were ignorant, wherein they never did | namely, all such propositions, as have agree or resolve anything? 3. Yea, whereof they speak variously. 4. Is it not odd and extravagant to damn or curse people for a point of so little consideration or certainty? 5. Is it not intolerable arrogance and presumption to define, nay, indeed, to make an article of faith, without any manner of ground or colour of authority either from scripture or the tradition of the ancient Fathers ?* The holy scripture forbiddeth us to call any man master upon earth, or absolutely to subject our faith to the dictates of any man; it teacheth us that the apostles themselves are not lords of our faith, so as to oblige us to believe their own inventions; it forbiddeth us to swallow whole the doctrines and precepts of men without examination of them. It forbiddeth us to admit "various and strange doctrines."+ been taught by their great juntos allowed by the pope, especially that of Trent. *Moreover, all other things delivered, defined, and declared by the sacred canons and œcumenical councils, and especially by the holy synod of Trent, I undoubtedly receive and profess; and also all things contrary thereunto, and all heresies whatsoever condemned, and rejected and anathematized by the church, I in like manner do condemn, reject, and anathematize-. This is the true Catholic faith, out of which there can be no salvation." This usurpation upon the consciences of Christians (none like whereto was ever known in the world) they prosecute with most uncharitable censures, cursing and damning all who do not in heart and profession submit to them, obliging all their consorts to join therein, against all charity and prudence. The scripture enjoineth us to bear with those who are weak in faith, and err in doubtful or disputable matters. But the popes with cruel uncharitable But the pope and Roman church exact from us a submission to their dictates, admitting them for true, without any further inquiry or discussion, barely upon his authority. "They who are provid-ness, not only do censure all that cannot ed of any benefices whatever, having cure of souls, let them promise and swear obedience to the Roman church." assent to their devices, which they obtrude as articles of faith; but sorely persecute them with all sorts of punishments, even with death itself; a practice inconsistent with Christian meekness, with equity, with reason, and of which the Fathers have expressed the greatest detestation. 66 They require of us without doubt to believe, to profess, to assert innumerable propositions, divers of them new and strange, nowise deducible from scripture or apostolical tradition, the very terms of them being certainly unknown to the They have unwoven and altered all primitive church, devised by human sub-theology from head to foot, and of divine tilly, curiosity, contentiousness-divers have made it sophistical."+ of them being (in all appearance, to the judgment of common sense), uncertain, obscure, and intricate; divers of them bold and fierce; divers of them frivolous and vain; divers of them palpably false: Multa dicuntur a veteribus sacramenta præter ista septem.-Bell de Sacr. ii. 24. Many things are by the ancients called sacraments besides these seven. † Διδαχαῖς ποικίλαις, καὶ ξέναις μὴ περιφέρεσθε. Heb. xiii. 9. Provisi de beneficiis quibuscunque curam animarum habentibus in Romanæ ecclesiæ obedientiam spondeant ac jurent.-Conc. Trid. Sess. xxiv. cap. 12, de Ref. nec non veram obedientiam summo pontifici spondeant et profiteantur.-Sess. xxv. cap. 2, de Ref. The pope, with his pack of mercenary clients at Trent, did indeed establish a scholastical or sophistical, rather than a Christian theology; framing points, devised by the idle wits of latter times, in *Cætera item omni a sacris canonibus et œcumenicis conciliis, ac præcipue a sacrosancta Tridentina synodo tradita, definita, et declarata, indubitanter recipio atque profiteor; simulque contraria omnia, atque haereses quas cunque ab ecclesia damnatas et rejectas et anathematizatas ego pariter damno, respuo, et anathematizo.-P. Pi IV. profess. Hanc veram catholicam fidem, extra' quam nulla salus esse potest.-Ibid. Totam theologiam a capite usque ad calcem retexuerunt, et ex divina sophisticam fece Matt. xxiii. 8; 2 Cor. i. 24; 1 Thess. v. runt.-Erasm. praf. ad Hieron. 21; Col. ii. 8; Matt. xv. 9. • Rom. xiv. 1; xv. 1, 7. to definitions and peremptory conclusions, | reliance in God's mercy, remitting sins backed with curses and censures concerning which conclusions it is evident, That the apostles themselves would not be able to understand many of them.* That the ancient Fathers did never think anything about them.f That divers of them consist in application of artificial terms and phrases devised by human subtilty.‡ That divers of them are in their own nature disputable; were before disputed by wise men; and will ever be disputed by those who freely use their judgment. That there was no need of defining many of them. That they blindly lay about them, condemning and cursing they know not who, Fathers, schoolmen, divines, &c. who have expressly affirmed points so damned by them. for Christ;" seeing it is plain that St. Paul doth by faith chiefly mean the belief of that principal point of the gospel? Or that good works "do not cause an increase of justification:"* seeing St. Paul doth exclude justification by works; and it is a free work of God-uncapable of degrees? Or that after remission of sin in justification "a guilt of paying temporal pain doth abide ?"t Or that a man cannot "by his works merit increase of grace, and glory, and eternal life;" seeing a man is not to be blamed, who doth dislike the use of so saucy a word; the which divers good men have disclaimed? What need of cursing those who do not take the sacraments to be "precisely seven?" or who conceive that some one That many truths are uncharitably of their seven may not be "truly and backed with curses, which disparageth properly" a sacrament; seeing the word them (seeing a man may err pardona-sacrament is ambiguous, and by the bly-πολλὰ γὰρ πιαίομεν ἅπαντες), in Fathers applied to divers other things, many things we offend all. For instance, what need was there of defining, what need of cursing those, who think concupiscence to be truly and properly sin," upon St. Paul's authority calling it so? That" Adam presently upon his transgression did lose the sanctity and justice in which he was constituted ?"|| What need of cursing those, who say that men are justified" by the sole remission of sins," according to St. Paul's notion and use of the word justification? What need of cursing those, who say the " grace of God, by which we are justified, is only the favour of God;"§ whereas it is plain enough that God's grace there in St. Paul doth signify nothing else, applied to that case? Or that faith is "nothing else but a and defined generally by St. Austin, signum rei sacra; and that before Peter Lombard ever did mention that number. What need of damning those, who do conceive the sacraments equal in dignity? What need of defining, that sacraments do confer grace ex opere operato?1 which is an obscure scholastical phrase. What need of cursing those, who say that a "character is not impressed in the soul" of those who take" baptism, confirmation, or orders;"|| seeing what this character is (or "this spiritual and indelible mark;") they do not themselves well understand or agree? What need of cursing those, who do not think that the validity of sacraments (and consequently the assurance of our • Sess. vi. Can. 24.-Non autem ipsius augendæ causam Ut nullus remaneat reatus pœnæ temporalis exolvendæ Sess. vi. Can. 30. Sess. xiv. de Panit. Can. 15. being Christians) dependeth on the in- his errors) disclaimeth, and which comtention of the minister?" mon sense therefore disclaimeth ?* What need of cursing those, who Their new creed of Pius IV. containthink that a pastor of the church may eth these novelties and heterodoxies :change the ceremonies of administering 1. Seven sacraments. 2. Trent doctrine the sacrament;" seeing St. Cyprian of- of justification and original sin. 3. ten teacheth, that every pastor hath full Propitiatory sacrifice of the mass. 4. authority in such cases within his own Transubstantiation. 5. Communicating precinct? under one hind. 6. Purgatory. 7. What need of defining the Second Invocation of saints. 8. Veneration of Book of Maccabees to be canonical, relics. 9. Worship of images. 10. against the common opinion of the The Roman church to be the mother and Fathers (most expressly of St. Austin mistress of all churches. 11. Swearing himself), of the most learned in all ages, obedience to the pope. 12. Receiving of Pope Gelasius himself (in Decret.), the decrees of all synods, and of Trent. which the author himself (calling his work an epitome, and asking pardon for Sess. vii. Can. 11: n Sess. vii. Can. 13. ⚫ Sess. iv. *Fidem minutis dissecant ambagibus Prudent. in Apotheos. SYNOPSIS OF THE TREATISE ON THE POPE'S SUPREMACY. The ensuing analysis of Barrow's disquisition on the Pope's Supremacy was compiled by Dr. Hughes; and as it includes in a condensed form the cardinal principles and arguments of the entire Treatise, it was deemed advisable to append it to the original work. The Student of this important Controversy, will find, by the use of it, his acquaintance with the topics in controversy essentially facilitated. INTRODUCTION. I. Boast of the Roman party in the points of unity, certainty of doctrine, decision of controversies, &c. Yet in matters of great importance it is hard to descry how they agree, or of what they are certain. Many of their laws and rites shown to have been drawn from diverse authorities. Disagreement among the Roman doctors concerning the nature and extent of papal authority; so that in the Council of Trent the agitation of that question was not permitted: reasons of this. II. There are among them some, who ascribe to the Pope an universal, absolute empire, over all persons and in all matters, conferred on him by Divine immutable sanction. Authors quoted, who acknowledge this power. III. The opinion of Bellarmine, given as the general opinion of Catholics, does not differ in effect from this, though veiled and disguised by words. IV. Such an universal power hath been claimed by divers Popes, successively, for many ages. Instances quoted at great length. V. This doctrine may reasonably be supposed the sentiment of all Popes continually for more than five hundred years to the present day. Reasons for this alleged. VI. All Romanists, consistently with their principles, seem obliged to hold it: this shown. VII. Yet so loose and slippery are the principles of the party, that many in communion with the Roman Catholic Church will not allow this doctrine of the Pope's universal and absolute power: this point enlarged on. VIII. Neither are the adherents of the Roman Church more agreed concerning the extent of the Pope's authority, even in spiritual affairs: this shown. IX. No wonder that their doctrine in this matter is various and uncertain, since interest is concerned in it, and principles are defective towards the resolution of it. X. Even Popes themselves have shifted their pretences, and varied in style, according to circumstances, &c.: this shown. XI. Hence a statement of this ques XV. It is known that many within In order to the resolution of this point, we may the Roman communion contract the Papal sovereignty within narrower limits: the doctrine of many such stated. XVI. Nevertheless, the former opinion seems to be the genuine doctrine of the Roman Church, if it has any: this enlarged on. consider that there are several kinds of primacy these enumerated, and the title which Peter might have to each. 1. A primacy of worth, or personal excellency. Various personal endowments, natural and moral, enumerated, in which XVII. No distinct regard therefore will it may be granted that St. Peter possessbe paid to the opinion of these semi-Ro-ed this superiority over the other discimanists, except in part. Discourse levelled at the Pope, as he pretends to be, absolute in authority. XVIII. Of such vast pretences we have reason to require sufficient grounds: this shown. XIX. Such demands they cannot wholly baulk, and therefore they call in St. Peter; which plea of theirs involves the following main suppositions; I. That St. Peter had by our Lord's appointment a primacy over the Apostles. II. That St. Peter's primacy, with its rights and prerogatives, was not personal, but derivable and transmitted to his ples; though one afterwards arose who can hardly be called inferior to him. 2. A primacy of repute; which St. Paul means in Gal. ii. 2, 6, 9; 2 Cor. xi. 5, &c. Nor can this advantage, consequent on the preceding, be refused him. 3. A primacy of order, or bare dignity. This probably may have been conceded to him for use and convenience. Various reasons for this probability stated. 4. A primacy, importing superiority in power, command, or jurisdiction. This asserted by the Romanists: but we have great reason to deny it, from the following considerations: that such a power ought to be conspicuously and clearly instituted, &c.: there is no express mention of it; no time for its institution can be assigned: it would probably have been indicted by some title or name: there was indeed no office above that of an Apostle known to the disciples, or the primitive church: our Lord himself several times declared against such superiority: in serveying particulars we shall not find any peculiar jurisdiction, &c. conferred on St. Peter, which was not on the other Apostlesno intimation of it in the Catholic Epis |