图书图片
PDF
ePub

thefe, when requested, Anno 1671, 1672. to declare their Senfe, did fo, and unanimously profeffed Tranfubftantiation, &c. Ibid.

C. E. The Queftion, as to the Greek, and other Oriental Churches, is not, whether they own Tranfubftantiation now, but how long they have done it. I grant, the Synod at Jerufalem, under Dofitbeus Anno 1672. is for it. But then Mr. Claude tells us how the way was prepared for this Change of theirs, (a) That they were won by Money, feveral Pretences were made ufe of by the Emiffaries, to introduce themselves into their Houses, they prevailed on their Bishops, not making them publickly change their Religion, but leaving them in the fame Communion wherein they found them, to the end that they might likewife endeavour the Establishment of the Roman Faith. The like Account we have allo from the late learned (b) Dr. Smith, a diligent and curious Enquirer into Matters of Fact. Who informs us, that the two Metropolitans of Sophia and Achrida, and Cyril of Birrbaa, were fent from Rome, on purpose to procure the Depofition of Cyrillus Lucaris, in order to the bringing their Defigns about. But give me leave to tell you, this is a Method of propagating Religion, that was utterly unknown to our Saviour and his Apoftles, and which will never be for the Credit of whatfoever Church that makes use of it.

R. C. The Vindicator had been told [that is, the Reftater had owned] that two Cities in France, Amiens and St. Jean de Angeli, both pretend to have St. John Baptift's Head, but the Truth is, they bave Heads of Saints called John. Admit this, fays he, They are not both his Head, whofe Name they bear, and fo the Worshippers of one of them must needs

(a) Cath. Doctr of the Eucharift, 1. 2. c. 5.
(b) Collectanea de Cyrillo Lucario:
Q &

be

be guilty of Idolatry. Good Sir, why one of them? If they give any Creature Divine Worship, both are guilty of Idolatry. If they do not, how can either of them be Idolaters? p. 9.

C. E. Will you ftand to what you fay here, that Giving any Creature Divine Worship is Idolatry. What then becomes of the Latria which the Pontifical declares to be due to the (a) Crofs. What becomes of your (b) Crucem tuam adoramus Domine, We adore thy Cross, O Lord? What becomes of your frequent Prayers to the Bleffed Virgin, and other Saints, not only to pray for you, which you can never juftify, but moreover (c) to Defend you against your Enemies, (d) to Deliver you from Evils and Dangers, (e) to Loofe the Guilt of your polluted Lips, and the Bonds of your Crimes, to make you Meek and Chaft, to Receive you in the Hour of Death, and to Place you in the Heavenly Seats? If this be not giving Divine Worfhip to a Creature, it will be very hard to tell what is. And then, how will you diftinguish it from Idolatry? Or if you give any other folemn religious Worship to an Image, or a Relick, he must be more skilful than I pretend to be, that can excufe it from being a palpable Violation of the Second Commandment; and by what Name you will call fuch a Violation I know not. At the best fee what Answer you can return to those words of the Vindicator? (f) You have no more proof of their being the Heads of two Johns, than of one and the fame John. And yet fuppofing they were the Heads of two Johns, how should I know thefe were both

(a) Rubr. de Benedict. nov. Crucis. (b) Fer. vi. in Parafcuem. (c) Brev. in Feft. B. Mar. (d) Brev. in Feft. omn Storum Offic. parv. B. Mar. & Pontif. in Imag. B. M. (e) Brev. in Nativ. S. Jo. Bapt. In Feft.

omn. Storum, & Offic. B. Mar. in Sabbat. truly fated, p. 91.

(f) Cafe

Saints,

Saints, and so in your Opinion to be Worshipped? Here may be a mischievous Mistake, for ought appears to the contrary, like that of the supposed (a) Saints in the Catacumbs, who in reality were no Saints at all, fome of them probably no Chriftians.

R. C. It was no excess of Charity in him, to ascribe, as he does fo often, whatever our Divines fay in favour of the Church's Authority (which the Scripture attefts) to a Sacrilegious Defire of concealing the Corruptions of it. And the Truth is the fame as if a Deist fhould tell him, that Chriftians only magnify the Authority of Scripture, to give fome countenance to the abfurd Fables of Samplon and Goliah. This is the Deift's Language, not mine, p. 12.

C. E. Here, after the Example of the Reftater, you are for putting Objections into the Deift's Mouth, as if you were convinced you have no way of defending your own Corruptions, but by trying to expose the Scripture. You fay indeed, it is the Deift's Language, not yours. But if it were not to your liking, how came you to bring it in here fo unneceffarily, and to fo little purpofe? you are for maintaining Miracles to be ftill wrought in your own Church, even though you want good Evidence for them; and yet can fuffer thofe of Sampfon and David to pafs for fabulous, though as fully attefted as the word of God can do it. This, I prefume, is not done out of an earneft defire to magnify the Scriptures. Nor is it either for the Service of God, or your own Reputation to have done it. But the Truth is, the Scriptures too plainly discover the grofs Corruptions of your Church, both as to it's Faith and Worship, and this makes it thought neceffary to leffen their Authority upon all occafions. Yet let me tell you, thefe Holy Writings will

(a) P. Mabillon fur le culte de Saints inconnus,

be

[ocr errors]

be able to ftand their ground against all the At tacks of Deifts, Freethinkers, Roman-Catholicks, or whatsoever fort of Adverfaries. And as to your felf, fince you profefs to put a stop to your Career out of compaffion to fome Chriftians of weaker Capacity, I hope the fame Compaffion will withhold you from ever beginning the like again.

R. C. He grants the Parts of the New Teftament were not all immediately received after the first Century; there having been fome Dispute about the Epistles, &c. p. 15.

[ocr errors]

C. E. Here the Vindicator told the Reftater, that this had been 7. Toland's Objection before him, and what Anfwer it had received. Whereupon you very gravely Remark, That this being F. Toland's Objection, can no more turn Truth into Falfhood, than it can be a difparagement to the Eleventh and Twelfth Verfes of the Ninety firft Pfalm, That it was the Objection of one much worse than Toland. As if the Vindicator had faid, or at leaft infinuated, that it could; for which yet you have not the leaft pretence. But you want to be informed, that Eufebius speaks there of all the Deuterocanonical Parts of the New Teftament. And does he not fpeak of the Epiftles of S. James and S. Fude, the Second of S. Peter, the Second and Third of S. John, befides the Revelation which he promises to speak of afterwards. Now, if the Epistle to the Hebrews was included amongst S. Paul's Epiftles, as I take it to have been, and you cannot prove it was not, you will eafily fee whether here be all the other Books that can be called Deuterocanonical. And farther, according to your wonted nicety in Criticifm, you want likewife to be informed, that is morroïs must neceffarily fignify the Generality, as it is there tranflated; wherefore, if you pleafe, you may read

it

it by a great many; which I hope will pass without Offence.

R. C. S. Jerome teftifies the Epiftle to the Hebrews, and the Revelation were doubted of in his time, p. 15.

C. E. But he lets you know he could not fee any reason why, inafmuch as he himself readily owned them both.

R. C. Befides that Tertullian Speaks not of the Books in Queftion, Originals that were extant in the Second Century, might be loft in the Fourth, p. xvi.

C. E. If out of your great kindness to the Scripture, this be spoken to fhew it defective, it lies upon you to prove that any fuch Books were loft. Till this is done, which can never be done, your Suppofition fignifies nothing.

R. C. Some even to S. Jerom's time and Amphilochius's rejected it.

C. E. I know not how to come by Amphilochius, but I muft beg your pardon, if I obferve, that your Critical Skill has failed you in tranflating S. Jerom; for he does not fay there were great Numbers, that rejected the Revelation; but only fpeaking of the Greeks he fays, Non eadem libertate fufcipiunt, they do not receive it with the fame freedom as the other parts of Scripture. Which feems to imply, that they received this, together with the other Canonical Books, though not with the fame Freedom.

R. C. It is not to be found in the Catalogue of the Council of Laodicea, nor in that of S. Cyril,

P. 17.

C. E. Mr. Richardfon, in his forenamed Anfwer to Amyntor, fpeaks of this Council in the following manner. (a) The Council of Laodicea

(a) Canon of the New Teftament vindicated, p. 15.

(Can.

« 上一页继续 »