, as Tome have pretended, her citing a conftitution of 
 lii'linian with appyohation, wherein the Eucharilt is called the holy 
 Oblation^ ror yet her recaniraending JuUin Martyr''s defcriptlon of 
 the Euciiaiillick foleinpity, prove that fne has the Sacrifice. For 
 fhe doss not quote that conftitution for any oth.cr purpol'e, than to 
 prove that the Corrjinon-prayer and Sacraments ought to be minif- 
 tred in a tm'rue that h underjhod by the hearers. In all the quo- 
 fU'^n (hat »he brings from him, there is not fo much, as one word 
 f'f Sacrifice or OhlatiottiM all. So that her Homily's'citing S. Juf- 
 ti/i wiH prove nothing in her favour ; neither does fhe adopt ^2// Juf- 
 tin Mircyr'i dtrcripcion. Nor would the Canons of 1 6.|.o, had they 
 been ( isthey were not) Veceived either by Church or State of Eng- 
 i.iad, be a proof that fhe has the great Chriiliati Sacrifice (f). 
 
 ••' In a word, in the iird refornrsed Liturgy, clear of all Boper)\ 
 " the rubricks frequently call the Holy Table by its Proper name, 
 " it'.- Scripture name, it's Chrillian Primiti\^ Catholick name Jl- 
 *' tar : Thi=i proper name referred to the gre^t Chriftian Sacrifice 
 *' oi' Chriit-s Reprefentative Body and Blood, then appointed by 
 ■"' that Liiurgy to be oilered there bv a Prayer of Oblation uttered 
 * by the Pr'\-::j[ turninrj to the Altar ^joithout any eh^ualion^ im- 
 *'- mediately after his pronouncing the word* of inilitution : The 
 
 *' Calviniih 
 
 (^•, Sypplerri-nt ro_,Indif{renrs^leObIig\tlon_, p. 153—1551 (/] Supp!e* 
 c/iC tUiiUJ;u<d^ p. 2l3, ZlOf, 2ZO, 
 
Chap. XXIL Of ibe Church of E:^GLA^D, 153 
 
 *• Paivinifts and Zuinglians took ofi-'cnce at this, and the words 
 
 *' Altar and Sacrifice were taken away to con-iply with them.*' Sei 
 
 Supplement (ontitiuect, p. 223. and further to j^ 252. where that 
 
 author moft juJlty infers Ironi what he has there faid, " thfit npori 
 
 *' the whole of the matter, the Conllitutional Church of England //^ - 
 
 *' ha? not one Pubiick Authentick Aft now in u^ which deter- £ - 
 
 ** rnines that the Sacrament is a Sacriiicc, but much to tlic contr.'t* 
 
 " ry that it is. not fo." 
 
 I n-.ali tranfcriBe tiie.'^^vholeof this page r.32. from our Elabo^ 
 rnte author, for indeed it is alone fuificient co prove what is prq- 
 
 pofcd in this Chapter. 
 
 *' But (fays he) before I conclude this head, T oucht to n(»- 
 Knrtvvicdj^e the informarion given :ne by a Learned Clergymnn^ 
 who, tho' he ufes not our Communion Office, yet kindly writes 
 to me thefe words, n):x,. I think you hai'e omitted One argument, 
 
 ivhich plainly (hen.vs, that the C 0/ E entirely rqecU 
 
 the Zacrifice^ and does by tio means intend that the 'vjord Oblacions 
 in the prayer for ChriJT s Church, Jhould refpeSl the Bread and Wine ? 
 an^. that is, that in the Communion of the Sick, the Priejl is t6 
 ^0 llirealy fro7n tlpe Gofpel /o Ve that do truly, ^"C. So that 
 "the prayer for Chrift's Church is not f aid at all This (continued 
 our Author) is a very great truth, and iirongly corroborates alt 
 that i have hitherto arg^jcd to prove, that the Ciiurch of England 
 has no Pubiick Acl or Rule, which gives the title of Oblations tci ■ 
 the unconfecrated Bread and Wine, as in />. 153. and 154, 2n4 
 that therefore {lie does not pray God to acfifpt. them as fuch ; an4 
 alfo that fhe totally rejeds the Sr.CDfice of Chrilt's Sacraxr.enta^ 
 Body and Blood. For, as the Church of Engl-^nd in the 5th of 
 her Poft-Communion rubricks, prohibits any of her publickly con- 
 fecrated elements to be carried out of the Church, and thercfora 
 they muft not be given to the Sick ; fo, (he appoii^ts er^jery Thttir^ 
 to be done in the office of the Communion of the Sick, which 
 ihe efteems to be htx duty in relation to the elements of Bread an^ 
 Wine in her Communion Service : If therefore ihe elleemed it her 
 duty, to pray God to accept Oblations 0I Bread and Wine, before 
 hei' confecration of them ; and after her confecrating. to offer 
 them to him a Sacrifice of ChrilPs Sacramental Body and Blood ; 
 Jhe would beyond all doubt have appointed both 0/ thefe to be don« 
 in her Communion of the Sick, fince with relation to the i:W' 
 mtnis to he Piinifred to him, thefe fuppofed duties had not been 
 fulfilled before. But it is manifell, in her ofHce for the Commn- 
 r.ion of the Sick, that (he neither prays God to accept Oblation^ 
 of Bread and Wine before her confecration, nor does Ihe aft^r 
 ^,onfecration offer them to him a Sacrifi:: of Chrifl's Sacramental 
 
154 The LJrMJI^s ATOLOGT. 
 
 Body and Blood : and therefore it unavoidably follows, that flie 
 holds net Such Oblations nor Such Sacrifice to be her Duty fo to 
 cFer in her Communion Service. '' 
 
 \.-' li /i i . ^'\.i^^iil. 
 
 Of the 'fsece^ljity of that 'part of the Cg?2^ 
 jecratmi commonly called the Invoca- 
 
 TiOK. 
 
 iT is plain frora S. Matthew and S. Mark, that our BlcfTed 
 Saviour at the inftitution hlejfed [ euchari(lize(d ] the Bread 
 and Cup. And Biiliop Collier in his Defence ot the Reafofis 
 fhcived plainly enough, that Bleffihg in the Scripture-lan- 
 guage n\c^X]s praying for abkjjl-ng : \And as the bleffings of God 
 the Father are conveyed by the Holy Ghof>, ** to eucharlflize or 
 *' b!efs the elements ([aid he) is therefore in other words to pray 
 " for the defcent of the Holy Ghoft. Now what our Saviour did, 
 ** he commanded his difciples to do/* 
 
 The meaning of the word Bhfs [or Eucharifiizfe} in this place 
 snuft, by our Rule, be determined by the Tradition of the Church,' 
 fi'hich I will tranfcribe from the author of the Vieix^ of Chrifia- 
 iiityy referring, as I have done above, to his Appendix for the 
 (Original quotations. 
 
 " S.Paul (fays he) calls the Eucharidick cup the cup ofhhf- 
 /tng nx^hich n.ve blefs ; and he mentions this curtom, when he fays, 
 ** Elfe when thou Ibalt blefs with the Spirit, how (hall he that oc- 
 "' cupieth the room of the unlearned, fay Amen at thy Eucha- 
 ** rifx ?'* Hs al-udes to the fame, when he fays : ** that 1 Ihould 
 '* be the Priell of Jems Chrifb with regard to the Gentiles, ofFer- 
 '' ing the facrifice of the gofpei of Gcd, that the oblation of ihg 
 '' Gentiles may be acceptable, fan£tiSed by the Holy Ghoft." 
 
 T'ct^odotus fays : [* The Bread and Oil are fan<^ified by ths 
 
 *' powar 
 
Chap. XXIIL Of the Church ^/England. i i^c^ 
 
 " power of the name {of the Spirit,] being not the hrt\t as they 
 *' are taken to be according to the outward appearance, but by the 
 " power [of the Spirit] they are changed into a ipiriiuai 
 *• power." 
 
 In the dialogue written by Origen or Maximus, the Marcionite 
 holds, that the Spirit defcends upon the Euchari/I. 
 
 S. Juflin Martyr calls ,the Eucharil^ food confccratcd hy thatikf- 
 giving and prayer. 
 
 S. Irensus, as I cited him above in Chap. X. fays, that the 
 Bread and Wine " by the Wifdom [by which he means the Spi- 
 ** rit] of God coming into the ufe of men, and receiving the 
 " word of God, become the Eucharift, which is the Body and 
 " Blood of ChrilL" And in another place he fays : " The Bread 
 *' receiving the Invocation of God, is no longer common Breads 
 *" bat the Eucharifl, conufling of two things, an earthly rnd an 
 " hpvenly." And elfewhere he has thele remarkable words: 
 '* And here, when we \i^vQ. iinifhed the oblation, we call down 
 ** the Holy Spirit, that he. may conftcrate this facrifice, and 
 ** [make] the bread the Body of Chriil, and the Cup the Blood 
 *' of Chrift ; that they who partake of thefe antitypes, may ob- 
 ** tain remiUlon of fins and eternal life." 
 
 Origen fays : " V/e eat Bread made a certain holy Body by 
 ** prayer;" and again, " Bread^ fanctiiied by the word of God 
 ** and prayer." See likewife another paffage from him above ia 
 Chap. X. where Tertullian is alfo produced. 
 
 Firmilian in* his epifile to S. Cyprian fpeaks of a wicked womanj^' 
 who ufurped the facerdotal office, aivd pretended "** with an Innjo-- 
 " cation not contemptible to fandUfy the Bread and celebrate the 
 *' Euchariit, and to ofFer facrifice to the Lord in the ufual form, 
 ** wherein that myilerioos rite is performed." And S. Cypriaa 
 himfelf fays : " The oblation is not there fandified, where the 
 ^* Holy Ghcilisnot." 
 
 S. Balil mentions the form of the Invocation, as an ufagg 
 univerfally received in the Church from A^oAolical Tradition. 
 
 8. Cyril of Jerundem fays : " The bread of the Euchari/f, zU 
 
 " ter the In-uocation of the Holy Ghoft, is no longer common 
 
 ^' bread, but the Body of Chrift."- And again having given aq 
 
 'account of the long Thankfgiving, he fays: " Aft^r we havq 
 
 ^' fan^iiisd ourfsiyss by thefe hymns, W5 befeech jh§ mercifa^ 
 
 ^- - ' ' ' ■■'' - * - u ^ - ^M 
 
156 The L .^r M AN's APOLO G T. 
 
 *' God to fend dotv7i his Holy Spirit upon the gifts lying upon tha 
 
 •' altar, th:.\t he may make the Bread ihe Body of Chrilt, and the 
 
 ** Wine the Blood of Chrift ; for to wliaifoever the Holy Goo/} 
 
 ** gives a contadl, that thing is fanftified and changed.'^ 
 
 f See S. Ambrofe above in Chap. X. ] 
 
 f>. Optatus afes the Donatifts, V What greater facrilege can ye 
 *i be guilty of, than topull down the altars of God, where God 
 ** Almighty is invocated, and the Holy Ghoit deicends upon fucU 
 •* fupplication ?" 
 
 S. Ephraim Syrus fays : f' The Priert petitions, that the HoZy 
 *^ Ghofl may dtfcsndy and fan6lify the g^.fts upon earth laid iri open 
 "?? view.''' 
 
 S. Gregory Nyffen fays : " The Bread is fandiiied by the word 
 «* of God and prayer.'* 
 
 Theophilus of Alexandria fays : " The Bread of our Lore] 
 *' and the holy Cap are confecrated by the in,vocation and adven"^ 
 •^ of the Holy Spirit." ' ' ' 
 
 Juvencus fays, that Chrift[himfeif confecrated the Eucharifl by 
 prayer. 
 
 S, Chryfoftom fays : '^ Wh:-t mcaneft thou, O man? When 
 •* the Prieft flands before the holy table, lifting up his hands tQ 
 ** heaven, aiid innjocaiing the Holy Spirit io come and touch the 
 ** elements, there .fhould then be great tranquillity and lilerice.'* 
 Thi? Father wais produced above in Chap. X. 
 
 S. Augnftin fays : " We call that the Body and Blood of Chrift, 
 •* which is taken from the fruits of the earth, and'confecraied by 
 •* myiiicnl prayer in a foienin manner i and fo received by us untq 
 *♦ farvarion in *rm,mory of our Lord's fufFiiring for us, but which( 
 ** is not far.dified to be fo great a Sacrament, Without the invifi« 
 <» ye operation of the Holy Gholl." 
 
 S. Jerom Uyi, thai it was the peculrar office of the Prefbytcrs 
 ^0 con{©:i;ate the Body and Blood of Chrift by prayer. 
 
 The rvords of Cyril of Alexandria are \tTy ful?, which are 
 Ihefe .' *' Lell we ihould be ready to fwoon at tm fight of frefh 
 •* awd blood, lying before us on the holy table of the Church, 
 y Chriit as GH ^oudcfccading to our infirn^itieSj k)i^% an eniiv-n- 
 
Chap. XXIII. Of the Church ^/England. i^y 
 
 ** ing power into the gifts lying before us, and fubftitutes them to 
 ** be, in effect or energy, his own fltfli, that we may erjoy them, 
 " fo as to partake of their enlivening power." 
 
 Theodoret fay$ in one of his dialogues : «« What do you call 
 *' the gift that is offered before the Prieflly Invocation? Bread 
 *• made of fuch grain. What do you call ic after Sandincation 3^ 
 •* The Body of ChriS," 
 
 And laflly, Gelafius Bifhop of Rome fays : " Certainly the fa- 
 
 *' framents which we receive of the Body and Blood of Chrift, are 
 
 *^ a divine thing ; for which reafon aUo, by n^eans of them we 
 
 *• are rt.iade partakers of the divine nature, and yet the fubftance 
 
 •• or nature of Bread and Wine does not ceafe to be : And indeed 
 
 ** the image and Similitude of the Body and Blood of Chrill are 
 
 *' celebrated in the adion of the myUeries. The Bread and 
 
 ** Wine by the operation of the Holy Spirit pafs into this, chat i?, 
 
 *' into a divine fubilance, an4 yet remain in the propriety of their 
 
 *^ own nature (a),'^ 
 
 I might here produce the Clementine Liturgy, that of S. James, 
 tha'fo'f'S. IVIark, S. Chrylollom-s, S. Bafii's Liturgy uf«d in the 
 Conllantinopolitan Church, and that of hisufed in the Alexandrian 
 Church, the Ethiopick Liturgy, that of Nellorius, thatofSeveru% 
 in fnort All the Greek and Ealtern Liturgies; the Gailican, Go^ 
 t^iid:, aud Mofarabick Liturgies, and even the Homan Canon 
 praying for theBUJing : But we fhall have occafion for them in the 
 next Chapter, 
 
 l^ow, ** if there be x\o Sacrament without the Confecration, 
 ** and if there be an Early and Plain Tradition, Antiquity, Uni- 
 ** verfality, and Confent, that the Invocation pf the iioly Gholl 
 ** is an eficntial part of the Confecration ; then who can fay, that 
 ** the Invocation is not neceflary to the validity of the Sacra- 
 *' ment (I?) ?'* And if it be, what fhall we lay, if it is not to 
 be found in the prefent Common-Prayer-Eook of the Church of 
 England ? Whether it be, let us enq^uire in the next Chapter. 
 
 [a) View of Chriftianity, Longer Catechifm, part a. LelTon 2oS. p. 33a»i 
 p^^ 3S4» ' (ij Nsceffity of:an Alteratign, o, 137, 
 
 CHAP. 
 
1 158 ] 
 
 CHAP. XXIV. 
 
 That the CImrch of England- njedfs^ 
 and really has fiot^ the Catholick hiva^ 
 cation or Bklpng. 
 
 '^ *W ERE \re muft again cnl! to remembrance, that the 
 
 M ..-A Church ofEnpJand makes ihe Conlecration to confill in 
 
 »d S. ^^^ words ol- !n(titution ; fo that if ilie has the prayer for 
 
 a BlelTing. which we call the invocation, flie does not, 
 
 V. I:h the Catholick Church, believe it necefiary, 
 
 B'Jl chat ihs rcjcccs, and indeed has it not, is what I now proceed 
 J- fherv from the learned writers, Wiio have already but too plainly 
 . jvtd it. 
 
 •" Now the reviewing Convocation above mentioned, which 
 fat by King Charles Il's CommiiTion or Mandate, faw in the firil 
 vRefcrmed Common Prayer-Book a determinate Invocation, that 
 tne Father v/ou!d " with his Holy Spirit and Word vouchfafe to 
 " blefs and fandiify his gifts and creatures of Bread and Win^, that 
 " they may he inHo us the Body and Blood of his moll dearly be- 
 «* loved Son Jefas Chrill.'* 'J'his v^as the Publick Aft of the iirft 
 reformed Convocation, agreeably with our Lord's own avt and in- 
 ititu:ion, and the confentient prafticeof the Primitive and Univer- 
 fal Church. This latter Convocation rejcded ti»is Catholick Invo- 
 cation, and eftablifbed the lall Book v,ithovu any determinate peti- 
 tion, that the very Bread and IVine themfelves may be unto us the 
 ^dy and Blood ox Qhriil : The ][>rayer now is no more, than tha.c 
 
 •^^ we rccdving ths Bread and Wine- m^iy hz partakers oi Yi\s 
 
 *' molt ble£ed I>ody and Eiood." Now the fame Convocation 
 teaches in this latter Book, that a man *' can eat and drink the 
 *' Body and Blood of our SaviourChri^t, — akho' he doth not receive 
 ** the Sacrament with his mouth." And this by Mea/iSy 'viz. true 
 jepraunce ar.d ll-i:h in^ with i\ thankful 
 
Chap. XXIV. Of the Church efEijGLAi.^D. irj 
 
 death ; which Means mod certainly are not themfelves, in any re- 
 fped, the Body and Blood of Chrirt. [ See their lafi Rubrick htit 
 i-xvo after the CoTnniunio7i of the SicL ] if a man therefore ( in rhe 
 cafe tnere put ) fhould pray, fhat ae 'ha^jing thofe graces, may be a 
 partaker of Chrilt's moft bklTed Body and Blood ; it is evident jven 
 to a de^nonflration, that the man does not pray th?.t thofe grac?f in 
 him may he Ciirifl's Body and Blood : Even fo, in the S'-crament, 
 the prayer that we ** receiving God's creatures of Bread and Wine 
 
 *' may be partakers of Chrift's moll bleifed Body anc' Blood " 
 
 is no prayer that this Bread and Wine may themielves he in any re- 
 fpc6l his Body and Blood. For upon fuppofition ( but not gv^n ino: 
 it ), that the Convocation intends by this petition to ptiay, "that our 
 vtcei'Ving the Bread and Wine may be a means of our parL-ikir.cr of 
 his moll precious Body and Blood in heaven, vvhiuh is the moft tii^S 
 can.be fuppofed ; yet this falls vailly Hiort of the great NecelT:iry 
 liere required by the Inllitution, Jjecaufe the Convocation teaches 
 in the aforefaid rubrick, that there are tneans of eaiing and drink- 
 ing ChriiTs Body and Blood, which means themfelves are nat\\\z 
 Body and Blood in any refped whatfoever ; and theieforc rscel-vin^ 
 that Bread and Wine^ as a means of making us partakers, of his 
 Body and Blood in heaven, does not neceflarily in the ConvocaiionV 
 fenfe determine, that this Bread and Wine received are themfelves 
 the Body and Blood of Chriii \ and therefore this petition does no?: 
 neceffarily and determinately pray, that the Bre. d and Wine may 
 he his Body and Blood, But. the Inlh'cution neceilirily and determi- 
 nately affirms of the Bread T^hls is n:y Body, and of the mixed Wine 
 ^his is my Blood, after Chrifl: had bleiled, that is, prayed to the 
 Father to make them fo j he exprelly commanded /)i7//^/i ; the. 
 Bread and mixed Wine maft therefore be his Body and Blood ; the 
 Primitive and Univerfal Church, and the iirft Reformed Church of 
 England,- without the leafttergiverfation, cloak, covering, or am- 
 biguity whatfoever, didexprefly, determinately, and definitively 
 pray with one confent, that the Bread and Wine mAy he Chrill's 
 Body and Blood : We ought not to concern ourfeli^es with the jnodas 
 
 or manner of their b^ing fo, and therefore Con and Tranfub- 
 
 llantiation ought to be rejeded ; [ The reader ivill remember vjhat 
 is faidupon this in Chap. I. ] yet I am fure the omnipotent power 
 of the Holy Ghoft can and does make them to b* fo, infinitely more' 
 than in bare lignihcation and mere reprefentation ; The Convoca- 
 tion's eibiblifhed latter Book, which is their acl and determination, 
 has no fuch exprefs, determinate, definite petition, that the Bread 
 and Wine may be Chriit's Body and Blood : This is manifeft fromi 
 tile indeterminatenefs of their petition (Grant that ive recei<ving^ 
 SiC.J 3.S before proved from their own dodrine ; and therefore thac 
 Convocation's Ail determines, that i£ h not provided for in th^ 
 prefent Liturgy (^^j." 
 
 Tho' 
 
 .^ -• .■i. ' -.J-a^.-i ' J,'--^ 
 
 f/ij Th-Jifoenfabl? Obligation,, p, s»? ?■>, 
 
 
,,6a The L A T M A iV s APOl:&a T, 
 
 * 
 
 Tho' what Is here faid, from the Right Reverend author jnlt 
 cited in the margin, h6 quite fufRcient to prove what was propofed 
 in this Chapter; yet, lell any one fhould be led to fancy, thac the^ 
 BIekn(^ rec^ui^ed by the inftitution is implied in the Church or 
 England's prefent prayer. Hear us, and grant that voe receiv- 
 ing, &c. as Tome have afTerted it to be, 1 Vv'ill enlarge this Chan- 
 ter by tranfcribing further from that Prelate. 
 
 ** Let U3 try then (fays (h) f^e J whether the pretended 
 {w/)//f«//37/ is Neceffarily contained in the prefent prayer, or no^ 
 (foV if it is not neceffarlly contained therein, the fuppofilion of 
 havincT found it m thofe words, Hands only upon a precarieuS 
 ^vd uncertain f9aridntion, and fo the fupporition of iinding this 
 imoiiCrtUon will be but Precarious and Uncertain too : Rut let us 
 try' thii) by comparing this prayer, ift with iwt BieJJing in the 
 Inftitution; zdly, vvith the ptayers of the CathoHck Church r 
 and adly, with the prayer, which was rejefled and thrown out, 
 and upon* what occafion, to make room for the prefect prayer." 
 
 Firft, the BiefTine; in the InPiitntion is manifeft enough ; for our 
 t,ord, ''afcer he had Eulogized or BlefTcd, that is, prayed for a 
 ElclBnt; upon the elements, afiirmed oi iham befcr: di/lributio?i 
 This is'my Body, This is my Blood : It is therefore juil and reafoa- 
 ahie to conclude., that they were made his Body and Blood, nc5 
 Ij.irelv by h»s affirming th^y were fo, but alio by, the onmiporenC 
 apency of God, procured by this prayer for a Bleffing upon theni ; 
 iivc they could not be {o in their own original nature ; they could 
 not be fo by human defignation and appointment, things of fo high 
 and pofinve a nature being folely at thedifpofition ofthefupreme 
 \yill of God : Our Saviour [ as Man } was at th-it time miniftring 
 Suhordinai/'ly to his Father, whofe will he perfectly knew and came 
 to perform ; and therefore confidering our Lord's fubordinate 
 ;ninii,lraiion and the nature of things themfelves, this his prayer to 
 his Father was for fuch a Blefling upon the elements, os chat they 
 niight be advanced to the fupematura/ dignity of bcmg made his Body 
 and Blood, for all the gio;-iOus purpofes of that divine inftitiuiorf» 
 which he as the AooUle of his Father was about to appoint and 
 i;)tiblirn. Upon the whole, this inllitution moll evidently^ demon- 
 <i^^te5 that Che elements were raade the Body and Blood of Chrill*, 
 ■h-fore he gave them to b'e eaten and drunk by his Aportlee ; they 
 jT^ait therefore «o-xy bernade his Body and Blood, before thev are 
 ;'ii;lr!butad to the communicancs ; they cannot be made fo by this 
 ,.; «.:.:cy of Man ; the omnipotent power of God only mull be arJ- 
 Tilc;^ to for tnii fuperna'tinal purpofe j . this application iriuft be 
 
 mad'e 
 
 fi) Sup^Icojehty p, ijt, $cc. 
 
Chap. XXI v. Of the Church of Engivand. i6t 
 
 made by prayer : therefore this prayer of Bleffing niufi be, to 
 make the elements Chriirs Body and Blood, and to be So before 
 theC(Jinmiinicants eat and drink of them, as they molt rotor.c uOy 
 were in the inilitution : from whence it follows, thnr the prayoi. 
 Grunt that v:c recti^vitfg }hefs thy creatures of bread arid ni.^7:e be- 
 ing a prayer which docs r,ot beg that thefe creatcres may be madei 
 Of may become, or may be changed into, any thing at all before: 
 the zdi of receiving them ; I fay, frotn hence it follows, that (his 
 prayer is not a prayer for That Bk fling, that SuptrRatural Blef- 
 ii.Tg, which the ihliitution requires the elements themfelves to have, 
 'i';^: to be the Body and Blood of Chrill before the adl of reteiv^ 
 ing them ; and therefore this prayer has nothing that implies the 
 Bkffing which the elemiehts had in the inllitution. 
 
 Will any one fay, that our rccelvlvg thefe ^reaturei of ^rea/i 
 a^dWine makes them (by the inititution] to be tiie Body and Blood 
 of Chriji I and that this we pray for in the preftnt prr.yer? To 
 iiich I anfwer, that there is ho fouhoation for this in the inlh'tuti- 
 on : Our Lord never told his Ajiodles, that their eating and drink- 
 ing the br&ad and wine fliouid make that Bread and Wine to be 
 his Body and Blood : He firi> bleiled and obtained from 'his Fa- 
 ther, that the Bread and Wine were his ^ody and Blood, before 
 the diftribution ; for, before his Apoliles eat and drank of them* 
 he faid J his is my Body^ This is my Blood, He did not fay, Thi« 
 by jour Sating fhall be my Body, This by your Drinking fhall be 
 niy Blood ; there is nothing like this in our Lord's inftitution } and 
 therefore the Apoflle's eatmg and drinking of them tontributej. 
 nothing at all (by the inllitution) to make the elements cf Bread 
 and Wine to be the Body and Blood of Chri'A, the faid elements 
 being his Body and Blood before they «at and drank of ihem : 
 confequently our eating and drinking the Bread and Wine row^j 
 does not in the lead contribute (''by the inftitution) to make them 
 to be Chrilfs Body and Blood ; and therefore to pray that our 
 eating and drinking them may make them to be, or to become 
 or to be changed into, his Body and Blood, would be a r>o<vel fan- 
 cy^ T\oo(h?.x i\\hv\ivill-xvorJhip, and utterly foreign to the divine* 
 i'nftitution of the holy Sacrament. So that if this were [as i^ideed 
 U is not] the implication of the prefent prayer. Grant that q^ve 
 rud-vivg^ &c. it would not at all imply the Blelfing which ih^ in- 
 ititution requires, <viz. to make the elements to be the Body and 
 Blood of Chrill, before the adt of receiving them. But 
 
 Secondly, By comparing the prefent prayer with the confe^tient 
 Ju'vocaiions of the Catholick Church, [the be.d evidence for the 
 ^criptjreffnfe of oar Lord'? Bleffing on the elements,] it is mani- 
 felh that this Prayer has no implication of a petition for that 
 Bkftng, which thofe Invocations prayed for. The rrcfent prayct 
 ii. Grant that ^v/ nai'Ving theje thy inaturjs of Br (Ad and IVint^ 
 
462 Tht t/.r MAKih A'POLOat. 
 
 ^C. inay I: pnrlahe?s of hi! m^Jl blejjed Body and Blood. In 
 this prayer it is manifefl, that in the very ail itfelf o^ receiving, 
 the Bread and Wine are plainly diilinguifhed and dift'erert from 
 that rr.oft blelled Body and Blood, which they pray to be parta- 
 kers of; therefore, the Bread and Wine are not th^t fan.e Body 
 and Blood, from which they differ and are dillinguifhed : If any 
 will fay, that tlie elements are that Body and Blood by implica- 
 tion, then it will follow that the implied prayer is this, UraKt 
 that ive receiving ChriJTs mojl blejfed Body aP.d Bloody may he fcir-- 
 takers of his mofl blejjed Body and Blood; whch Dr. Brett ha told 
 the world is a Nonfetifual Inttrfretation (c). But if to efcnpe this 
 Nonfcnfe, any will fay, that the prayer Grant that ^we recci^virg, 
 f<i. does by implication pray, that our receiving the Bread and 
 Wine may he the means of our rcctiving the Body and Blood, 
 tstu then he will confirm what f juil now obferved, that the 
 Bread and Wire arc not That Same Body and Blood r becaufe 
 the wfa/;/ and the end cannot pollib'y be one and the fame thing ; 
 fl.e mean:, according to this luppofition, would be Bread and 
 Wine, and tl'c end would be the Body and Blood : therefore, the 
 Means and the End being not one and the fame thing, the Bread 
 and Wine are rot one and the fame tiling with the Body and B ood j 
 confi-qucntly the Bfcad and Wins are not (he Body and E^ocd 
 j^rnyed to be received. It remains therefore, that the Body and 
 I)!oQd of Chrilt, which" this petttion prays we may be partp.kers of, 
 are th4t very Body and Blood, which the Bread and Wine are 
 rot J and conf.quently, it prays to be partakers of no othef than 
 KJs Natural Body and Blood now glori^ed in Heaven. Ti)creiore 
 the implication in this prayer is, that we rc^ceivi-ig the creatures 
 of Bread and Wine, m.iy be partakers of Chrill's glorified Bod/ 
 and Blood in heaven; \vhich does not necc^arily imply, that the 
 Bread and Wine theuiQlves may be Chrill's Body and Blood herd 
 on earth at the altar, that we may partake of them j becaufe, to 
 be partakers of Ch^ilVs mofl ll-fjcd Body ar.d Blood, which a5*e 
 :n heaven, is not the very Same with our being partakers of his 
 f!ody and Blood, whicli by the ini^ifition ought to be here on 
 («rarrh at the altar; for the Church of England (whole this prayer 
 5^) teache?, that we can p.lrtake of the former, when we do not 
 partake of the latter, {?is r^bove) and confeqiiently llie tcaclics, that 
 the one is not individually the fame with the other: And there- 
 fore her prcfent prayer, that nve reteihing Bread and IJ'ins—^ 
 
 maybe far takers (ff his moil blefl'ed Body And Blood, [which no 
 Chriilian can deny are really in heaven} does not neccfiarily iniply, 
 ^at Ihe thereby prays, that the faid Bread and Wine themf^lvea 
 here on earth may be his Body and Bloody as th* Inlliturion re- 
 quires. 
 
 (t) J5ee the Preface to his Dfcourfe concerning the S^^ceiTity of difccinng 
 ^Is-ird"'! Body in the H0I7 Commuhion, f. \t» 
 
Chap. XXIV. Of the Church ^/Engi^and. i5| 
 
 £| aires, and the Primitive Church always prayed = Thus for exam, 
 
 p'e, 
 
 The Clementine Liturgy, the moft primitive and bed ftandard 
 of all other Liturgies, prays to God the Father, that the Holy 
 Ghoft " may make this Bread the Body of thy Chrift, and ihis 
 Cup the Blood of thy Chria.'* 
 
 S. James's Liturgy, ** That he may fanaify and make 
 
 ** this Bread che holy Body of thy Chrifi- and this Cup th^ 
 
 «' precious Blood of thy Chriil.'- 
 
 S. Mark's: <• Send down thine Holy Spirit— = upon thefe 
 
 ♦* Loaves and thefe Cups, that the almighty God may fan6\ify, 
 
 '* and thoroughly confecrate them-^ making the Bread the 
 
 <" Body ^and the Cup the Biood of the New Teftament of ouf 
 
 '* Lord himfelf Jefus Chrill." 
 
 S. John Chryfouom's Liturgy: " Send down thine Holy Spi- 
 
 *' rit upon thefe Gifts lying before thee m»ake this Bread 
 
 " the precious Body of thy Chriit— ^ — and what is in this Cop^ 
 
 " the precious Blood of thy Chriit^-— changing them by th/ 
 " Holy Spirit." " 
 
 So Bafil's Liturgy • " Send down thine F^oly Spirit 'upoa 
 
 '' thefe Gifts, to blefs, to fin^lify, and to perfect them, make 
 
 *' this Bread the precious Body of our Lord, our God, and Sa- 
 
 *' viour Jefus Chrill and this Cup the precious Blood of 
 
 '* our Lord, our God, and Sayiour Jefus Chriit, changing 
 
 " them by thy Holy Spirit.'* 
 
 S. Bafil's other Liturgy '• ^' Send down thine Holy Spirit — 
 
 *• upon vthefe Gifts lying before thee, to blefs them and make 
 
 •' them the Holy of Holies that he may make this Bread the 
 
 ^* holy Body of our Lord, our God, and Saviour Jefus Chriit,— 
 *' and this Cup the precious l^lood of cur Lord, and God, and 
 «* Saviour Jefus Chrill." 
 
 The Ethiopian Liturgy, " Send dovyn the Holy Spirit and 
 •"^ Power upon this Bread and upon this Cup, that he may make 
 
 V them both the Body and Blood of our Lord and Saviour jjefus 
 ^' Chriit." 
 
 Neftorius's Liturgy '- " That the grace of thine Holy Splric 
 
 V may come down, dwell, and reft, upon this facrifice-- — that 
 '* it may fanftify and make it 'vl%, this Bread and this Cup. thf 
 
 V Body and Blood of our Lord Jefus Chnft, changing and(nnai- 
 " fying them bv thine Holy Spirit."^ 
 
ibj, Tht L dTMAl^s, APOLOGT: 
 
 Severus's Liturgy : " Send down thy Spirit upon theie 
 
 ** OfFeringEi that this Bread may be made the life giving, 
 
 *' heavenly,' faving Body both of our (ouls and bodies, evea the 
 •* Body of our Lord, and God, and Saviour Jefus Chrid — - — and 
 
 ?* the Mixture in this Cup the life-giving favingj Blood, 
 
 ** e\^en the Blood of our Lord, our God, and Iving of all, Jef^s 
 *• Chriil." 
 
 Th$ Roman MifTc)! [notwithftanding all the faults And fad cop- 
 yuptions of that Church] prays: " Which Oblation do thou, O 
 *• God, we biTeech thee, vouchfafe to render in all refpe^s blef- 
 \* kd, approved, tftcc\u^I, reafonable, acceptable, that it piay 
 •*^ be r^iade unto us tlfe Body and Blood of thy moll beloved Son, 
 " our L^rd Jefus Chriil." 
 
 The Church of England's firft Reformed Liturgy : '* With thy 
 •' holy Spirit^ and Worde vouchfafe to blefs and fandlifie thefethy 
 ** gyice§ and creatures of Breade and VVyne, that they maye be 
 *' unio uj the Bodye and Blouc| of thy moite derely belov«i Sonne 
 V Jefus Chritte." 
 
 Thu? far in Bifr.op Brett's Co!lc(flion of Liturgies ; and in ths 
 other nunicrous Liturgies not coIle;^"led by him. 'Z.72;. no lefs than 
 forty-three Liturgies more in Reuaudctius'i Colleflion, Vol. i, p. 
 36, 3!, 48, 105. and Vol. 2. p. 33 — r— 621. [all which, y^_)ijt 
 the Right, Reverend. auihsr, from ivbom J vo^iv copy, I have care- 
 fully examined] the Invocation of the Holy Spirit to blefs the 
 elements ikem/dnjcs, that they may be made or may be what the 
 inflitution neceffarily fhews they mult be, f/x. the Body and Blood 
 of Chriil, is fo plain and manifelt, that he who runs may read it : 
 sill which is wanting in the prefect prayer of the Liturgy of the 
 Church of England, which contains nothing that can juftly be 
 termed praying for the elements themfel'ves to be made, or to be, 
 or to be changed into, any thing at all ; and therefore this Prayer. 
 4oes not necei^farily i^ply the Bleffing of the Institution, which 
 further pippears, 
 
 Thirdly, By comparing This prayer with That, which was 
 T?je<Sled and thrown cut, to make room for it ; and by confidering 
 t>ie cccaf;on, upon which this was done. The occafion was this .-. 
 
 Bucer and IMartyr^ zealous Calvinif'5, being fent ior over hither 
 ** to fpoil our Reformation, the Communion Office and particu- 
 * iarly the Cqn/ecration Prayer was altered, fo as to make it a- 
 " -reealle to the Cahhii[l Dotlrhie of the Eucharifl, which ie 
 *' was before altogether zrreconcileahle to." This was the occa- 
 fic^T according to Bifbop Brett, who proceeds to a coraparifon of 
 %H two prayers, and jhe hiiiory of rejecting \\t firft m^ introduce 
 
Chap. XXIV. OftbeCburcbofEtiGLAKD. 165 
 
 ing the prefent : fays he, *« Then inllead of defirini; the Holy 
 *• Ghoil mi'ghc />/e/s and fanaify the Bread and the Cup, and make 
 
 them the Body and B!cod of ChrijU we are taught to pray, that 
 ** ov^ recei'-oing thefe thy creatures of Bread and IVine, according 
 
 to. thy Son our Sa'viour Jefus ChrijV s holy in ft i tut ion, tnay hi 
 *' partakers of his Body and Blood : ^rhat is ((ays the Eifhop) that 
 ** by eating the Bread and drinking the Wine, we may psrtake 
 *' of Chrift's Natural Body and Blood which is in heaven ; which 
 *' IS exadly the Calyinill)^ notion, and makes the Bread and Wine 
 *' to be no more than bare Figures or Types without any manner 
 •' of virtue and efficacy, making all the efficacy to be in Chrift'a 
 ** Natural Body and BJood which is in heaven, and which they 
 •* fuppofe to be eaten and drunk by Faith (^)" This there- 
 fore is the ncceffary implication of the prefent prayer. This 
 
 confequeni'v is not by implication That Bleffing which the Infti- 
 (ulion requires, and which the Univerfal Church prays for, name- 
 ly, that the Bread and Wine themfelves at the altar here on earth 
 may be Chrifi's Body and Blood.— And therefore the preJVnc 
 prayer does not neceirarily imply the Bleffing, which the elcn.ents 
 ought to have by the Inllitution. It may be called, if you pleafc, 
 as every prayer may be. An Invocation, but not emphatically ^b€ 
 ^Invocation. 
 
 But furely enough I^as been faid upon this Subject. 
 
 (d) Preface to a Difcourfe concerning the Neceflity of difterning the Lord'* 
 Body in the Holy Communion, p. xv. 
 
 CHAR XXV. 
 
 Of the ¥lecejjhy of pray'wgfor the Faith- 
 ful Depart edj fpedally hi the Eticha- 
 riftick Oblatory Jnterceffton. 
 
 PRAYING and offering for the Dead (to ufe the words 
 of a Learned Author above-mentioned, ivho has Wte'y 
 prov.4 
 
tbS ThQ LJTMJN's JPOLOGT. 
 
 proved this point to my hand fa), W£3 pradifed under all religion? 
 and in all countries j but here we need only fhew it to have been 
 the Cultom of the Jewiih and ChriHian Church. 
 
 With regard to the Jews, Mofcs gives the following dire^lion 
 in Deuteronomy : ** When thou hall made an end of tithing all 
 
 *' the tithes of thine incrcafe-— ^ then thou fhalt fay before 
 
 •* Jehovah thy God 1 have not eaten thereof in my mourn- 
 
 ** ing, neither have I taken away ought thereof for any unclean 
 " ufe, nor given ought thereof for the dead, (i^J^^ The author 
 of EccbfiaiVicus fays : ** A gift hath grace in the fight of every 
 *' man living, and for the dead detain it not (c).''^' And in the 
 fecond book of the Maccabees there is the following account; 
 •* And upon the day following, as ihe ufe had been, Judas and 
 ** his company came to take up the bodies of them ihat were 
 ^* flain, and to bury them with their kihfmen in their fathers 
 ** graves. Now under the coats of every one that was flain, they 
 *' i'oup.d thing? confecrated to the idols of thejamnites, which is 
 * forbidden the Jews by the law. Then every man faw, that this 
 *' was the cauie wherefore they were fiain. All men therefore 
 *' praifing the Lord the righteous judge, who had opened the 
 <' things that were hid, betook themielves unto prayer, and be- 
 *' fought him that the fin committed might wholly be put out o£ 
 *' remembrance. Befides that noble Judas exhorted the people to 
 ■** keep themfelvcs from fin, forfomuch as they faw before their 
 •* eyes the things that came to pafs for thefms of thofe that were 
 «* flain. And when he had made a gathering throughout the com- 
 *' pany to the uim of two thouland drachms of filver, he fenc it, 
 ** to Jeruf:ilem to ofFwT a fm cix'i^ring, doing therein very well and 
 *' honelily, in that he was mindful of the refurrcOion (for if he, 
 *' had not hoped, that they tbdt were flain fliould have rifen a- 
 *' g tin, it had been fuperf^uous and vain to pray for the dead] and 
 *' aii() in that he perceived there was great favour laid up for 
 " thole that died godly. (It was an holy and good thought.}, 
 " Whereupon he made a reconciliation tor the dead, that they 
 *• might be delivered from i\n(dj.''^ And this pradice cpniinues 
 among tiis jews to this day. 
 
 With regard to Chriftians, it is allowed by learned men, that 
 the Greek word Euchariil has a very exterfive meaning. To 
 euchariftize is not only to thank and praife. but alTo to bhfs ; and 
 vvhea a lubordinate pej[fon is faid to Uefs, it is to bs underilood of 
 
 praying 
 
 (a) View of Chriftianity : Longer C^itechirm, part 2. L«0bn no, ii: 
 P- 336— --341 ( ^ ) C>^-ut. xxvi. 52, 13^ 14, (f) £.cd'A 
 
Chap- XXV. Of the Church ^/England. 16/ 
 
 praying for a blefljng : as Numbers vi. 22, &:c. Jehovah fpakc 
 
 faying on \h's ^vi/e, Te Jhall blefs —faying Jtionjafj 
 
 blefs thee and keep thee : &c. Now our Saviour's Bhjf.ng dt ihe 
 inititution of the Eucharill did certainly contain an Oblluory Inter- 
 Ceffion for the dead ; for nothing can be plainer, than that he oA 
 fered himfelf a facrificj for thoie who were then dead, as well as 
 for them who were living [e). His own infallible words prove 
 ?his : for he faid of t,he Bread which he had blcfTcd, " 'Jhii is my ^'— ?'1Sl 
 *' Body, vv-hich \^ given for you ;" and of the bleiU-d Cup. •' 'I his •4fe^'** 
 '* is my Blood of the New Teftament, which is fhed for many W^ '\ ^h'^'t 
 '* for the remiflion of fins." This, of his Blood Jkca for many i|»r> "'^'^ 
 
 proves, that his Bod} gi^jeti was alfo given iot the very Same Ma- \^/^fK ,V 
 r:y ; becaule the cxteniive benefit of his giving that his Body a fa* "^^ ^>»r* 
 criiice to his Father, cannot fall fnort of the univerlal benefit of 
 his fliedding or pouring forth his Blood a faciiiicc, he having done 
 both, undoubtedly, for the advantage of the fame pcrfons. So 
 thnc, fiiice our Lord's facrincc of his Body and Blood wr.s for tr.a-^ 
 vyfor the rcmijjion ofji^n^ it is mmifell that it was olieicd for That 
 Many^ who were to obtain the benefit of this Remiflion •. Bui fo- 6 
 of That Many were ihe Saints depjuted, v^ho, by re.ifon of their 
 being in a ilate of death, namely a ftate of feparation frcm (heir 
 bodies, {which is the confequeijce and penalty of fin,] had not yet 
 received their compleat Ahfolution and Rer/iiJJion \ and ihcreforfj 
 the facriiicc of our Lord's Sacramental Body nnd Blood was by him 
 olTered for T/^^/^ among the mtiny for remijjion of fns : Confe- 
 quently, his offering being made by Prayer (as has bten fhewn)/ 
 he ofi-ered and prayed for the Faithful departed, as well as for the 
 living : He commanded his Apollles to Do fhis:{./) And S. 
 Paul's exhortation is Univcrfai (g), that Eucharijis hi ofered for 
 all men : And he orders the Ephi;fians (/:?) 10 7nake fupflication for 
 all Saifits; for, tho' the word Sai?its in the New Teftament fomft- 
 times means living pcrfons, yet it is often applied to the (/) dead. 
 Moreover he aiks the Corinthians (/{•), " Fife what fhall they i^o, 
 *' who are baptized for the dead, if the dead rife not atal! ? why 
 ** are they then baptized for the dead i'" Upon which text BiHiopf 
 i^ell has the following note : ** baptized for fume Catechu Hi tn.% wha 
 ^' died before baptifm, out of an opinion of the neceflity of bap- 
 *' tifm, (fo Grotius 5) as likewifc (fays Diocati) that fuch deccafed 
 ** might be enrolled, and commemorated, and an happy rtfurrec- 
 *'- t'lon prayed for them, together with other faithful dcceafed/'' 
 So that without enquiring here any farther into the original of 
 jhis cuilom of baptising for the dcad^ or confiderirg by whciTl 
 
 it 
 
 U) Bp. Laurence's Supnlcmcnt (to the In('.ir()enr?.Me Obligation) contrni:e(}v 
 i. 2^1. 2n. (fJ View of Chriftianity, ibid.. ( f ; J Tim 
 
 h I. (h\ F.phef. vi. I?. ' rO See Bp. Brett's D.aUtaVi^.'i '>«^ 
 
 !he Litwrgie?, {. 190, 131, ?'?''. (^) ' C^^« ^^'^ ^?» 
 
iS^ The LATMAIS!'^ APOLOGT, 
 
 it was pradifed, let it fufHce to obferve, that It certainly was de- 
 figned for the benefit of the dead. Laftly, S. John fays : *• If 
 *-' any mnn fee his brother fm a fin, which is not unto death, he 
 ** {hall alk, and he fhall give him life for them thnt fin not unto 
 ** death. There is a fin unto death ; I do not fay, that he {}ia!l 
 ** pray for it.'* Now fince no brother can be fo wicked, by coiii- 
 rniting any fm, as toceafe to be a proper fubjedt of our prayers^ 
 while he lives upon earth, becaufe the door of rr.ercy is open to 
 ell on God's part til) death ; and fmce S. John docs in this text' 
 relax the duty, if not prohibit the jjradlice, of praying for fonrie 
 brethren ; this relaxation or prohibition cannot well be underilood 
 to relate to the living, who cannot be fo fiuiated while living, as 
 to make it unlawful to pray for them, or fo as that it is not our 
 duty to pray for them ; and therefore this relaxation or prohibi- 
 tion mult relate to fuch as are dead, and then this text v/ili be 
 found to be very llrong for prayers for the dead. Several nthef 
 texts might be urged in favour of this Ancient pradice, which, 
 from what has been faid, appears to have more foundation in Scrip- 
 ture, than has been commonly imagined. 
 
 But [ haften to fhew, that offering and praying for the faithful 
 departed was the conftant cuftom of the Ancient and Univerfal 
 Ci;hurch, there being not one Liturgy extant, for fifteen hundred 
 years after Chrii^, without a petition for the (/) Dead in theln- 
 terccffion ; and the praclice is farther confirmed by the following 
 kiUvnonies of the Primitive Fathers. 
 
 The Apoftolical Conflitutionsgive the following direflion : " Af- 
 *' fernblc in the dormitories, reading the holy books, and fin{>ing 
 *• for the Martyrs who are fallen afieep, and for all the 5 ints 
 '* from the beginning of the world, and for your brethren who are 
 '* '^c^?p in the Lord, and ofFer the acceptable Euchariil, the anti- 
 " type of the royal body of Chrill, both in your churches and in 
 ■' the dormitories j and in the funerals o^ the departed accompany 
 '' them with flnging, if they were faithful in Chrill." In another 
 j^ace there is the wnole prayer for the departed, too long to be 
 fscited here ; and then follows this dite^lion, " Let the third day 
 ** of the departed be celebrated with pfalms, and leffons, and 
 
 ** prayers, ind let alms be given to the poor out of his goods 
 
 " for a meraorial of him."" 
 
 Tertullian giving an account of the imntsmbrial praflices of the 
 Cnurch, fays : •* We make oblations for the deceafed upon the 
 
 *' anniverfarjr 
 
 iJ) S?e above Chap. VL where refuting the Popifh error of Purgatcr;), w** 
 %^'i le/tfru.ite ty tits Anci«r.t L^turgie-s 
 
Chap. XXV. Of the Church of ^.^GhA-^T}, i6^ 
 
 ^' anniverfary of their death." And (befide.s the paflage quoted 
 in the Chapter againii Purgatory) in another place ietting forth a 
 widow's duty towards her hufb\nd, he fays : ** She prays for his 
 " foul, and petitions for refrelhment for him at prefent, and that 
 /* he may have a part in the firll refurredion, and offers for him 
 •* upon the anniverfary of his death." 
 
 In the Ads of S. Perpetua and S. Felicitas, there is an account 
 pf S. Perpetua* s praying for her deceafed brother. 
 
 S. Cyprian fpeaks thus s " Thefe things werehiaturely confi- 
 " fidered by our religious precfeceflors, who therefore have made 
 ** a wife and wholefome provifion in the cafe before u^ that no 
 *• brother fiiould leave a Clergyman a gurrdian or executor ; and 
 ** if any fliould do fo, he fhouid not be offered for, ror the fa- 
 *' orifice celebrated for his repqle. Wherefore fince Vidorp 
 *' againil the exprefs letter of the canon, formerly made upoi| 
 ** this occafion in an affembly of bifhops, has prefumed to appoint 
 ** Geminius Fauilinus a Prtfoyter his executor; let no oblation 
 " be made by you for his repofe, nor any cufiom.^.ry prayer of the 
 *' Church be put up for him." And in another place, (peaking 
 of the Confeflors who died in prJfon, he bids the Clf-igy to whom 
 he wrote, " mark down the days of their departure, that their 
 '* memories might be celebrated in the cat-dogue -f Martyrs :'' 
 And this he afterwards exprelTes by " celebr.ting oblations and 
 ** facrifices in commemoration of them.** And elfe where fpeak- 
 ing of fome Martyrs, he fnys ; " By their illullrious fufFcring they 
 •' have gained palms ol the Lord and crowns. We always cfFtT 
 ** facrifices for^hem, as ye remember, when we folemnize the 
 " fufFerings of the Martyrs upon the annual return of their mar- 
 " tyrdom." 
 
 Arnobius fays ? ** Why fhouid cur chapels be {o outrageou^y 
 ^' demolifned, in which the mofl: high God is prayed to, and 
 *' peace and pardon implored for all, for magiftrntes, armies, 
 " kings, friends, enemies, the living, and the dead "" 
 
 :»" 
 
 Eufebius relates, that when the emperor Conllantine the Great 
 died, " the Priells and People offered up prayers to God for the 
 " empercr'^s foul, doing an acceptable office to the pious frince.'\ 
 
 S. James Bifhop of Nifibis, who was prefent at the council 
 of Nice, and was famous for working miracles ; this holy Pre» 
 late prayed for a dead perfon, " that God would pardon his fail- 
 " ings, and adm;t him into the company of the juft." 
 
 The autlror of the works, which are faid to have b^en wziSJea^ 
 fcy Dionyfius th? Aieopagite, giving an accouat of the baiiai of 
 
I7Q The LATMANh APOLOGT, 
 
 the<Iead, hys : *' The pr^iytr of the holy Prclaie irrip'ores t},e 
 *' divine goodnefs to pardon the dcccafed all his Tins; committed 
 f* througii hun^an frailty, and to place him in thejighfand le- 
 •' gion of the living, in the bofoni of Abraham, Ifa-cC, and ]a- 
 •' cob, the place whence forrovv, grief, and lamentation are La- 
 '• nifhed away." 
 
 S, Cyril of Jerufaletn rehtss, that it was the GiiHom oT the 
 Church to pray for all the Faithful deceafed in the E.ichai;iruck fei'- 
 vice ; that they believed the offering of the publck prayers, when 
 the ho!/ and trenicndous facrificc lay upon the altar, to be a very 
 beneficial afliilasce to the Spirits departed. And he illuftrates this 
 truth by a familiar inftarjce : *' It isobjecled, f^iys he, what can 
 *' the iTientio.n of a perfon at this facrifice fignify to his loul, 
 *' whether he dies charged with his fins or wiihoat the.D ? I'o 
 *" this he anfvvers, that in cafe a Prince flioald be prefented with 
 *' a crown by the relations of thofe who are fallen under his dif- 
 ** favour, would he not be difpofed to remit their punifiiment ? 
 *.* Thus we offer up our prayers to God almighty for the deceafed, 
 *•' tho* they are fjnners : and here v^-e do not prefent a crown or 
 V fqme fuch trifle, but we offer Chrid the vi£lim fl.iin for our 
 *' fins, that we may render tiie lover of mankind propitious both 
 *' to them and ourleives." 
 
 S, Ambrcfe, in hi; otation upon the death of the emperor 
 Theodoi'ms fpeaks thus : " 1 loved him, and .[ humbly conceive 
 " that the LvOrd will liear the voice of my prayer, which attends 
 
 *' upon the pioas foul. Give perf:cl reft to thy f rvant Thc- 
 
 *• odofiu?, that reft which thou haft prepared for thy Saints." 
 And again ; *' I loved him» and therefore 1 follow him even to 
 ** the rcgipn of the living, nor will 1 leave him till by my pray- 
 •* ers and tears I bring him to the holy mountain of the Lord, 
 *• whither his merit, call him." And"in his funeral oration upon 
 the emperor Valentinian he fays .• «' Give me the holy myfteries 
 '• into my hands, let us aifeaionately petition for reft to the pious 
 •* man. Give me the heavenly facraments, let our oblations at- 
 *' tend the pious fpnl." And afterwards fpeaking of him and 
 >>i£ brother Gratain he fays ; «< If my prayers can prevail, (jc,'' as 
 ^s cited above Chap. \T. 
 
 S. Ephraim Syrua in his laft will and teftaraent defires his brc- 
 ihrcn %p pray for him after his death,. 
 
 S. Bplphsnius affirms prayer for the dead to be a fignificant 
 sna beneficjal fervice, and njakes Uie rejeaing this oiHce pan- of 
 <^eriLis s hercfy. . « ^ 
 
Chab. XXV. Gf the Church of £ng Land. 171 
 
 5. ChryroHom iTays, that " a Bifiiop Is to be an intercrffor ic.v. 
 
 '*' all the world, and to pray to God to be merciful to the iins c^£ 
 
 •^ .'itl men, not only the living but the dead alTo." And fpcaking 
 p.gnind immcKjcrnte Torrow for the death of fifiner?, he layj ; 
 
 " i'hey are not fo much to be lamented, as fuccuuicd v.'itb prav- 
 
 " ers, and fupplications, arid alms,, and oblations ; for thefe 
 
 *' things >^ere not defigned in vain ; neitiie'r is it without reafon, 
 
 *' that we make n«ent)on of tliofc that are deceaied in the holy 
 
 ** myfieries, interceding for them to the I^anib '.hat was llain to 
 
 '* take avvav the iins ofthe world, but that foine confolacion may 
 
 *' hence arife to them. Neither is it in vain, that he who llandss 
 
 *• at the altar, when the tremendous myfteries are celebrated, cries, 
 
 '* We offe-- to thee for alt tho/e that are a/Ieep in^ChriJl, arui all 
 
 *' that make commcjno'r anion's for them .* for if there were no con^- 
 
 ^' mtmorations made for xh^xn, thefe things would riSit be faid. 
 
 ** ^_-^ Let ns not therefore grew weary in giving them our 
 
 ** allUlance, and cfFciring prayers for them i for the common pro- 
 
 ** pitiation of the whole world is now before us."* And in ano- 
 ther place he fays ; ** Tc is not enabled in vain by tlie Apoflles 
 
 ** that in the tremendous mylleries commemoration be made of 
 
 *' theViead. They knew v(::xy well, how much profit and benefit 
 
 " accrues to them : For when all the people fland with their hands 
 
 *' lifted up to heaven, and all the company of prieii/* '^iih them, 
 
 *' and the tremendous facriiice lies upon the altar, Ifiovv Ihall vve 
 
 " not move God to iirercy, when we call upon him for thofe that 
 
 ** are dcceafed in the faith ?" And once more he fays : " Noir 
 
 ** is it in vain that oblations, nor in vain that prayers, nor in vaiii 
 
 ^^ that alms are offered for the dead. All thefe things the Spirit 
 
 *♦ coa^mands, it being his will that we fliould airiit one another.'' 
 
 S. Augui^in fays ; '' It is not to be doubted, but that the 
 *' prayers of the holy Church, the falutary facrifice, and alms 
 '* given for their Spirits, are beneficial to the dead, that Go4 
 *• may deal with them more mercifully than their fins have de- 
 *' ierved : For this, which was delivered by our fore fathers, 
 *'• the Univerfal Church obferves, to pray for thofe who are de- 
 " parted in the communion of the body and bJcod of Chrilt, 
 ** when they are commemoraied in their place at the facrifice." 
 And in his treatife of Heresies he fays ; " The Aerians take their 
 *• name from Aerius, who foiling into the Arian herefy, added 
 ^* feme of his ov/n peculiar tenets, fayirg, we ought not to pray 
 
 " or offer the oblation for the dead.- The Catholick Churcht 
 
 *' teaciies tiie contrary.'* 
 
 ^ And Ifidorus Kifoalcnfis fays : " Becaufe facrifice and prayfef 
 '^ are offered through the whole world for the repofe of the faitfi- 
 '* ful departed, wTbilieve this caitom was delivered by the A- 
 '' poii!c6 thsrafelves : For the Cathgbck Chwrch every whejf 
 
 y ;jr /' 6bferve# 
 
17,2 The LATMAN's APOLOGI. 
 
 " obferves this ; nor would fhe give alms or offer facrifice to God 
 " for the fpirits or the faithful departed, unlefs Ihe believed they 
 ** received remiiTioa of fins." 
 
 And thus we fee what numerous, full, and ancient authorities 
 there src for offering and praying for the faithful departed : the 
 anihor, from whora I x\o\y trynfcribe, has fet forth the reafons, 
 for the craaice under the article ^ihe Co7nmunion of faints [m] : 
 So that (ashegoesffn) ihis cullom is ibongly fupported by Scrip- 
 ture, Ir^dirion. and Reaion j tho' if it were but barely' lawful, 
 no more; nted be fa id i Nature would do the reft. 
 
 (m) fee Viev/ of Ckriilianity i Longer Catechifn, part i. LejTon lOo ». 
 
 
 CHAP. XXVL 
 
 Thnt the CJmrch ^England rejects 
 mid really has rM^ prayer for the fahl 
 , fid departed^ either m thd Eucharijuck 
 or in any other part of her'' Service. 
 
 N the nrR Refornied Liturgy- the Priefl fayp^ Let ui 
 
 fray for tk^ nvkole fiate of ChriJT s Church, without the 
 addiiign of tnilitant here on earth, which latter words in 
 the Common Prayer now ufed feem ( faid Bifoop Collier 
 with his ifual Tnodefty) inferted to exclude prayer for the dead." 
 {a) They feem (fays he in another place \Jb) ) defigned on pur- 
 ** pofe to exclude the Dead, and confine the Church then prayetJ 
 ^' for to the living." And Bifhop Brett, fpeaking of the ^ds^i 
 «)f the Charch of England, reckons " praying for the Dead, who 
 '* have died in the Lord with the %n of faith/' as one of thof« 
 
 dsfei^Sj 
 
 (a) RiaionS; p, i#. (h^ D«fIiH^e^ p.- ^, 
 
Chap. XXVI. Of ihe Church of England, iy^ 
 
 defeds, faying, '* It \s p /at rj/j want wg in the prefent Liturgy of 
 '• the Church of England. When Bucer, Martyr, and Fagius 
 
 ** (the difciples of Calvin) were fent for, »the Liturgy was 
 
 ** new modelled to pleafe them^ and the particulars before- 
 
 '* mentioned, [of which prayer for the Dead is one,] call out of 
 " the Book ofCommon Prayer [c). Martyr and their friends here 
 " were not content not to have them [ the Dead ] particularly 
 ** prayed for, but clapt in words that ftiould particularly exclude 
 *' them, putting this preface to the general interccHion in the 
 *' Communion fervice. Let us pra\ for the nvhole Jlate of Cbrifs 
 *• Church militant here on earth : as much as to iay, Let us pray 
 *' for the faithful in this tvorld, not for thofe <tvho are departed!, 
 
 {d) Indeed after the Relloration of King Charles \l. a 
 
 Thankjgi<vif!g was added with rehtion to the Saints departed j 
 but the words militant hereon earth were itill left in the title 
 of the v>x?^y.Q.ry to fhew that no words in that addition fhould 
 be coniirued to be a prayer in their behalf (^). The words mi- 
 litant here on earth (fays another learned {f\ author) as they 
 are the title of this prayer, mull be the belt explanation of the 
 ambiguous paffages in it, and muft nectTiarily determine the«.i 
 ** to an excluhon of the Dead." But to proceed. 
 
 • ( 
 
 « {g) *' The Convocation, mentioned under the three lafi articles, 
 faw that the Atits of the former reformed Convocation ordered 
 prayers for the faithful departed in the firft book : they rejected 
 all thofe prayers in eilabliOiing the laft book : moreover all thp 
 members of this Convocation fubfcribed the 39 articles of reli- 
 gion, and thereby owned the Dodlrine of the Homilies, which 
 are eitabliflied by the 35th of thofe articles ; The Dodrine of 
 she Homilies is againll yf// prayers for the Dead, whether falfely 
 fuppofed to be in the feigned Popifli Purgatory or rightly fup- 
 pofcd not to be there ; for the third part of the Komi!/ con- 
 cerning Prayer does of fet purpofe tteat ** of that qneftion, Whe^ 
 *' ther <tve ought to pray for them that are departed out of thw 
 *' world or no ?" And the Homily afferts, that '* we have no 
 " commandment fo to do :" this it fays as to the general quef- 
 tion, and it gives this following as the reafon why, *' For (fays 
 *' the Homily) the Scripture doth acknowledge but two places 
 *' after this life ; the one proper to the eleft and bleffed of God, 
 *' the other to the reprobate and damned fouls." The Homily 
 repeats this again as the reafon, and fays : •• As the Scripture 
 *' teaches us, let us think, that the foul of man paffrng out of 
 ** the body, goeth Jlraiinvays either to heanjin or slfe to hellt 
 
 ** whereof 
 
 ^^t) Neceffary ufc ofTradition, p. 52, 53. {d) DifTcrtation on thft 
 
 Liturgies, p. Z04, {e) Ibid. p. %^%. (f) Nccefiity of an AHtr- 
 
 ?:Vioi3, p= 124, ^1) I Jidirpcnfablg Obligation;, V' *^» ^^» 
 
174 ^i^^ LATM^iirs APOLOGT, - 
 
 ^ whereof the- one neea'eih no prayer, the other is without re-* 
 *' dempiion." And towards the conclurion it exhort<= - Let u'- 
 2 noc-dream— of prater for the fouh of them (hat be .^ad' 
 *^ but let US-pray— for all men living." And ipenkina of "the 
 Corr,mun)o;i, the Homily conccrr.ing the Sacrament r,y. - - We 
 - mu It then take heed-— ~Idi applying it >• ,^, Dea^ w. 
 *' lole li\t friuc that tjs alive." 
 
 All the member-3 of this Convocation fubfcribed io m^ r^oc- 
 tna., ^by^fubfcnbin^ to the 39 articles, the 3rth of which aiTcrts, 
 that tee hoskof homilies doih contain a godlv and whokfomc 
 ■^ doccrine." i hjs Convocition eftnbhrned and determined the 
 kit booK confidently with their own fubfcription to the VVhole- 
 iomenels of the Homily do^rine ; and therefore, a^rreeably with 
 tiusdodrine, 3gain(i all prayer for the dead : for, iT? is unchDri- 
 C^ble to charge this^ra-^^ afemhiy with the wretched'w3--f/?ifv 
 of making this laii book to contain any thing rontrar^io th« 
 otner ilandmg A-as of their Church, and their own fubfcription 
 to tnoie Handing Aas; and therefore this iail book which they 
 eihbaCied, js (confiaently with thofe Afls and Subfcriptions) with- 
 oat any pr.^yers for the dead : Look and exatnine, throughout tne 
 whole, book ; there is not fo rpuch as one prayer for "them -s 
 t'iizy were prayedfor in the Primitive Liturgies and in the fir"l 
 reformed Liturgy. If the private judg^nent of any man furmifcs 
 and teaches, that this Convocation has provided fuch a prayer for 
 them in tne laft claule, which they havfe added to the prayer for 
 ti^^ whole (late of Chrili's Church, and alfo in one of the prayers 
 ol- the Eunal ofH:e j the Puhlkk Aa of the Church of England 
 and all the menibers of that Convocation having fubfcribed to it' 
 are fufficient tedimonies againft, and jull corrections of. t.iat man's 
 private judgment. For, bring this matter to the tcii thus : Fj.-- 
 ■*a:e judgement fays, th^u the claufcs and the Burial Office prayer 
 are fuch prayers /or the Faithful departed: the Publick A^ c^' 
 theChjrch of E.ig!and fays, as I have cbferved before, that the 
 
 foul of fuch pafp.ng out of the body, goeth fuait^.vays to hea- 
 
 .^,en -and needeth no prayer} And further ihe exhorts. Let ui 
 
 ^,ot dream of prayer 'for the fouls of them that be dead, hut 
 
 ^^t u^ pray for a fl men filing. This is her Pablick At\ 
 
 HI her Ho'.nily aforefaid ; as is alfo her dodrine in the liiit pare 
 ^f h^r Homily concerning the Sacrament, where foeaking of th" 
 
 Coinmunion, ihe fays, IFe muf then take heed /f// applying it 
 
 Jar the Dead. <zy^ lofe the fruit that be ali^e- Nothing can be 
 more direft againi> Praying and Offering for the Dead. Now the* 
 Church will not own her "Pablick A^s to be snccniTitent with or-e 
 another i therefore the 'church wiJI not ncknowlcdgc, that the 
 ^Uufe and Earial prayer are by her provided to pray for the Der.c 
 \i bc;ing inconfiilent with her Homilj do-itrir.c, which is her PiJb- 
 U'fei^ A<\ agaiitil prayirg /or ilig Ptad •• ace ccnfec^t?£n:ly xh\d 
 
 m^'^i'S 
 
Chap.lSXVL Of the Church of EnoLK,;^. i;. 
 
 map^s Private Judgment againft the Puhlick DoBrim cf his Church 
 IS of no value , and his teaching, w',,ich accufes her Afts of in- 
 confiltency, ,s to be r.jeaed by all, who have anv regard for her 
 bir.cerity, ana the olam dcaUng of her Convocation. " 
 
 Nay, tlie very words of the additional clanfe before fpoken or 
 .ydl not be.r the interpretation of this „-..r/s Private Jud/n"erc' 
 ;.) -T.e cl.ai^ doeson^ ;' blch God's holy name forlii W^^. 
 ^ vants departed this life m his f^,ith and fenr." This is Than'f- 
 gu-ing: then that there is no prayer fo'r them, but that the 'pet'V 
 tmn immediately annexed is only for the Living: The petition i. 
 th., " iicfeechfi^g thee to give .. grace fo toinoJ th^^p^d 
 .; f^^-'P*7> ^'^^f^ vv,;J^ them;.c'. niay he fariakers of thv heaven- 
 
 ly .ang.om. This pect.on pray, for a necefjary means to at^ 
 l^m ^ co7ifequent end, depencmg on that means: The neccffirv 
 rr^^v..^ grace So to f alio., their (the Departed's) good er^n^plZ 
 e en. of this means is literally expreifcd. Ual Lh Zf tj 
 (th^. Liv:ng) may be partakers of ./., h^a^oenly kingdom. The ne- 
 ,en.uy^W..d the^W, therefore, being^clofdy conne^ed by 
 the f^o words So and Uat, are unavoidably prayed for in beh.lf 
 o none but the fame perfons:. the neceilary means is in be ' 
 of th? Living only: the end therefore is in behalf of tt 
 Li.n.g onlv ; fo that the End here is, that they enjoying 
 the kmgdom of heaven, we may be partakers with them io V-at 
 enjoyment; for we have f^-en, that this Church tench.^/ thit 
 their foul? go ftraitways to heaven, and need no prayer. ^^* "' 
 
 ^ If any one will deny this, and afilrm, that the .,r^ prayed for 
 IS in behalf ot the Departed as well as the Living • then accor 
 ding to him our foilovving the good examples of the Saints d- 
 partea muft be the necejjary r.eans of their beirig made partake;^ 
 of God's heavenly kingdom, which I am fure is falie divini tv ' 
 for, at this rate, their £nal happincfs /lands upon a very d4' 
 carious and uncertain foundation, if our followms^ cheJr ?ood ev 
 ainples mull be the neceffary means for their procuring thereof ii' 
 The petition then is plainly conditional ; but we cannot m^-^^ 
 that the departed fhould perform the condition, becaufe it would 
 beabfurdto/....7rtheirown.u'^^;/,,; therefore we cannot be 
 luppoled to include them in the prayer. 
 
 {k) In the firfl reformed Common Prayer Book the Church of 
 England s prayers for the dead in the Burial Office were t\^^(e 
 Wttei-ed by the Priefl, ^viz. ' 
 
 « I 
 
 com 
 
 Jh) Ibid, p ao ,r ( ) ^^eceffity of .n Airer.tJon, p ,^^^ 
 
 V-^' ih Indifnenfable Obligation, p. 46—51. See /ppendx I 
 
 ?i, 920 Supplement, p. 96, ' f T >' occ /.ppena.x, ^j. 
 
1-76 The LAI MANh APOLOGY. 
 
 I. " I commend thy Soule to God the father almighty, and thy 
 ** body to the Ground, dfff. 
 
 <( 
 
 2. ** Wecommende into thy handes of mercie, the Soula 
 
 ** of this our brother departed N , befccching 
 
 *' thine infinite goodnes, that when the iudgcment 
 
 *' fliall come, whiche thou hail compiitted to thy wel- 
 ** beloued Sonne, both this our broihcr, and v^^ ruixy bee 
 " founde acceptable in thy fyght, ^c. 
 
 3. ** Graunt that at the day of iudgment his Soulc, and 
 
 all the Soulcs of thy ckd departed our of this lyfe, 
 may nvilb us, and we with them, fully rccciue thy pro- 
 
 " mifcs, and be mr.de piifitc altogether, through the 
 *' glorious rcfurrcccion of thy bonne, CjV. 
 
 After the Lord's Prayer. 
 
 4. " r>itj7. Entrc not (O Lorde ) into iudgcment with thy 
 
 ** Servauni. 
 *' ^HnfxK^ere. For in thy fight no liuing Creature fhall be iuf- 
 
 *• tified. 
 " Trirfl. From the gitcs of hell 
 ** Aunj\\je)c. Deliver their foulcs, O lorde. 
 
 *' Let us praie. 
 
 5. ** O Lorde, with whom do liue the Spiritcs of thei«-n that be 
 
 ** dead, cVC. Graunt unto this thy Seruaunt tha; 
 
 *' the Sinnes which he committed in this world be not ira- 
 " puted unto hym, but that he cfc.ipying the gntes of 
 " hell, and paynce of eternnl darkcn'.-s, may euer dwel 
 •' in the Kcgion ofjight, with Abraham, Ifaac, and 
 " Jacob, in the place where is no weping, Sorrowe, nor 
 " hrauinefs ; ?.nd when that dredcful day of llic gencrall 
 *' refurrcccion fiuill come, make bym to ryfe alfo with the 
 •' iuil and i*ightcou5, and rcceiue this body agayn to glo- 
 " ry, then made pure and incorruptible, fet hym on the 
 ** ri^^ht hande of thy Sonne Jefus Cbnil, among thy 
 *' hoiy and ^\tt\, that then he may heare with them thefe 
 *' mo:l fwete and comfortable wordes : Come to me, ye 
 " blciL'd of my father, ^c, 
 
 6. " The celebrnrion of the holy coramiinion; wbcn thsre is & 
 
 *' b'iiiaj of the dead. 
 
 ■■ Thi 
 
Chap. XXVI. Of the Church of England. 177 
 
 « The Collet. 
 
 «' O mercifull God, the father of our Lord Jefu ChriH, who i3 
 
 •« the refurrcccion and the life, ^c. we mekely bercecH 
 
 " the ( o father ) to raife us, L^c. and that at the general 
 
 " refurrcccion in the laft dale both ^e and this our brother de- 
 «* farttd receiuing ag.iin oar bodies, and rifing again in thy moit 
 •* gracious fauour, may with all thyne eled iaindes obtainc 
 •' eternall ioy : Grauncthis, Csfr. 
 
 See the firft reformed Common Prayer Book " Imprinted at 
 " London in Fleet- fireete, at the figne of the Sun ower againfl the 
 *^ Conduit, by Edward Whitthurche, the 4 day of il% ye year 
 •* of or. Ld. 1549 " 
 
 In thefe prayers for the Dead it is Very remarkable ( fays m^ 
 author ) 
 
 Firji, That the Reformed Church of England prayed then particu- 
 larly and cxprefly for the foul of the deceafcd, as in ihofe 
 prayers which I have marked i. 2. 3. 
 
 Secondly, That fhe prayed for him by name, as in the prayer niark° 
 ed 2. 
 
 Thirdly, That fhe prayed for him with refpef^ to his intermediate 
 flate between death and the final judgment, as in the prayers 
 marked i. 2. 4. 5. 
 
 t^jurthly, That fhe prayed for him, and us the Living, in conjunc- 
 tion ; as in the prayers marked z. 6. in which her language 
 is fo determinate, that there is no room for any oppofite 
 conllrudion : for fhe prays, ih2iX.both this our brother And 
 njce may he Jound acceptahUy and again both ive And this our 
 brother departed. 
 
 fifthly^ That fhe prayed forhim^ and all the eleft departed, and 
 us the Living, in conjundion ; as in the prayer marked 3- 
 and this in fuch determinate language, as leaves not the 
 leaft liberty for any other meaning ; her words are, hii 
 
 fotd And all the Souls of thy Eka departed may with 
 
 us And mve luith them fully receive thy promifes* 
 
 But in all the following Common Prayer Books, and particularly 
 fhe prcftMU, the Church of England rejects and throws out of he> 
 l^i; iai OiiivC every one oi ihdt det(rmnat$ praytn for the Dtad % 
 
 2> ^ fh0 
 
i-'S The lATMAI^s AFOLOGT. 
 
 flie his not retiined {o much as but one of them, nor has {Tie ^rc-' 
 vided any peticion equivalent thereto : nay, fo circumfpe£l arid crr- 
 {ica! is her Burial OiHce now, thnt it no uherc prays for any of the 
 faithful Dead rn company with ihe Living, by joining them with 
 the Coiijaittion vi^'^v?', as in the iirli Liturgy j fueh uS, T^hat both 
 ahii our hrothf.r And ~ix:e may be found accept able ^ or both <vje And 
 
 ih'u our brother dsparted ' ftia^ obtain eternal joy, No^ 
 
 there is no fuch conjai:(^"tion copulative as rhe word And in all the 
 prefent Burial Office to coiines^t the Dead with the Living in the 
 fame petition ; it is utte ly excluded and rejeded out of that Office, 
 by the Lift reviewing Convocation. So again, the prefent Burial 
 Oiiice does ro where provide (as in the firit Buiiiil Ofrice) to pray 
 for the Dead /;y^<?;;f;W conncdtd with the Living, by the con- 
 
 junclion .a)?^/, as thus in the fjril OiHce, That-^ all the Jouh 
 
 of thy ele6i departed out of this llfe^ may itith us. And «iv^ avitb 
 ihsm, fulh recei-ve thf fromijes \ wherein it is maniftft, that all 
 the Departed fouls and we the Living arc equally prayed for in 
 that petition, becinfe detcrnsinately connected together by the 
 conjuns'^.ion copulative Ar.d. So that this petition concerning de- 
 p?.rtfC fouls and us the living, is. That they with us Ar.d^joe with 
 them 11^ ay fully receive God's proinifes ; \'hich is exa<5lly the 
 iatnc as to fay, 7bat thsy And n.\je imy ^My receive them. AH 
 fhis deaf and determinate manner of praying for the Dead in 
 general, is uttcr'y e;xcFudcd by the IK€(. of the Church of Eng- 
 Und's C'onvocation in the lail review : the daufe in their prefent 
 Burial Oirice is only this, Ihtitixe nx'ilh all thofe that eiri depart- 
 idy &C. Tfias ha've eur perfc5l conjuvimation and hlifs both in body 
 Aiidjcul, Sec. I'his deterajincs not any prayer for the Departed x 
 It doss not pray, th^.t they And <ive may, ^c. it does not pray, 
 that <vje And all thofe that are departed may, kz. nor does it 
 pray, that «iv^ ijcith all thofe that are departed. Sec. And they * 
 •withusf in?iy, &c. No f No ! This lall And they ivith us maj, 
 &c. would have determined the Dead prayed for, but the Con- 
 vocation would not admit it : the Brit part of the claufe Thai 
 *ive With all ihofs that are dsparted, &c. may. have, is allowed 
 by them to be there, it determining no petition for the Departed 5 
 becaufe a man can with good grammar pray in this fentence to 
 be made happy with or in the company of thofe very perfons, 
 whom he believes Hand not in need of his prayers, and for which 
 feafon he does not pray for them. 
 
 t win give three inflarc<*s of this, and literally apply them to 
 ihe very claufe of this Barial prayer. Firjl, we ran with good 
 grammar pray thus, as to our happinefs with the bleffed Jefus, 
 That 'Zve nA:ith thy dear So?t ^sfus Chriji, nvho departed this life in 
 thy faith and fear, may hwve our perfed ccnjutnmation and hlifs 
 hoth in body and foul, kc. In which, it is manifeR, we do noS 
 f/ay for ths bleflcd J^fu?, but for ourfdvef IQ be confummately 
 
Chap. XXVI. Of the Church ^/England. 1-9 
 
 happy with or in his company. Secondly^ The Romanift?, who 
 believe {tho' falfly) that the bltficd Virgin, mother of our Lord, 
 has attained to \\tx perfsSl confummation and hlifs both in body and 
 foulf can with good grammnr pray thus, That nve n-viih the bhJJ'ed 
 mother of our Lord^ 'who departed this lifs in thy faith ar.d fear^ 
 may ha-je our perfect conjuvimationy 6cc. In which, it is niani- 
 fefl, fuch Romanilts would be undcrllood to pray, not for the 
 bleiled Virgin, but fcr themfclvcs to be confuminatcd, ^c. with 
 or in her coitipany. 'Ihirdly, Thofe Piottliants who believe with 
 the Ghiirch of England, that the fouls of the righ'.cou'^ /^r-'^^^jj- 
 cut of the hcd\\ go Jlrailti-'ays to hea-ven^ and netd no prayer[Ll ; iuch 
 Protellants, I fay, can with good grammar pray this pi a} er, without 
 any fuppofition of being underliood to pray for the faithful de- 
 parted ; nay they, or any other Chriilian oppofcrs of Uich prayer, 
 ii^an, confidently with their principles, prny ** that we with ail 
 ** thofc that are departed this life in iby faiih and fear, may have 
 '* our perfedl confurnmation and blifs both in body and foul, hz.-* 
 For,if you ihould charge fuch cppofers of prayer for thcDead,thac 
 in ufing this prayer they have really prayed for the Dead j they 
 might eafjiy anfwer thus ; *' Your charge would be true, if the 
 " prayer had been worded, 'ihat ive And all thofe that are de- 
 ** parted^ 4^c. Eat the prayer ib worded fo, as to obviate and 
 *' prevent any fuch charge againil us: lt*s words are only, Thtat 
 ** <we With all thofe ^ which are very diftercnt from the words iice 
 ** And all thoje ; our prayer is for ourfelves alone, [not that tt'*? 
 ** And all thofe, bur] that n.ve With all thofe that are departed — 
 V *n<iy hanje our perf eel confurnmation \ which is no moie in reality ». 
 ** than thar we ourfelvci may be confummated, and joined to or 
 ** united with their fociety, for they need not our prayers,'* fay 
 thefe oppofers ; and fo fays the Church of England Proteftant too^. 
 but with this additional way of arguing: '* 1 ho' in my judg- 
 ** ment I think the above anfwer fufficient, (he may (ay) yet, that 
 ** I may not be accufcd of building too much upon my owij 
 ** meer private judgment, I appe^i to the authentick Ads of my 
 ** own Church, the Church of England, whofe prayer this is 2 
 " She teaches me exprefsly in her Homiiy, that the faithful de- 
 
 ** parted need tjo prayer : She exhorts me, faying Let us not 
 
 *' dream '■"^-^^'•^ of prayer for the fouli of them that be dead, but 
 
 *" Ut us pray -for all men li'ving. Thele her AtX%^ 
 
 *' taken in conjundion with her Ads of rejtding and throwing 
 " out o^ her prefeiit Burial prayers all determinate petitionsy which 
 ^' necefTarily and unavoidably did pray tor the Dead in her iirft 
 *' reformed' Burial Service, do evidently prove that her prayer 
 ** aforefaid in her prefent Burial Office, contains no petition for the 
 
 Z; « •* Dead, 
 
 CO Ss5 tbs third part gf \U HpjaU/ C9W«rni;i^ ha/?r» 
 
iSq The LAYMAKs APO LOGT. 
 
 •* Dead, but for the Living only : for, as I arti certain, that the 
 •* judgment of my Church will not own any of her Publick ABs 
 *" to be inconfiftent with one another j fo I am fure, that my 
 ^' Private Judgment cannot, with any decency and refpeft to- 
 *?' wards her, athrm that her Burial prayer, which is her Publick 
 ^' Aft, does now pray for the Dea4 inconuiiently with her Do£- 
 ** trine, which is her Aft ^Ifo, againft fuch prayer : and confe- 
 *** quently my Private judgment, regulated and direfted by her 
 *' Publick judgment, determines, as ihe does, confiftenily wiih 
 ** herfelf, that this Burial prayer is no prayer for the Dead, but 
 "' for the Living only." 
 
 After what has been faid in this Chapter, i£ the Reader flrlj 
 thinks, with a certain writer (m) or two, that the Church of En- 
 gland prays for the Dead, let him examine the pages quoted in 
 the Margin (n). But from what has been already faid, I will 
 take the liberty to conclude that (he does not, and will clofe this 
 Chapter in the words of Bifhop C<5/«Vr : ** Where thing^ of this 
 ** vail importance are in the quellion, where falvation is fo nearry 
 *' concerned, we ought not to rely upon diflant colleftion and 
 ** uncertainty, not to reft contented with glimmering hopes and 
 \' unaifefting obfcurity, but prefs for the plaineft proof, and prac* 
 •*• tife with the moftfolemn perfpicuity. For can we be too fure 
 ^* we are fafe, in a cafe of this nature ? And ought not the befl 
 ** provifion be made, where advantage and lofs run higheft ? (©}**' 
 
 («j) Appendix to Two Difceuifes, tSc. and The Great NecefTaries, ^f« 
 «xprcfcly and manifeftly allowed and provided for, &c. (ft) Supplement 
 
 (to Indifpenfable Obligation) continued, p. 158 285, 364, 38 z. (<!■) 
 
 H A Pi 
 
i isx ] 
 
 CHAP. XXVII. 
 
 Of rejcBi}?g or hyh/g qjidc the t^fc (^J 
 Chrijm in ConJirhiaUoiu 
 
 I4ni afraid, k now but too evidently appears, that tJ^ 
 Church of England isjuftly chargeable, not only with hav- 
 ing erred in the E ght particulars mentioned above in Ch^pi. 
 XV'II. but alfo in the Five additional ones juR debated. I flisiJl 
 now fpeak of her having rejefled or laid afide the ufe of Chrifm 
 in Confirmation : From the arguments and authorities to be 
 brought for the ufe of it; we ihall fee whether ilie ought not to 
 fiave retained it. She declares, '* that it was far from her pu4-> 
 ** pofe to forfake and rejed other Churches in Jii things vvhicii 
 
 •' they pradifed, or to depart from them '\^ any o/^^r points 
 
 •* than thofe, wherein they were fallen boch from themfelves m 
 *' their ancient integrity^ and from the Apojlolical Churches whith 
 *' were their firll founders (^?).^' 
 
 Now I obCerved above (Chap. TX, j, that by the fame ru!« 
 that Infants were admitted to Baptifm in the Primitive times, 
 they were admitted to the Seal thereof, commonly called Confir* 
 niation^ and after that to the Eucharilt And proving iht AW^A 
 Jity of this from Scripture and Antiquity, I concluded againM lh« 
 Church of Rome for rejcding the pradice of Infant-Ccmmuniori t 
 and it is one of the Eight particulars, which the Church of Eng-. 
 land is convicled of in Chap. XVil. Taking it then for granted, 
 that what wc now call Confirmation was the Seal or Completioii 
 of Baptifm, it will give us fome light into the u(e of the Chrifm, 
 which we are fpeaking of. No doubt S. John alludes to this, 
 ^hen he fays, {l>) ** But ye have an Un^ion from the Holy onej^^ 
 as if he had faid : " But ye have been anointed with confecrate<i 
 *• Chrijm • Ye have been confirmed, and by that means have 
 
 'f rcceiv?4 
 
 (»} Se« b«r 30tli Canoa^ A, D^ 1603. (h) 1 J.ks, U. ao. 
 
tSz Ths LA7^MdN*s APOLOGIA 
 
 ** received the Holy Spirit : Your Anohititig was not in vain ; 
 ** ye itay with, and depart not from us, as the hereticks, whom 
 •* 1 have been fpeaking of, did." And again he fays ? (<r) '* But 
 ** the Artointing, which ye have received of him, abideth in you :'*• 
 that is. The CJndion, which ye have received from Jefus Chrift, 
 in confequence of the ordinance of Confirmation, which we his 
 i^portles h.^ve adnrsinilUed to vou, outwardly anointing you with 
 Chrijm ; this Anointing, I fay, abideth in you. And S. Paul 
 mu't Uiude alfo to the iarre cuitom, when he hy^ : (^Z) '* Now 
 *• he WHO tjlahlifieth us with you in Chrift, and hath anointtdw%, 
 ** is God who nath alfi y^^W us,'* I obferve, that Mr. Saci^ 
 %vho tranflates from the Vu gar Latin into French, makes ufe of 
 the verbs cunfirmer and affennir ; fo that his Tranfiation of this 
 verfe may be thus rendred into EngliOi s *' Now he, who con- 
 *' firmeth ^xsdi firtngtheneth us with you in Jefus Chriii, and hath 
 ** anointed us wirh his un8ion, is God himfelf j and it is he alfo, 
 •*• who hath marked m nvith his fear* Now luppofing the biefied 
 Apolile to fpeak ot the unftioi) of the Holy Ghoft, it is highly 
 p'obable by the phr^leology which he ufed, that he alluded to the 
 k ;own pra^Tiicc of anointivg with Chrifm in the S,eal of Bap- 
 til in. 
 
 To this let u« add the prayer in the Apofiolical Confiitutions at 
 adminiltring the Undlion in Cor-Srn-.ation, which flicws the effe<^s 
 then expected from its *« O Lord God, who art unbegotten and 
 ** without fuperior ; thou Lord of all, who hd|l made the fweet 
 *'* favour of the knowledge of the gofpei to go forth among ail 
 *' nations : Do thou now grant that this Chrifm may be eft;fdual 
 *" in hi'n who is baptized, that the fweet favour of thy Chrill may 
 •* remain iirm and llr.ble in him, and that he dying vvi:h him ia 
 ** his death, may rife again with hir^ in his refurrettion, and live 
 *' tcgeiher with him (^)." 
 
 S. Ireraeus, in his account of the Marcofian hereticks, fays 
 that they anointed their new baptized diiciples with Balfam (y). 
 Now they were never blamed upon this account ; therefore tiie/ 
 had this pradice in common with the Church, and carried it a- 
 long with them into their fchifm from it. Agreeably to which 
 the Learned Dr. Wall [g) oberve- : •' Since I flialj Ihew pre^ 
 ♦^' fently, that this Chriim was ufed by the Catholicks, from tef- 
 ** timonies of near the fame date with th's 5 one may conclude, 
 *' that it came from fome principle univtrfally received by all 
 '* Chriitians, Catholick or iieretick." And i iind this was the 
 
 cafe 
 
 (r) IJ>:d, V. a7. {d) 2 Cor. i. ar, 24, (<") Ccnftit Apoft. B. 
 
 7. c. 44, (/) Iron. adv. h«r. 1. 1, C. j?. \ j, C|). J^i^W 
 
 if infant Bjptlfm^ edit, 3d, part »» chsp. §, p? 1^7. 
 
Chap. XXVII. Of tie Church ^/E-gland. 1S3 
 
 cafe as to other particulars for S. Irarneus tells us bcfcre:, that 
 thefe fame hereticks ufed both the Mixed Cup and the Invocation 
 at the Euchariii [h) But it muU be, that either thf y took all ihefc 
 practices from the Church or the Church from then! s i he latter 
 is abfurd ; therefore Chrifm was in ufe among the Carholicks be- 
 fore the hereiy of Marcus, that is, early in rhe ffcond century i 
 And as it was Univerfal, as well as thus Ancient, it mull coufc- 
 quently be an Apoftolical Tradition. 
 
 Tertulllan telllfies for the Unf^ion in thefe word?. ^ ** As Toon 
 *' as we are come out of the water, we are anointed with the 
 
 ^* blelTed un<5lion— ■ and then we receive the impofition df 
 
 •* hands, ini'ocating the Holy Spirit by a benedidion (/) '• 
 
 Origen fays : " All, who are anointed with the facred Chrifm 
 " are [in fome fort] made Priefts, as Peter fays to the whole 
 ** Church, l^e are a royal Prieflbood {k), 
 
 Theophilus Antiochenus is more ancient than the two laH cited " 
 authors, and he fays ° '* We are therefore called Chrillians, be- 
 '* caufe we are anointed with [he oil of God (/),*' But it is al- 
 ledged, that the ttnciion he fpeaks of, is a fftritual and mylicat 
 unition(t}i) : Be it fo ; but does not his way of fptakn^g tiilcover 
 him to agree with the Catholick praflice ? Mr. Birgham con- 
 feil'es, that '* Bifhop Pearfon is of opinion, that the ufe of it Ci-me 
 ** into the Church fhortly after the time of the Apoflkt (//)."•* 
 Kow, (afking the Reader's pardon for repeating with enlargement 
 what we fo lately urged) if the u/e of it came fo early into the 
 Church, and it cannot be f^id to have had it's injlitution frcm any 
 council, ^^' be denied to have been ««;Wr/6;//y pr>:;difed upon the 
 progrefs ; why may we not, by S. Auguilia's rule, pronounce it 
 fnojl certainly an Jpojiolical tradition ? 
 
 S. Cyprian was charged by a late Fanatick, ore ThopfUs de Lauxt 
 from the Centuriils with holding the ahfolute ntcf£ity of ihi3 
 Chrifm. To which Bifhop Brett thus anfwers ; {o) '* 1 do ac- 
 *' knowledge, that S. Cyprian does fay, that Chrifm is neceffary, 
 •* but he does not fay abfolutely neceiTary, as DeLaun charges him 
 
 «« to do. He fpeaks of it ia his 7oih epiiile directed to^dr- 
 
 •* nuarius 
 
 (h) Iraneus ibid. c. 9. § 1. (/) Terrull, dc Bapt c. 7, ?. (^) Ori- 
 
 gen. in Levit. hom. 9, p, 156, (/) Theoph. ad AuroJ. lib. I. in B be 
 
 Pat. G. L, torn. i. p. jo. {m) Bingham's Antiquities, B' 12. c. 3^ 
 
 frtj Ibid. [0] I,s?t;;r t9 Mr, Ed, Hars fef/vr? Th<? Bulw^^k Awm'a, ^ 
 
tfe^ The LATMAN's JPOLO^r. 
 
 •* nuarltis and the other BiHiops of Numidia, and fi^ys : It is at- 
 
 ** fo neceffary, that he that has been baptized, JJ:ould be anointed j 
 
 ** that having received the Chrifm^ that is, the Utidion, he may 
 
 •* bg the Anointed of God, and hd-ut the Grace of Chriji refiding in 
 
 ** him. And what he here calls Chrifm or Unciion, he in his 7zd 
 
 ** epiltle directed to Stephen B)niop of Rome calls Ivipofition of 
 
 •* hands for the recei'ving of the Holy GhoP,, which is that ordinance 
 
 *♦ which we now call by the name oi Confirmation : Which being 
 
 «< aJvv.iys adminiOreJ, from theApoftlcs days down to UieReforma- 
 
 ** tian, wich the ceremony of /i'«c/>//«^, was therefore ufaally 
 
 •♦ culled by the name of C/^*-///;; oiU/Ulion. Now, the faying 
 
 •* tint this ordinance of Conftrmation is neceffary, is faying no 
 
 •* n;ore than the Scripture itfelf warrants him' to fav, fince it is 
 
 •* runibercd by S. Paul (Heb. vi. i. 2.) among the Fundamentals 
 
 «* of the Chrillian religion. For fpeaking of the 7''(3/<!^^/i7/;c;/, or 
 
 ** thofe points of our religion which arc necejfary, fnch as Repent- 
 
 •* once fro:n dead nuorks. Faith toivards God, the Refurreifion of 
 
 *' the (had, and eternal 'judgment, he adds to whem not only //<? 
 
 ** docirine of Baptijms, but likewife of laying on of hands. If 
 
 *♦ therefore S. Paul judged this ordinance to be one of ihtfoundatl- 
 
 ** //(?«/ of oar religion, as he exprefiy calls it, I cannot think St. 
 
 *"* Cv'pri:in corrupt or erroneous for faying that it is ncceffary • For 
 
 ** they both fpeak of the fame ordinance, tho' one calls it the laying 
 
 •' o>i of hands, and the other calls it iL/^c^/o^ or C/^r//?/;, becaufe 
 
 «< both theie ceremonies were ufed in the miniilration of it. And 
 
 ** tiitrefore whether O'rl was necelTary, ornot, to be ufed in this 
 
 *^ ordijrince, S. Cyprian was not corrupt or erroneous in fpeakmg 
 
 ** ofCiiriun as nectffary, fince that ordinance lu his time, and long 
 
 "*" before even frofn the Apoflles day:, was not adminirtred without it. 
 
 ** And \ conceive tht^re i^ more reafon to believe, that we ourfslves ' 
 
 *^ h.'Yc been erroneous in laying afide the ufc of Chrifm Or Oil in 
 
 *' the Ordinance of Confirmation, than that he was erroneous rr! 
 
 ♦^ ricntioning it as neceffary. Much more have thofe been cor- 
 
 ** runt and erroneou?, who make Confirmation itfelf not neceffary, 
 
 *« and liave altogether laid afide a divine ordinance, which S. Paul 
 
 •^ pi.\ct;3 amoncT tho Fundamentals ofour religion." 
 
 -- S. Cvril of Jernfakm is an evidence in favour of x\{^*jecelfary ufe 
 ot Chrifm, when he fpeaks fo highly of its efficacy in the follow - 
 ■r>» words, as we quoted him in Chap. I. — • ** So alfo this holy 
 " Ointment is not bar« ointment, nor to be called common, after 
 " the confecration, but the gift of Chrifl and the prefence of hia 
 ^*' floly Spirit." Mr. Bingh.-^ni allowr, that ** if.vas this Undli- 
 " on, as the completion of Baptifm, to which they { the writers 
 ** of the fourtli century) afcribtd the power of rnaking everyChrif- 
 •' tinn in fome fenfe, partaker of a royal pricllhood ; V.'hich 15 not 
 *^ only faid b) ^v'^^txx in tb;- p-'fTsgc of hix'li'A m^ntioncdj but' 
 
Chap. XXVII. Of the Church ^/England, ig^ 
 
 ** by Pope (p) Leo, S, (q) Jerom, and many others (r). To 
 
 «* this they alfo afcribe the noble efFeds of Confirming the Soul 
 
 '* with the ftrength of all fpiritual graces on God's part, as well aa 
 
 " the Confirmation of the profeffion and Coven;uu on Man's parti 
 
 *' The author of the Conllitutions makes it to be, t>n Man's part^ 
 
 •* the Confirmation ( f) of the confefiions and compacts made with 
 
 •* God in Baptifm ; and, on God's part, the collation of the Holy 
 
 ** Spirit, rcprefented by this ceremony of Anointing : whi<;h is fo 
 
 •* frequently m^jntioned by every Greek writer, that it would be 
 
 ** fuperiSuous to refer any learned reader to them. It will be fuffi- 
 
 *' cient only to hint the forms of prayer, which they ufed upon lhj> 
 
 '* occafion ; for thefe will evidently (hew what fpiritual efFedls they 
 
 *« expeded from this Unclion (t)''* The oldeil form of all w6 
 have cited before. 
 
 And liow, I think, we may reafonably afk, Who gave the 
 Church of England authority to lay afide the ufe ofChrifm in Coft* 
 firmation I 
 
 {p ) Leo, Ser, 3, de Affumptione fua, p. 3. ( j^ ) Hieron. cont. Lucif. i. 
 ^. (r) Vid. Profper. Sentent. 342. Anibros. de initiat. c» 6. Auguftin^ 
 
 Ser. 3. poft 40. a SJrmond. edit, in Append, torn. 10. p. 847. (J) ConftiCi 
 Apoftol. 1.3. c, 17, 1.7. c. 22, (t) Bingham's AntKjuitieS, B. la. c, 3* 
 
 \ 3 
 
 CHAP. XXVIIL 
 
 Ofrejecilng or laying ajidc the Vnctloyt 
 of the SicL 
 
 TH E Undion or Anointing of the Sick with Oil is an- 
 other pradice of the Primitive Church, which is rejec^l- 
 ed by the prefcnt Church of England ; but whether llic 
 had authority to depart from the Ancients in this parti- 
 cular, is what I propofe to enquire into in this Chapter. I f«iy, it 
 is rsjsdedhy i\iQprefent Church of England i for it was one of the 
 A a Vnmxm 
 
%^6 The LAI MJI^'s JPOLOGT. 
 
 Primitive ufages, that were thrown out of the firft reformed Lito.5- 
 gy, to pleafe the Outlandiih Pfe%terians above-mentioned. 
 
 But let us fee what is to be faid in favour of it. Now it is found- 
 ed upon an exprefs text of Scripture : ^^zj •' Is ««/ fick among 
 •• you ? Let him call for t'he Prejlyfers of the Church ; and let them 
 *' pray over him, anointing him with Oil in the name of the Lord ; 
 ** and the prayer of faith fhall fave the fick, and the Lord fliall 
 *• raife him up ; and if he have committed fms, they fhall be for- 
 *• given him." 1 I^now indeed ^fays Bifl^jop (hj Brettj it is faid 
 by Tome, that this Oil was ufed, in the days of S. James, to work 
 miraculous cures j and therefore it is fuperftitious to ufe it now, 
 when no (ach miraculous cures are to be expecled. But all thrs 
 13 faid without proof J and it does not appear from the holy 
 Scriptures, that Oil was ever ufed after our Saviour's refurreiSlion, 
 by any of the Apoilles or others, to work a miraculous cure. Nei- 
 •i.*her does the Apoi'le here promif^; a miraculous cure, but only 
 fays *• t\\e prnyer of faith fhall fa x^e the fick, and the Lord fhall 
 •* raife him up. Here isjiothing fo much as intimated, that a 
 iTiiraculous operation is to be expeded j any thing, which may 
 not as reafonably be hoped for, now miracles are ceafed [ as the 
 Biihop fpenk ] as then when miracles were frequent. T^ke payer 
 cf faith fiaUja<ve the fick ; that is, when the Priefts have prayed 
 ever the fick perfon, and anointed him with Oil according as is 
 liiefcribed, he may then txpeft the bkfTing of a relloration to his 
 health, if God fees it motf expedient for him. But it is not faid, 
 the Lord fhall cure him miraculoufty, but the Lord fhall raife him 
 lip ; which if it be done by God's blelhng on the Phyfician's Ikiil 
 and prefcriptions, or by any natural means, ( neither of which 
 -Can operate without God's blefTmg) the promife is fulfilled". 
 
 But then it is obje6led, that here fs no promife made to the 
 affcintlng nvith oil, but only to the prayer of faich ; if, therefore, 
 prayer alone be the means to procure health to the fick, the a- 
 7iointing is^infignificant. But this objeftion makes Anointing the 
 fick, not only to be ufelefs at this time, but alfo to have been 
 always fo, even at the very time when ^. James required it, that 
 is, in- the age when miracles were wrought : for that Apoflle plain- 
 ly fpeaks of his own limes as well as thefc, when he fays, the 
 prayer of faith fvall fa^ue the fech. This argument therefore is of 
 no force, fince it proves too much, and makes the Undion of the 
 fick as infignificant when it was conftfTedly required, as now 
 
 when 
 
 (a) James V, 14, 15.. {h) Viridliculori of himfelf frocn Po^Jcry- 
 
 P'42. &c. 
 
Chap. XXVIIL Of the Church ^/England. 1S7 
 
 when they pretend It is not required. In the next place we ought 
 to confider, that i\\Q prayer of faith is Such a prayer, as is offered 
 according to the will and dircclion of the Holy Ghoft, for whicii 
 we have fome word of promife to rely upon, that we fhall be 
 heard and anfwered : and therefore the Holy Ghcft having re- 
 quired by the pen of the Apoflle, that C/;^^/(?« (hould accompany 
 this Prayer^ it may be queltioned, whether in this cafe That is 
 to be called the prayer of faith, which is not fo accompanied. 
 At leaft he that ufes the Un^ion, may be more fecure, tiiat he 
 does offer up the prayer of faith, when he omits nothing that th« 
 Holy Ghoft has enjoined on this occafion." 
 
 Thus far Bi(hop Brett ; and to the fameeffe^fl, in difFt-rent words, 
 «3oes the Very Reverend author (c) often beforc-menticned expref? 
 himfelf. *' The Apoitle's diredtion (fays he) is exprefied in very 
 general terms, and implies that all that were fick, were to fend 
 for the Prefbyters of the Church, that the Prefbyters of the Church 
 were to pray over Jl/who fent for them, and that they were to 
 Anoint with Oil 4// whom they prayed ove( ; and confequently 
 that they were to anoint Jll in general that were fick. If there- 
 fore this anointing be underllood of the miraculous gift of heal- 
 ing, the ApoUJe, to be confilWnt with himfelf, mut\ give affurance 
 that All fick Ciiriitians, if they were anointed, fhould certainly 
 recover. Beiides, if S. James had defigned this Anointing to be 
 underilood of the miraculous gift of healing, he would probably 
 have ordered the fick to have fent for any fuch gifted perfon, whe- 
 ther Prefbyter or not, (for t)ie extraordinary gifts of the Spirit 
 were beflo\yed upon the Laity as well as the Clergy) or at leail 
 for fuch Prefbyters only as were endowed with miraculous gifts : 
 But here his direftion is general to fend for Prefbyters, a land- 
 ing Order in the Chriftian Church, many of whom had no mira- 
 culous gift, but were AH perfons who, by virtue of their being 
 Prefbyters, had authority to pray over the fick, ivhich office all 
 Prefbyters are here ordered to accompany with the outward cere* • 
 raony of Anointing with Oil in order to render it elFedual." 
 
 Neither is this pradice without Traditionary evidence in the 
 Ancient writers. 
 
 In the Apoflolical (d) Conflitutions there is a prayer for t|ie 
 fandification of Oil, in which the Priefl begs of God to grant i5 
 power to reilore health and drive away difeafes. 
 
 A a 2 Prigea 
 
 (c) View of ChriftianUy ; jLongev Cat««hifj)i^ part a, LefJ'&n J59, (4) 
 t9nftit. Apoftol, 1.3.0,6, 
 
188 The LAYMAN'S APOLOGT. 
 
 Origen has thcfe words : (e) ** There is yet a feventh way, tho' 
 *' it be hard and painful ; when the finner wnflies his bed wich 
 <* tears, and tears are his meat dr^y and night, and when he is not 
 ** afliamed to fhew his fin to the Prieftof the Lord, and to f'-ek 
 •• for healing according to him who faith / /aid, I tvill cnfefs. 
 " agaitili myfelf my tranfgrejjtons unto the Lord, and thou forga'veji 
 ** the ungodlinefs of my heart. In which alfo is fulfilKd that which 
 •* the Apollle faith. Is Any manjick ? let him call Jar the Prejhyters 
 *' of the Churchy and let them lay their hands upon him ^ anointing 
 ** him ivith Oil in the name of the Lord, and the prayer of Faith 
 •* fhall fave the fick, ana the Lord fhall raife him up ; and if hi 
 •* hanje committed finsy they fhall be forgi-ven him.'''' 
 
 S. Chryfoftom (f) in like manner fpeaking of forgivenefs of 
 
 fins, cites the fame ter.t of St. James. 
 
 Viclor of Antioch has thcfe words : " In the mean time, what 
 <' James mentions in his canonical epiftle, does, not differ from 
 *' this ; for he writes : Is any ftck among you, ^c. Now Oil 
 ** among other things mitigates the fatigue of labour, and che- 
 *>* riflies light, and produces ch°arfulnefs. The Oil therefore, 
 ** which is ufed in the fncred Unction, denotes God's mercy, and 
 <* the cure of the 6i(c3ii'e, and the illumination of the heart : yet 
 ** it may be faid, that Prayer procures all thefe things, but that 
 ^* Oil islhc external fymbol of thofe things which are done (^).'' 
 
 Now ict it be obferved, that the Anointing here pleaded for, 
 and rejetled by our Modern eformer?, ** is very far from the 
 •• Extreme Vnciicn ufed in the Church of Rome. The Papilh 
 *' ufe it as a V^i.iticum or Sacrament, proper and nccelTHry for 
 •* thofe that are pall all hopes of recovery, but our \^frll ] Re- 
 ^* formers diredled [and I plead"] that it fhould be ufed as the 
 *' Apollle appointed, as U was ufed in the Primitive Church, 
 <* and as it is Hill ufed in the Greek Church and all other churches 
 •' that were never lubjefi to the Roman, for the recovery of the 
 •-' fick(f)." *• The petitions proper to be put up for a fick 
 perfon, are (fays the Very Reverend author of the f^ie-uj of Chri- 
 fiianlty) for the Recovery of his hcakh, if it may conduce lo 
 his good and God's glory, for the forgivenefs of his fins, and 
 for Spiritual ftrength againll the affauhs and temptations of the 
 devil. And anointing with Oil is a proper reprefentation of all 
 
 thefe 
 
 (e) Origen, in Levit, horn. 2. (f^ ChryToft, de Sacerd. 1. 3. c. 6« 
 
 (g) Viftor Antiochen. in Marc, cap: 6. , ( ^) Bp« jBrett's Vindiotioa 
 
 ot hi aliiUfjcni Popery, p, 41, ^ 
 
Chap.XXVIII. Of the Church of Ekglai^d . 189 
 
 thefe benefits, becauTe it was the common cuftom to anoint per- 
 fons with Oil, in order to give them Itrcngth or recover their 
 health, and to thefe parpofes it was much recommended by the 
 Old ' hyficians ; It was in high eilimacion among the Eaftern nati- 
 ons ; and he can fcarce have read tf.e Old Teftament, who is not 
 acquainted v^ith the nioli fieqiient ule of Arointing among the 
 Jews. It was efpecially praitired on a medicinal account, and 
 adminiilred publickly in the fynagogues by the Elders on the fab- 
 bath ; where the applying oi this remedy to fick people was ac- 
 companied with the prayers of the Faichful for their recovery and 
 the pardon of their fins ; or if the perfons were in a weak condi- 
 tion, the Elders came home to them. And from the Jewilh it 
 was adopted into the Chriilian Church ; where it muft be granted, 
 ;hat it was many limes attended with miraculous recovery: But 
 when the miraculous gifts cf the Spirit ceafed to be common, 
 ihe Church rtill thought fit to continue the ufe of this rite as an 
 ordinary means to procure the recovery of the fick by the pray- 
 ers of tiie Priell. It is moreover a iacred ceremony, proper to 
 h^ ufed upon t\m occafion, becaufe all the Outward untiions of 
 the Church are fo many Emblems of the Inward undtiou of the 
 Holv Gholt, by whofe grace alone we are qualified for pardon, and 
 furniflied with fpiritual ilrength to withiland the fiery darts of the 
 wicked one (0-'* 
 
 In a word, the mofi acute adverfaries to this cuaom acknowledge 
 it to have be^n the pradice of the Univerfal Church in the fevenih 
 century {i) ; and grant, " that fo long as the fuper natural gift 
 «• of healing lafied, there was as much realon to ufe the common 
 «« ceremony of fuch healing, as there was at firll. And. (fay 
 ♦* they) as we confefs this pradice of Anointmg the fick to have 
 « been frequent in the nr.i ages of the Church, fo we grant it 
 " to have been an Apollolical Tradition ; for we find it agreeing 
 *' with the praaice of the Apoflles in S. Mark, and with tha 
 •« cuftom of the primitive Prcfhyters in S. James (/ )" Smce 
 therefore Anointing the fick i. an undoubted Apoilohcai pra<^tice 
 tho' it be fuppofed. but not granted, that it was always attended 
 with the fupcrnatural gi^t of healing : yet it lies upon thefe Gen- 
 tlemen to ihew us a direftion, either in Scripture or in i radition, 
 for the abolilhing of this rite, upon the ceafmg of this gift in their 
 language, or," afl ihould chafe to exprefs myielf, upon the le.s 
 frequency of it. But fince no fuch diredion can be produced, 
 baton the contrary All the churches of the carta continued the 
 
 iion, (0 Clogctt. ibi4. p. 55. 
 
190 The L AT MAN'S APOLOGT. 
 
 cuftom, whenthegift ceafed or grew lefs frequent; how came 
 tiiefe gentlemen to be wiferin this matter than theUniverfalChurca 
 of Chrill ? Flow do they know, when or how often God Almigh- 
 ty may be pleafed to bellow his extraordinary blefling upon the 
 ufe of this Apoliolical ceremony ? In fhort and to conclude this 
 fubjeft, there can be no harm in the ufe of this pradice , there 
 may be hazard and lofs, there certainly is difobedience, in rejed- 
 ing it. 
 
 And here I trike leave of the prefent Church of England^ 
 whom natural aft<filion obliges me to love, and confequently to 
 leave with regret : But Great is the ^ruth, and nxnll pre'vaiL 
 
 CHAP. XXIX. 
 
 Of the Pretended Churches of the A/itl-^ 
 Eplfcopal RejGrmat'ion. 
 
 E F O R E I come to the main point, which I propofe 
 to fpeak to in this chapter, that is, the Divine Right of 
 Epifcopacy'; I will fay a word or two of the manifold 
 defe£ls and errors of thefe pretended Churches, befides 
 their want of that Epifcopal Commiffion, which wrll appear to 
 be neceilary to the very }3eing of a Church. I fnallnot (for it 
 is not necefTary) point out nicely All their errors, or their difa- 
 greement with each other. It has been fhevvn above, that the 
 poor Church of England had not erred in fo many particulars, had 
 fne not, contrary to her own judgment, been led by them to de- 
 part from her Rule of Reformation t And it is well known, hqw 
 they have fince call the fame in her Teetk. 
 
 But to be more particular : Since I have proved, that Infant- 
 Communion ought io be prasftifed, let me afk, whether it is m 
 ufe among them ? And the anfwer mult be, that tho' Mr. Pierce, 
 (Dus of their Tcache;s^ has written an ingenious Eijay |o favopr 
 
Chap. XXIX. Of the Antl-Epifcopal Churclies. j 9 1 
 
 ©f this praaice, which none of the reft of them have anfwered, 
 yet they do not revive it, But indeed what do they praiT.ire? 
 The Britifii and IriOi Prefbyterians, Independents, &c. having no 
 Liturgy, their minillrations are in a great meafure left to the 
 fancy of every Miniller, and (I fuppofe) they do not now pretend 
 to Divine Infpiration. How then can any man be alTined, that 
 the perfon who takes upon him to ofiiciatc, will offer, will cele- 
 brate, if you pleafe, the Eucharift (for inilance) in fuch njuije as 
 our Lord and Sa^oiour did and commanded to be done, as his holy 
 ^Jpojilesufedit, and the good Fathers in the Primitive Church fre- 
 quented it F Or rather, knowing the principles of the men, may 
 he not be allured of the contrary ? Again s Do not all Prefhyte- 
 rians, Independents, &c. deny the Eucharilt to be a Sacrifice ? 
 Yes: And, in confequence of that heterodoxy, they have neither 
 Oblation, Invocation, nor Interceffion, as the Catholick and A- 
 poHolick Church ahvays had : Yea, they brand thefe with the 
 rame of rank Popery. Neither can I find, that they pradife the 
 Mixture of the Cup. 
 
 Further i Suppofing ( what we fhall prove anon) the Divine 
 Right of Epifcopacy, the Britiih and Irifli Prcfbyterian worfhip, 
 if they pray for the profperity of their own Mock Ecclefiaaical 
 government, muft be corrupt : The Scotch, efpecially, mufl be 
 abominably wicked. For the proof of this I will borrow the 
 words of a late learned Prelate of that country. *' If Epifco- 
 pacy (fays he in his Epiftolary ilylt) fs of Divine or Apoliolical 
 inftitution, what other can thbfe, who have invaded the Rights 
 of the Bifhops, be than notorious Ufurpers ? Ufurpers of Rights 
 belonging to others by Divine Inflitution ? By unavoidable con- 
 fequence, what a difhonour done to God mull it be, to pray to 
 him to countenance fuch Sacrilegious Ufurpations ? 7"o pray to 
 God to abet or afTert an unrighteous Ufurpation of a Right, 
 that is founded but even on Human Law, is an abomination to 
 him. Suppofe Titiusy by all the human laws that can give right, 
 has a clear and an unqiiellionable title to fuch an eftate or fuch 
 a government : Suppolc Caiits, by notorious ufurpation and vio- 
 knce, has got an unrighteous pofi'effion of that eftate or that go- 
 vernment ? Suppofe Sempronius and his followers have nothing 
 more ordinary in their publick addrefles to heaven, than that God 
 would for ever exclude Titius from his Right, and continue Caius 
 in his unrighteous pofleffion : How can Fla^vius or Fuhius^ any 
 man who is fully and firmly perfuaded of Tit0us's having the 
 only Right, join in fuch addreffes ? How can he, with a devout 
 fenfeof the honour that is due to *' a righteous Lord that loveth 
 ^* righteoufnefs, to a God of purer eyes than to behold iniquity,'* 
 allow himfelf to communicate in vvorfnip with Sempror-ius? But 
 a the cafe b? fueh^ where Right is founded even on Human La-nj, 
 
tgt The LdTM/lN's APOLOGT, 
 
 how much more raull it be fuch, where it is founded on Dii'irf 
 
 InRitution? In our prefent cafe, not one or another but the 
 
 main body of your Pallors [continues he to Mr. M.) do, in con- 
 fequenceof an unfound faiih and of heterodox principle?, put 
 up, not rarely and at fome times, but ordinarily and as often 
 as they hold publick aflemblies, linful and unfandified prayers. 
 When you fio fo, l"o generally, fo ordinarily, and fo ftatedly j it 
 manifelliy afFcds your Worlhip, as it is the worlhip of fuch a 
 [a} Church, whether Provincial or National : A pradlice fo U- 
 riv( rial as to Pallors, fo Ordinary as to Publick airi-mblies, and 
 fo vMibly founded on univerfally received t eterodox Principles, 
 i^ ni'it pl-iinly (tho' not formally, yet) on the matter the fiime, 
 jis if til It Church had a Publick Liturgy polluted with unhajlow- 
 t<' petiLiOdS : And I fuopofe, all thinking iVoteilants will readily 
 allow, that u is lawful to give up Communion with a Church, 
 thatu(esiuch a Liturgy (b)"" Again: " In praying - - the 
 Pallor is the rajuth of the People, he is our Mailer cf Requcfts. 
 By neccfTary corfcquence it is always to be fuppofcd, that We the 
 Pooplf are to join with him ; it is in Oar names he prays ; they 
 are Our rccjueih he offers up (c).'" And again : ** Every peti- 
 tion any-wife immoral or unrighteous pollutes the publick wor- 
 fhip of a Church, and makes Communiort in it finful. To pray 
 to God, that he would patronize or prolper Unrighteoufnefs in 
 any ir)il:>nce, profanes the publick oihces no Icfs than praying 
 
 t^' Angfis or the Saints departed.- i o rffjr up immoral, im- 
 
 piou'-. or unrighteous petitions to God himfelf, is moll notorioully 
 to affront his nature. It fuppofts that which is inconfilUnt >*ith 
 his tflentiul purity, that he is capable of being unrighteous or 
 befrieiidmg unrighteoulnefs. And whatever llrikes againft the 
 cilraiial, impartial, unalterable righteoufnefs of God, docs e- 
 caa'.lv (hike againll that which, in our way of conceiving divine 
 ttnngs, is founded on his righteoufnefs, his fovcreign preroga- 
 tive [d):' 
 
 B'Jt to come to the French Reformed : They teach in the Ca- 
 techifm publickly in the congregation, that the Eucharift is not 
 a Sacrifice. I'he words are ihc^fe : " Minifier. Was not then 
 •* th« .>upper iritruted to make an oblation of the Body of Jcfus 
 •* C-.r-a t'> Gv-)d ins FatheY? Scholar. No: for it is Jefus 
 *' CnriU alone, to whom that office appertains, inafmuch as he 
 
 ii 
 
 {A) " Wh.'n I call thore Societies, with whom Communion is not to be 
 «« htld, Cku'tbeSj 1 fpcak the common Dialeft ;'* fays our author, />. 2. of 
 tTic h>iuk 1 am n. w c ting, meaning Prefliyterian Societies, (b) Bp. 
 
 feagc's Rc»fonabJe".trs of a Toleration cnfju-rcd into : Letter 2, p» 2%, 49> 
 JO* (c) bid, p. 34. (d) ibid. p. 36, 37. 
 
Chnp. XXIX. Of the Jnti-Epifcopal QhxMxh^^. jg'^ 
 
 " is a Prieff for ever : But he commands us onh to recei-vs hh 
 ''Body and Blood, m/ to ojer ic." And acrording to this doc- 
 trine, T/je Liturgy of the Eiicbarifl cr manner of celebrating the 
 ho.-^ Supper printed with Ihe Pfalms of Daind in Frevch <verf, 
 andre^vie^cclby order of the TFaloon Synod at the Vniled Pronjinces, 
 and (1 fappofe) ufed at this day by moft of the French Reformed 5 
 i lay, this Liturgy, nccording to the do^rine of the Catechifm, 
 dwindles the Euchariil down to ,t bare Remembrance. I fliail jult 
 oblcrve here, that the rubrick of the Geneva edition orders, " tha: 
 ♦* the Sunday before the Stopper is celebrated, it fiiali be declared 
 
 ^* to the People, adly : That they do nor prefent Chidren 
 
 ** there, except they are well iniiruaed, and have made prcfeiliori 
 " of their faith in the Church." There are other Liturgies a- 
 mong thefe people, but it would be doing them too much honour 
 to dwell long Upon them : They are miferable fluft j in fhort, nof 
 worth regarding, and fo we will leave them. 
 
 I had like to have forgotten the Lutheravi ; who, befides their 
 PrrlLyierianifm, adminilter, as the Romanifls do, a nvhote Wafer 
 inflead of broken Bread. Befides, they and the Romanifts *' agree, 
 ^' that they eat and drink the Subftantial Natural Body ?.nd Blood 
 ** of Chrilr, which was broken upon the Crofs, in the Eucharift : 
 ** But they differ in the Manner of Eating ; for the Pr.pi(is fay 
 ** they eat and drink them in the elements, and the Lutherans fa/ 
 '* they eat and drink them i.<:ith the elements : both which afTer* 
 ' tions are equally abfurd. (^)" Con- is as ofrenfive as TrsKs-kb^ 
 ftan;iation. 
 
 But before we proceed to fliew the Divine Right of Epifcopacy, 
 and apply the confcquences of that to thefe Modern No-Churches^ 
 we mult fay a word or two of the fucccliion of Paibrs in geniiral 5 
 becaufe fome famous men among the Prelbyterians, and particu- 
 larly a popular preacher one Mr. Samuel Chandler, with MeiTrs. 
 Collins, Trenchard, and Gordon, a Triumvirate of Deiib, deny 
 theneceflity of an Un-inierrupted Succeffion of Gofpel-MinifterS;, 
 bantering it as abfurd (/). Now it is ftrange, that v.'hile thefs 
 Gentlemen pretend to argue from Scripture, and leemingly allow- 
 it to be God's word, they fhould deny fo dear a truth. The^^ 
 cannot but know, for the Scriptures plainly teach it, that no man 
 can lawfully take upon him the Miniilerial oiHcc, (o as to aft irx 
 Chriit's name and by his authority, without a miffion from him 5 
 
 B b thac 
 
 fc) See a Letter to the author of The Hiftory of the Lutheran Church from 
 a Country School-Boy. London, printed fur John Morphew, 1714. (/ J 
 
 See Chandler's Sermon ap.ainfl: Popery at Salter's Hall; and the JncJependene 
 Whig^ Numb. 7. Note, this part cular paprr is figrAf^ only bj two of {he 
 Triu-Tiviiate, T, and C, Tr€i3ckr4 flnJ Qcrdon, 
 
294 ThtLATMJN's AFOLOGT. 
 
 tliat no man taheth this honour to himfelft hut he that is called of 
 God, as tvas Aaron : So al/oChriJi glorified not himfelf to he made an 
 High Frieft, hut he that /aid unto him. Thou art my Son [g). Thus, 
 as God called Aaron by name to this ofHce, fo alfo he called 
 Chrift ; and till Chrift was fo called, ht glorified not himfelf to be 
 ^ade an H:gh-Priefi. He did not preach the word, inftitute and 
 adminifter facraments, till he was particularly called by God after 
 his Baptifm, who then publickly authorized him by a voice from 
 heaven, faying, This ij my helcved Son, hear him. Matth. iir. 
 17. Luke ix. 23. Yet he Rayed till he was of that age, before he 
 entred upon his mlniftry, becaafe he was not called to it before. 
 from that time Jefwi began to preach. Matth. iv. 17. Then he 
 began ; and he was Then ahout thirty years of age. Luke iii. 
 23. Now no man can doubt of Chrill's qualifications before that 
 time, as to holinefs, fufHciency, and all perfonal endowments.-^ 
 -And if all thefe were not fufncient to Chrill himfelf without zw 
 outward Commiffion ; v^hat man can pretend to it, upon the account 
 of any perfonal excellencies in himfelf, without an outward Commif- 
 ITion ? Bat when God had calledAarcn by name, he did not call his 
 <iefcendants by name alfo ; but entailed the Prieflhood on his ^ti- 
 cendants by a natural generation, and by virtue of thatnatural gene- 
 yation they were Prieib alfo as Aaron was, and God owned them 
 as fuch fo long as the Jewilh Church continued. And as the Jew- 
 ifli Prieflhood defcended to Aaron's fons by a natural generation, 
 ib the Chriilian Prieflhood defcended from Chrift to his Apoftles, 
 and from them to their fucceffors, by a fpiritual generation : theA- 
 poftles were begotten by the word of Chrift, and made the heips 
 of his Priefthood by the Commiifion which he gr.ve them, when 
 ht lent them, as he ixias fent by the Father. John xx. 21. And 
 in like manner they fent others, as we learn from the Ads and 
 Epiftles of the Apollles fh). 
 
 I might fill many pages with unanfwerabTe arguments, even 
 from Prefbyterian authors, proving •• that the office of the mini- 
 "* dry of the word and facraments is neceffary in the Church By 
 ** Di'vine Lnfiitution ; that it is perpetually necejjary.'''' I could 
 bring the Provincial Affembly of London, faying, that ** They 
 " think it no difparagement to their miniftry to fay, they receive 
 "* it from Chriil and his Apollles, and from the Primitive Churches, 
 ** through the impure and corrupt channel of the Church of Rome ;" 
 afid boalling of a Lineal Succession from the ApofiUs. This 
 
 h 
 
 {g) Heb. V. 4. 5. (h) See the Preface to Dr. Brett's Sermon of the ex- 
 fsnt of Chrifi's Comniifiion to baptise, p. iv, v. Sermon, p. 1$. Sersnon 0? 
 th« Ho:io»r of the Ghriiliaa E*rieAhoc«3, p. 20, 31, 
 
ti 
 
 Chap. XXIX. Of the Jnti-Epifc§pal Chmchesi 195 
 
 is exhibited in the Letters ^/') concerning Toleration before men- 
 tioned, to which Mr. Chandler fhould have replied, inflead of 
 repeating flale objeftions exploded by his Fathers before he was 
 born ; as the worthy author of the Letters tells his adverfary. 
 This is certain, your Prefbyterian Fathers, all Britain over from 
 ^n. 1640. to An. 1660. would have damned your notions 
 " about the No-Neceffity of Ordinations or luiinterrupted Succef- 
 ** fion (ky^ " But (as another author fays) it is fuch a publick 
 " matter of fa£l, that I might as well go about to quote particu- 
 " lar authors, to prove that there were Emperors at Rome, as that 
 ** the Minillers of the Church of Chrift were ordained to fuccecd 
 " one anotlicr, and that they did fo fucceed (ly But before I 
 take entire leave of it, I will remark, that the firft Oafs within 
 the Province of Lan.cafter, at Manchefter November 23d, 1658. 
 15gned in the name and by the appointment of the Ck'fs by Robert 
 Gonftantine Moderator, did moft llrenuocfly argue for the Neceffi- 
 ty of a Succellive Ordination, tho' they denied it to depend upoti 
 Epifcopacy. The words of thefe Genilemen were as follow ; 
 *' And thus we fay, it [the fuccelfion of a Lawful ordained Mi- 
 *? niltry to the end of the world] was continued in the days 
 ** of Epifcopacy-^ — the Bifhops being themfelves alfo Prefbyters, 
 
 *• and fo their ordination valid in that refpcdl, but alfo 
 
 ** in the darkell times of Popery, and that our Miniftry def- 
 *^ cended to us from Chriji, through the ApojJate Church of 
 *' Rome, hut not from the Jpojiate Church of Rome ; as our 
 " Pveverend Brethren of the Province of London do well 
 •^ exprefs it, in their Jus Di'venwn Minifierii Enjavgelici, where 
 *♦ they do folidly and learnedly prove. That the Minifiry, nxjhich 
 " is an Inditulion of Chrift pajfing to us through Rome, is not made 
 *' null and void, no more than the Scriptures, Sacraments, or any 
 " other Goipel-ordlnanceSy njohich <we no'VJ enjoy y and nvhich do alfo 
 •* defcendto us fro}n the Jpoftles through the Rornip Church \ and 
 ** concerning which, if any one do doubt, we refer him to the 
 ♦• book for his latisfaaion, p- 2. cap. 3. where (as they welJ fay) 
 
 **__ this great truth, io neceffary to be known in thefe days, 
 
 ^^ is fully difcuiled and made out (w)/'' 
 
 One thing more I will jufl mention. The Sciiblers of the hdi- 
 pendent Whig (and Mr. Chandler feems to retale^he thou;:,lu from 
 them ) make it an objeaion, that the Term Uni^iterrupted Succefi 
 Jlon is not to be found in Scripture. Now I would not vouchiafe 
 this an anfwer, did f not know that fomc who pafs for very wife 
 men, applaud that weak performance. I anfwer then (m the words 
 B b 2 of 
 
 \l \ Bn. Sage's Reafonablenefs of a Toleration, p. 232.-=-«J/.3. .(*) ^'^1^' 
 Letter V. p. 441. See p. 208, 209, aio. (I) D>fc.>ar .e concerning F. p. U 
 couacy fub-.oined to the 8th edition of Mr. LeHie s Method with the LK..its, 
 p. '44. ' iP') 'I'ae C?nfurcs cf the Church rsyive^Ji p. 137- Lon4yT»^ ^:i^» 
 
196 The LATMA¥P% APOLOGY, 
 
 OfBiihop Snge ) by afking tbefe great Pretenders toChriftianity and 
 lylr. Chandkr alfo, *' Have yoii found in all the Scriptures in ter- 
 •* rninh — That Women ought to be admitted to the Lord's Sup- 
 •» per ?'^ But away with iuch Trifling. 
 
 From what has been faid upon this head I will now conclude? 
 thai: God has not left this work gf the Minillry in comnion, but 
 within a facred inc'ofure, which cannot be broken over without 
 the etForts of a Corah-\'MQ fpirit ; as a famous DiiTenting Teacher 
 jn New England expreffes it : (n) And *' let this fufiice to fhew, 
 •* what f.-icrcd Mounds are thrown up by Divine appointment around 
 V this hcl/ calling/;* 
 
 Bat ht^re is a difnute, whether this Succellion was preferved in 
 the order of Bifiiops or Preftj) ters ? or whether both are not ths 
 'iame r And here I mult prove the Di^jir.e Right of Epifcopacyy which 
 1 will do wiih as much brevity as the iubjeCt \t ill admit. 
 
 Our Lord oi^t of the number of his Difciples feleded Twelve, and 
 g.U'e them authority to preaph ( o ) and baptize {p], to receive 
 and admit converrs into his Chur;h : Thefe he alfo netmed ApoQles (^•;« 
 ^■^fte?- ihe's the Lord appcinied other Sc'venty alfoy and fent them i^vo 
 end ftvo before his f^xe into e'very city and place » <vjhither he hitnfelf 
 nv.-)u!d CGTne ( ;•)• Thtfe, it is pl^=in enough, were not fo exteniive- 
 ly commiiTioned as the ApcHles were. But though the Apoilles 
 liad authority to preach and baptize or admit converts into the 
 Church of Chrift, then called the kingdom of heaven ; yet they had 
 no: received authority to commiffion others to do fo, but were, as 
 the Seventy in thi?, to pray the Lord of the har^vefi, to petition him 
 ^vhofcnt them, tcfev.djorth labourers into his har'veft(f). {t) ** The 
 ComiTjiflions given by our Lord to the Twelve and to the Seventy 
 
 were bat Tcrnpornry : —It was after his refurredtion, that He 
 
 { who'is the great Shepherd and Bifjop of our fouls ) Jent the Eleven 
 tii his Father had fent him ; that is, gave them their CcmmiiTjons 
 to be Suprenne Governors of his vifible Church [u] proinifmg to bo 
 \vich ti^in even to the end of the world {^lu). 
 
 ) '» 
 
 *' The Apoftles thus invefied \v'\i\\ Epifcopal power ordain the 
 fevcn peacons [x). Whether they theiufelves ordained the firll 
 
 PrefDyters 
 
 (r.) Mr. Pcrribcrtcr/s Difcnurfe of Ortrnation by Pre/byters, as referred to 
 3n the Diiccvirftt-ccncernifig Epifccnacy, jtjil mentioned, (o) Matth. x. 7« 
 (P) John. iv. %. (q) LuicCj vi. 75. ix. 2. Matth. x, I. Mark, iii, 
 •J3. T-:. 7. Yr^.Lvike x. j. ' (s) Matth. ix. 37, 3S. Luke x. a. (sf) 
 ReafoRableneis of Toleiarioa, l.ttttr iv. p. 141, Aic." {u) Jojin Xlii' 
 
Chap. XXIX. OftbcJnlt-Epi/copalCauYchts. 197 
 
 Prefbyters of the Church of Jerufalein, or whether they firH confc- 
 crated S. James to be Bifhop of that Church (which it is certain 
 they did foon after our Lord's afcenfion) and then left it to hioi 
 to ordain his own Prefbyters, comes all to one purpcfe : either way, 
 
 itisplnin, thofe firfl Prefbyters, had Epifcopal ordination. 
 
 The firlt ordination of PrelLyters that we read of, was performed 
 by two Apoltles Paul and Barnabas, that is two perlbns cloathed 
 with Epifcopal authority in an eminent degree. A^s^ xiv. 23. 
 We find Timoth/ when he was fettled Bifliop' of Hphcfus (which 
 was not done during all that period of time which S. Lake ac- 
 counts for in the book of the A6\s of the ApoiileO in full pof- 
 feffion of, at leal!, the chief power of Ordination. This is evi- 
 dent from the rules laid down by S. Paul, i T'/w. iii. to be obferv- 
 ed by him in promoting whether Prefbyters or Deacons. His 
 having this power is alfo plain from i Tim. v. 22. and 2 Tim. ii. 2. 
 As much i.s evident concerning Titus from Tif. i. 5, &c. And 
 who can reafonably doubt that thefeven Angels (that is, Bifliops) 
 of the feven churches, mentioned in the iirfl three chapters of the 
 Revelation, had the fame power ? It is evident from the epiflles 
 written to them, and Blondel (y) himfelf confefTes, that they 
 were chargeable with what mal-adminiftrations foever that hap- 
 pened in their refpedive churches. How could this have been, 
 if Ordinations could have been performed without them? Where- 
 on can the right adminiftration of ihe affairs of a Church depend 
 more, than on due care and caution taken, that her officers be 
 worthy men and fit for their employments ? B<U how could thofe 
 Angels have been obliged to take fuch care and ufc fuch caution, if 
 officers could have been ordained without depcndance on them ? 
 How could they be m.ade to anfwer for the pradices of thofe; who 
 had not their Commifuons from them, and were not fubjedl to 
 them ?" 
 
 " Hitherto then, and fo far as the Scripture informs us, all 
 Ordinations were performed by thofe, who werefuperior to ordi- 
 nary Prefbyters (2;)." ** I know fome have been pleafed to tell 
 us, that Tiipothy and Titus and thofe others [fuch as S. James 
 furnamed ihe Jufr and Epaphroditus, who are termed Apoflles or 
 Bifhops by all Ant quity, and fuch in all probability were thofe 
 whom S. Paul calls (e) Jpo[}les of the Churches^ and joins with 
 Titus } befides the Angels of the churches mentioned in the Re-- 
 veiation, of whom before] of the highefl Order, v.'ere extraor- 
 dinary ofncers in the Chnilian Church, and fo of temporary inl'ti- 
 
 tucion 
 
 {y) Pref. ad Apol. pro fent. Hieronym. p. 6. (z) Mr. W. Eo- 
 
 hcrts's Vifitati9a Seiinon at ©l^ghaipptgn, Au^uil 19th, 1703, (<?J 3 Cor, 
 Viij, 23. 
 
I9S rim L AIRMAN'S APOLOGl. 
 
 t'ition only. But this is fald without any ground or plaufibic pre- 
 tence. That they were fomecimes fent upon extraordinary mef- 
 iages, ap.d had a power upon occarion 16 do extraordinary things, 
 fucti as miracles, &c. is vzx'f true : but then the fame is to be 
 U\c. of the Prefoyters and Deacons. Philip (we know) was only 
 a Deacon; and yet God employed him in itvcr^l extraordinary 
 matters. And the working of miracles was fo common in the be- 
 ginning of Chriiiianity, that ordinary Chriftians were frequently 
 endued with this power. So that if this were an argument for the 
 temporary inftitution of one Order, it muft be fo too for alt the 
 reli. Which they who make the objection dare not fay, and 
 thereby acknowledge there is no force in it." 
 
 But they further urge, that Timothy was an Evangclirt,becaufe 
 S. Paul bids him do the wjork of an Ez>angeli(i. But in anfwer to 
 this f.vo things may be faid, either of which fdlly anfwers the ob- 
 jei6^ian. Firit, fuppofing the cflice of an Evangelill to have been 
 a diilinft Oidice and of temporary imlicution only, yet there is a 
 vail difference between doing the ^^vork of an E^jangelift and being 
 reiv'-y fuch a one. It is faid of Araunah [b], that Js a King bs 
 gave to King Dax>id : Yet i hope, no one will from hence t\r- 
 j;:ue, that he was rcalh ?i King. But then, Secondly, an Evan- 
 geiitl was no difiindt ofHcer a: any time in the Chriili^m Church. 
 JFor the proper notion of'^n Evargelili, in the Acts and in S. Paul's 
 f psiUes, is one who was* eminently qualified to preach the Gcfpel, 
 jt.nd had taken very great pains therein. Aod therefore the tiik of 
 3bva;:g?li|l was meerly accidental, and given as an additional or 
 ^iirni^iie to perfjns. Tiuis S. Philip was called an Evangellfr, bs- 
 caufe by his bs^bi^ricus preaching he had converted Samaria, and 
 propagated thegofpel in feveral places ; and yet his cfBce was no 
 juoie than that of a Deacon. For tho' he was dignified with that 
 If^.le, he co.ukl only preach and baptize^ and had not the power of 
 ikying sn of hands, which both 1 im.Qthy and Ti!;u>v had ; and 
 therefore his cfiice was far inferior to theirs. From all which it 
 is evident, th-i: Timothy^ pow^r over Prtibyters did not accrue lo 
 him upon the account o.i his being an Evangcliit, fuppofing he was 
 one: And the meaning of the adyice of doinr the n.vork of (in E- 
 r,>.ivge/ij^ can be no more thijn this, r/::?. That he Qiould diiigent- 
 Jv preach the gofpel, not only to thofe who w: re already convert- 
 ed, but to Iniidelj alfo, and thereby enlarge the bounds of ChriH- 
 janlty. But this no more proves iiis office of Ruling Prt'fl^yteis 
 ?,nd Ordaining to bcj temp(?rary, than S. Philip's being called an 
 Kvrngeliil proves the Oiiice of Preaching and Baptizing to be fo. 
 Sc. thac here is nothing lo cbjed: againlf the permanency and cond- 
 jiuance of the ofHce that Timothy and Titus were ordained to.'* 
 
 '-' Indeed 
 
 'i:} % Ss^)« xilv, 
 
Chap. XXIX. Of the Anti-Eplfcopal Churches, i g g 
 
 " Indeed (to ufe the words of [c) Bp. Stillingfleet) they who go 
 ** about to unbifliop Timothy and Titus, inay as well ut.fcriptnre 
 *' the epiftlcs that were written to them, and make them only fcra.s 
 ** particular and occafional writing?, as they make Timothy ani 
 ** Titus to have been only fome particular and occnlional cf::c...?» 
 ** Kutthe Chriilian Church, prclbrving thefeepiaics as of Corltar.t 
 " and perpetual ufe, did thereby luppofe the fame kind of cffice tr> 
 " continue, for the fake whereof thf fe excellent epi/lles were wric- 
 ** ten. And we have no greater ajjurance, t-iat thefe epifllef were 
 ** ^'ritten by S. Paul; than we have that there were Biihcps to fuc- 
 *' ceed the ApolUes in the care and government of the Churches.'" 
 So that according to the tnaturejl judgment of this Great Mnn, the 
 office of Timothy and Titus is of \\iZ fame authority, and defigred 
 to be of they^w^ cotitinuance with the cpillles that wrre written to 
 them. And furely nothing can be faid more highly fo/ the 'jUi 
 Di'vinum of Epifcopacy than this." 
 
 ** From what has been faid it plainly appears, chat there W^re three 
 difliKil orders let apart to the iriinillry by the Apoi^les. Our next 
 enquiry then is, to y^sw many or to nx:bich the power of Orditian'oa 
 was committed. Now that the /orjcvy? Order, n.''tz. thr.t of Dea- 
 cons, had not this power, is by all confcfTed. And that the hicrhei} 
 Order ( of which Timothy and Titus were ) had it, we arc afiurcd 
 by the expiefs teflimony of S. Pai-.l. The only quelli®n then i?, 
 whether Vae/scotid Ovcier, ^jiz. th:At of Prerbyters, was ever invell- 
 ed with this power ; the AfiiriTiative of which quelliou can nev€t 
 he proved from Scripture or Antiquity. For." 
 
 " FIrfi:, It is frivolous to argue from the Community of Names 
 to the Samenefs of OiRce : And therefore tho' the words Bijkcp and 
 Trejhyter be promifcuoufly ufed, and mere Prcfbyters frequently 
 called Bifhops, yet this doth not prove, that therefore all the powers 
 ivhich belong to thofe we call BiilKips, were ever lor.ged in thofe 
 Prcfbyters. At this rate of arguing Bifaops, Prefoytcrs, and Dea- 
 cons would all be but one Order ; for the Apoitles are fometimes 
 Called Deacons as well as Prelbyters j nay, our Saviour himfelf is 
 Called by th?.t name : BuE how ridiculous and abfurd would it be t.o 
 infer, that Deacons in Scripture had fuch a power, and were called 
 by thefe names ? And yet this i? the utmoli, that the argamcnc 
 frofn the promifcuous ufe of the words Bifiiops and Prefbyters can 
 amount to. The only method to prove, that the ppwcr of Ordi- 
 nation belongs to Prefbyters, is to fhgw, that whoever hsd a power 
 to preach and adminfier the facramefits^ had alfo a power to ordain ; 
 ^Xf that whoever were called hy the; naiac of Presbyters or Bifhops, 
 
 \yer» 
 
 yi Ecdefiaftical Gafes, p, n, 
 
200 Tht L A r M A ir% A P L G r. 
 
 were irivefted therewith. But this is what can never be done. On 
 the contrary it is very evident, that many who were authorized to 
 preach and adminifter the facraments, had no power to ordain. S. 
 Paul tells Titus, that far this caufe he left him in Crete ^ that he 
 flight ordain Elders in e^very city (d) : But this could be no caufe 
 ofleaving him there, if the Presbyters or Elders had the power of 
 ordaining lodged in them : for that ifland had been converted to 
 ChriMianity long before this epiftle Vv^as written, and before Tiius 
 was left there ; and no doubt there were manf Presbyters among 
 them, perfons to preach and adminiller the facranients to the in- 
 habitants of that iflandc The fame may be faid of Timothy's being 
 fent to Ephefas. To v/hat purpofe was he fent thiiher, if the 
 Presbyters there before had a power to ordain ? So that tho' Pr^f- 
 byters are called Bifhops in Scripture, this does not prove, that the 
 power of Ordination was ever committed to them. Neither," 
 
 " Secondly, can this bs proved from that perpetually quoted paf- 
 fage, I 7im. iv. 14. where S, Paul exhorts Timothy not to negleSi 
 the gift that <voas in him^ 'ivhich 'was gi'ven him by prophecy ^cvith the 
 laying on of the hands of the Prefhytery. For fuppofing Timothy's 
 Ordination is here fpoken of, ( which yet many learned men have 
 queliiuned) I have {hewn before, that the Apoftles themfelves were 
 ealkd by the name of Presbyters ; And fo the Presbyters here men- 
 tioned may very probably be Apcllles, as many of the Ancients 
 thought. Certainly S. Paul was one of them, or at leaft among them ; 
 and by his authority alone the ordination was com.pleat, tho' one 
 or more who were meer Presbyters, laid on their hands in concur- 
 rence with him, to teftify their confent and approbation : As is the 
 cuftom at this day in the ordination of a Presbyter, and has been 
 fometimes done at the ordination of a BiiTiop, as in the cafe of Pe- 
 lagius I. Bifhop of Rome [e). And it is remarkable, that S. Paul 
 arcribes the whole of Timothy's to his own layi72g on of hands {f}i 
 In fhort, to make this place any thing to the purpofe, thefe three 
 things at lead mull b? proved ; Firft, thai by Pre/oyiery is here 
 meant a company of perfons \ Secondly, that thefe perfons were alt 
 tnere Prefl^yters i and Thirdly, that «o«^ but fuch gave Timothy 
 his ordination : the firil of which is uncertain^ the fecond improba- 
 ble, and the third abfolutelyy^'^^. Not to mention feveral other 
 difficulties, which muft be cleared, before this text can be brought 
 to fpeak the fenfe, which the Patrons of the Presbyterian caufe 
 would extort from it. Infomuch that we may well admire with' 
 the learned ?v'Ir. Selden ( who cannot be fafpe^led of prejudice m 
 favour of Epifcopacy ) how any one can offer this text, as a proof 
 of Presbyters power to ordain. Upcti the whole, there is not the 
 
 leaft 
 
 (J) Titus, 5. 5, («> See Sevejrcs.. ia Can, /^poft, u (/ } 
 
 Tim, i, i6. 
 
Chap. XXIX, Of the Anti-Epfcopal Chutches. 20 i 
 
 haft footftep in Scripture or Antiquity of fuch a power being con- 
 veyed by the Apollles to any, but fueh as are of an order fuperiof 
 to tiiat of Prefbyters.'* 
 
 " The truth of the whole matter 4s this : Thofs who were 
 Veded with this power in the beginning of Chriillanity, were com* 
 monly known by the name Qi ApojUes ; and the Middle Order \v:A 
 the appellation fometimes of Bijhops and fometiaies of Frefbyttr: : 
 Eat fhortiy after, the name of Apojtles was appropriated lo thofe* 
 who were conilituted by our Saviour j their Succeftors in modtfty 
 declinirig fo high a title : and then the three Orders were diilin- 
 guiihcd by the iiaines of Biihops, Prefoycers, and De-^cons. Ani 
 this difiindion was fixed immediately upon the death of the Apof-^ 
 ties, before or in the very beginning of the fecond century ; as ap- 
 pears from this, I'hat all the writers at and after that time con- 
 Itantly reckon up the Three Orders under theft- three determinate 
 titles (g). Ic is therefore manifeft, that from Prefljytera being 
 Called Bilhops in Scripture, no colour of argument can be drawn 
 againft the Three-fold Order in the Chriftian Church, or any 
 thing urged in prejudice to the Divine Right of Epifcopacy.'* 
 
 Now, *' the office of a Bifhop implies only a Superlorify of Or- 
 der and J urifdi(51ion, to whom Alone the power of Ordination 
 belongs ; But the relation of a Biihop to this or that particula);* 
 i)iocefe or Diftrid is not abfoluteiy neceffary. All th t I contend 
 for, is, that the power of Ordiiation, which was given by Chrid: 
 to his Apoftles, was by them conveyed to None but fuch ns mult 
 be acknowledged a diftindl: tnd fuperior Order to that of Prefby» 
 ters ; and confequently fuch Alone are invefted with that power. 
 For to govern the Church of God is not fo pecu!i?-r to Bjfnops, 
 but Presbyters and others may do this by their appointment and 
 In fubordination to them ; as the moft zealous afferters cf Epilco- 
 pacy have granted. If we diftinguilh between a Biihop at iarg« 
 and a Biihop with rellraint, a Bifhop in the Ch'-Ulian Church and 
 a Bifhop of a particular Diocefe, and confider h^m only as one 
 who is Superior toPresbyters,and has the Sole Right of Ordination, 
 ive fhali find that all the material objedions agamlt the Divine la- 
 ftitution of Epifeopacy may eafily be anfwered." 
 
 " To what has been faid, I might for further proof add the 
 joint teftimony of all Chriftendom for near 1500 years together^ 
 and challenge our adverfaries to produce Onje inftance of a valid 
 ordination by Presbyters for all that time. The ftory of the Scot- 
 
 C c - ^i^ 
 
 [f] See Bevereg. in Can. Apoft, J, f^hiQ?-, V;jj4, IgJist, ^yii i^'t.'" A* 
 
202 The L ATM J N's APOLOGT. 
 
 tijh Culdees, and all others of the like nature have been abundant- 
 ly confuted and expofed. And (I think) Ifchyras is the only 
 certain inftance in al! Antiquity of a perfon's offi-ciating in holy 
 things with a bare (h) Prejbperian ordination '• But he was no 
 fponerdifcovered, but he was difcarded, and all that he had done 
 declared Null and Void. As for Aerius, tho'he ftilly contended 
 for an Equality between Prefbyters and Bifhops, yet I do not re- 
 member (fays the Learned author, from whom I now quote) that 
 «ho* a Prefbyter himfelf, he ever pretended to ordain others, or 
 that any of his followers officiated upon fuch an ordination. But 
 however that be, this Herefy expired quickly afrer its rife j for it 
 began and ended in tHe latter part of the fourth century." 
 
 I have trapfcribed all this from an excellent fer'iion, which was 
 preached at Okehampton by Mr. Roberts of Jacobllow, An. 1709. 
 in which fingJe fermon this controverfy fcems to be qui^c deter- 
 mined. 
 
 I fhould 
 
 (h) Moft writers, who mention this ftory, agree in this account ; but I 
 5nd it differently rcprefented by one author, whole full relation I w.U l^ere 
 fubioin, and leave the matter to be fettled by the Learned. *' Meliiius a E^- 
 ♦' fhrpin Egypt being convifl of many crimes, particularly of lacniicinj- to 
 «« idols, \Vas dtpofed by Peter Eilhop of Alexandria his Metropolitan m a fynod 
 *< of Bi/hopsj After which, inllead of appealing to another fyncd, (the 'nily 
 **■ jufl methad of redrcfs, if iniured) he calumniates Peter and his fucccHljr.*, 
 *« make? a fchifm, and take? on him to ordain BiAops, and thii within the 
 «« jurifdidlion of the Bi/hop of Alexandria, and did confecrate near thirt\ Bi- 
 •' '{hop?, as appears by the lift mentioned by Athan.ifius : for which Melidus 
 '' himfelf was by the Council of Nice dcpofed, and deprived of E[ilccpal 
 «* power, having only tlie name and dignity of a B:iTiop left him ; and thcfe 
 <' ordained by him cenfured, and made uncapable of the facred office, unlefs 
 •'* in fome cafes, and on fome conditions prelcribed by the Countil : amongft 
 •'< whom there is one indance worthy of our confideration. There was 
 <« one Ifchyras, v;ho pretendsd^to be a Prefbyter, becaufe he was ordained ?.s 
 •■'*■ fuch by CoUuthus. This Athanafius represents as monf^rous, that he fhouid 
 «* efleem himfelf a Prefbyter, who was ordained by one v;ho was only a Pref- 
 •* byter, and died a Prefbyter of the church of Alexandria, Neither d'd If- 
 «« cbyras plead that his ordination was vahJ, as received from a Prefbyter, for 
 "* that W£s th^n an opinion wholly flrange to the Church, that a Prefbyter had 
 <* authority to ordain a Prefbyter jbut he thoirght his ordination good, beccuffe 
 y* he received it from a B:fhop, in that Colluthus had been oidain^d a Bifhop 
 " by Melitiua a Bifhop, but then in an open fchifm, in which Colluthus was 
 «^f involved r But this Colluthus afterwards renounced hisSchifm, and there- 
 «* with his Orders, and was thereupon received into communion as a Prefby* 
 «' ter ; and being no more, his ordination of Ifchyras v/as judged invalid. If 
 '< that age refcinded Orders conferred againft the Canon, btcaufe conferrpd by 
 V< pne who pretended tc be a Bifhop, but was in truth according to the Canon's 
 -*<■ of the Church only a Prefbyter ; what thoughts would they have enter- 
 <« taingd, and what fantence would they have pronounced againfl ordinations 
 "' made by them, who we;re in truth and pretended to be no mere than mere 
 '<*« Preftyters :^ Iff that age this would have been eftccmed a prodigy, efp.jciai]/, 
 «« if a£ted in pppofition Lo Bifhops/ * Brokcfbf^ i^'Ji'^f^ </ ^^« G(>vsr-n?rHnf^»f 
 m ^fimtiveQbmchf p, j;;5, x^e, J37; 
 
Chap. XXIX. OftheAnti'EpifcopalQliuxcht?,. 203 
 
 I Ihould now, according to the order which I have obferved in 
 t^e foregoing chapters, produce the teftimonies of the Fathers ip 
 favour of the point that I efpoufe ; but they are fo numerous, and 
 have been fo often produced, that I choofe only to name Some of 
 tiie Many books, in which any common reader may find them : 
 
 Bp. ^///5«'s Perpetual Government of Chrift's Charjch. 
 
 Bp. Parker\ Account of the Government of the Chriftian Church 
 
 for the firft 600 years. 
 Bp. Sage's Reafonablenefs of a Toleration enquired into. 
 
 . Principles of the Cyprianic age. 
 
 - — ■ Vindication of the Principles of the Cyprianic age. 
 
 A. Bp. Potter s Difcourfe of Church-Government. 
 Bp. Brett's Account of Church-Government. 
 
 (NB. All thefe books were written, before the authors were 
 Bifhops. ) 
 
 Divine Right of Epifccpacy. 
 
 Mr. Le/Iie's Difcourfe of Epifcopacy. 
 
 Mr. Brokejby^ Hillory of the Government of the Primitive Church. 
 
 Mr. Sclater\ Original Draught of the Primitive Church. 
 
 Thefe will even fatiate the Reader with proof: for it is not 
 more plain, that Two and Two make Four, than that the Succei- 
 fion was preferved in the Bishops as fuperior to Prefbyters. 
 
 It is time now to conclude this Chapter, which I (hall do in the 
 words of Mr. Le/lie : 
 
 [i) " If Chrift delegated his power to his Apoftles, and they 
 " to others, to continue to the end of the world j 
 
 «* If the Apoftles did delegate Bilhops under them in all the 
 " Chriftian Churches, Which they planted throughout the whole 
 ^* earth ; 
 
 " If Epifcopacy was the known and received Government ol 
 ?' All the Churches in the world, not only in the Apoilolick age, 
 *• bat in All the Succeeding ages for 1500 years ; 
 
 *' If it was not poflible for Churches fo difperfed into fo many 
 " far diftant regions, to alter that frame of government, whicl^ 
 ^ had been left them by the Apoftles ; 
 
 (i) Difcoujfj cynceinin^ B^lfcQ^acy, 5, g;; ^S. 
 
^04 Tilt L 4i^MAl<rs AFOLOGT. 
 
 ** If fuch an alteration of government could not be without 
 ** great notice to be taken of it, as if the government of a na- 
 *' tioa was changed from Common- wealth to Monarchy ; 
 
 (( 
 
 *.f mention of fuch a Change of government, but Ail with one 
 ^* voice fper.k of Epifcopacy, and the fucceffion of the Bifhcps in 
 ?' a!! the charches from the days of the ApoUles ; and in thofe 
 *' ages of £eai, when the Chriilians were fo forward to facriiice 
 *' th(^i«- l;vefi in oppof^tion to any error or deviation from the 
 ^* 7>uth, no' one tikes any notice of Epifcopacy as being an En- 
 *' croachnicnc upon the right of the Prefoyters or the People, or 
 ** being any deviation froai the ApodoHcal Inilitution : 
 
 *' I fw, if thefe things are not pojjlhle to any thinking man, 
 
 '' then F.pifcopacy mull be the /*r//7i//zV^ and j^pofiolkal^'^v.d con- 
 
 '' {^quently ('c) of Divir^E] Inftitucion. And it is zi impoJ/iUe to 
 
 *' be oth^rvvilc, as to fappoi-e that all the great Monarchies in the 
 
 •* world Hioulu be turned into Common-wealths, or the Cpmmon- 
 
 ** wealths into Monarchies, a!! at one inftnnt , and yet (too) that 
 
 ♦* no body fhould ktip-.v it, or 'that thofe who wrote the hifto- 
 
 *' ries of thofe times ihDuId take no notice oj" it, or any man be 
 
 ^' found to JiiXurt his liberty and freedom againij fuch flagrant ufur- 
 
 ?' pations, or that none of thofe who luid the government before 
 
 ♦' fnould complain of any wrong done to them or fet up their 
 
 «f claim," 
 
 From what has been faiJ in this Chapter it follows^ that all the 
 miniitrations of the French, German, Britifn, Irifh, in H^iort of 
 All Anti-Epifcopal Minillers, are, like the ofterings of Corah and 
 liis adherenr'?, Rebeilion againit ths Majeily of Heaven, as they 
 ere TJfarpaticns of the Sacred Ofhces committed by Chrill to the 
 Bifjops in Chiefs thofo Stars in his right hand, as his beloved dif- 
 ciple reprcfcn^ts them in his book of Rsvslation : 
 
 And therefore they can lay no claim to the precious promifes of 
 ^hc Gc^fpel. O }::y Jouli (Orr.e not t'hoii into their Secret ; unto th$ir 
 i^Jsmblies, :my koaq-^r^ be fsot than united. 
 
 (iy' 5c2 B.cberu'i;}afl «uoit«i Senrjon^ p, 37. 
 
 e o N- 
 
C 205 3 
 
 s 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 AND now, upon the whole, having found that the Greek Church 
 is juftly chargeable with having departed from theDodlrine and 
 Pradice of the Catholick Church in the great points of i . Tranfub- 
 ilantiation and Adoration of the Hod ; [thefe being linked together, 
 I call them but One] 2. Praying to Saints and Angels ; 3. Wor- 
 fliip of Images ; and with impofmg thefe corrupt pradtices and de- 
 terminations upon all who communicate with her : And h ving 
 found the Roman Church alfo chargeable with the fame, and fur- 
 ther 4. with maintaining and impofing the dodtrine of the Bilhop 
 of Rome's Supremacy, 5. Purgatory Fire between death and the 
 refurredion, with itsfequence ; 6. with taking the Apocrvpha in- 
 to the Canon of Scripture ; 7. Witholding the Euchariftick Cup» 
 or Communion in one kind ; 8. Rejeding Infant Communion ; 
 
 9. Making the Confecration of theEucharift toconfift in the word- 
 of Inftitution ; 10. Impofing the F/Y/c^a^ ; 11. Not ufing Trine 
 Immerfion in Baptifm ; 12. Difregarding the ancient pradice o!- 
 praying Standing on Sundays and between Eailer and Whitfuntide i 
 13. Difregarding the Apoftolical Precept of abftaining from edrin;- 
 Blood ; 14. Difregarding the Saturday Feftiva! ; 15. Difregar 
 ing the Wednefday Faft : And having alfo found the Ciiurcb 
 £/;^A?«i/chargeable with the laft Eight deviations ; and further 9 
 with maintaining and impofing the King's Ecclefialtical Suprem cv ; 
 
 10. with Rejeding the Mixture of the Euchariftick Cup ; 1 1 De- 
 nying the Euchariil to be a Sacrifice ; and in confequence ot tn-it^ 
 wanting the Oblatory prayer, and 12. the Invocatory prayer ; 13 
 Rejeding prayer for the Faithful Departed ; 14. Rejedling or ui> 
 ing afide Chrifm in Confirmation, and 15. Undion oftheSitk 
 And, laftly, having found the Anti Epifcopalians to be in a wor;, 
 condition than any,of thefe, they having rejeded almoit every thi 
 particularly Epi/copacy^ without which there can be noLhurcri 
 fay, having found upon mature and impartial exaniinciflon, ()» t 
 three famousChurches have all departed from the dodrme ar.f' 
 
 tice of the Primitive Catholick Church, one in Tliree, and t' 
 others inPifteen particulars each, and that the Dijfenters fro; 
 have Unchurched themfelves ; I now come to point out tr 
 Epifcopal Church in England, in v/hofe bofom (praife>! b - 
 I have the honour and hippinef- to repofe ; A Church, ■■■■• ^ 
 not chargeable with any of the a'jcve-mentioned err. r? or 
 Vut, on the coRtrar^, is exa^Iy a^re^able to jhe QyWso . 
 
ao6 CONCLUSION. 
 
 down in the beginning of this tira£t|v^- a^WiJSJsa Church, whipa 
 teaches and praftifes a ll thej^^inai^^eVJoi Qp^ and his Church 
 in their Evangelical perfedionri J *.t % ' *> ^W 
 
 The Church that I In fpeakin|-6lI-^3'Trer Offices printed at 
 London, M,DCC,XXXIV, under this Title. " A Ccmpleat 
 ** CGlledion of Devotions, both Publick and Private : taken from 
 ** the Apoftolical Conftitutions, the Ancient Liturgies, and the 
 ** Common Prayer Book of the Church of England. In Two Parts. 
 " Part I. Comprehending the Publick Offices of the Church ; Hum- 
 " bly offered to the confideration of the prefent Churches of Chrift- 
 «' endom, Gieek, Roman, Englifli, and all others. Part II. Being 
 *' a Primitive method of Daily Private Prayer, containing Devo- 
 *.' tions for the Morning and Evening, and for the Ancient hours 
 *' of prayer. Nine, Twelve, and Three ; together with Hymns 
 'f and Thankfgivings for the Lord's day and Sabbath, and prayers 
 •* for Farting days ; as alfo Devotions for the Altar, and Graces be- 
 " fore and after meat: AH taken from the Apoftolical Conftituti- 
 *^ ons and the ancient Liturgies, with fome Additions ; and re- 
 *' commended to the pradlice of All Private Chriftians of Every 
 *' Communipn. To which is added. An Appendix in juftification 
 '* of this Undertaking, confifting of Extrads and Obfervations, 
 «* taken from the writings of very eminent and learned Divines of 
 " difFersnt Communions. And to ail is fubjoined, in a Supplement, 
 ** An EfTay to procure Catholick Communion upon Catholick 
 *f principles.'' 
 
 To this Book, ( whofe Appendix was referred to in the Introiuc-' 
 tion to this trad) and to the F«//, True, and Cornprehenfi've Vieio 
 ofChriftianity, quoted above, ( both which were compiled by the 
 fame hand ) the pious Reader isdefired to recurr : And if he would 
 know, where fuch a pure perfedl Church as I am recommending, is 
 to be found, I will l«|l him in One word, at Manchester. 
 
 And may Aln^'ghty God, in his great mercy, continually enlarge 
 t}ic birders thereof. *' May he make all religious bodies of 
 *' Cbnilians pure and found Churches, in profeffing the Ancient 
 *f Catholick and Apoflolick Faith, in embracing the Ancient Ca- 
 •* tholicl: and Apoftolick Government, in praclifing the Ancient 
 ** Catiiolick and Apoftolick Worfhip, and in maintaining perfet^ 
 *' chirity in the bond of peace, and holding Univerfal Communi- 
 *' on oie with another, to the honour of his great name, and mu- 
 *' tu.vl fupport of each other, through Jefus Chrill our Lqrd. 
 'l Arueii.;* 
 
 F 1 B 1 B.. 
 
^\ 
 
 DATE DUE 
 
 II i||i|iiii 
 
 lb 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 GAYLORD 
 
 
 
 PRI!^rEDlNU.SA 
 
 
 .:;»ci;^..- 
 
 fbSHHHHl. 
 
 
f 
 
 ;v 
 
 W 
 
.V 
 
 7^ 
 
 >^. 
 
^^>w