Romanism discussed, or, An answer to the nine first articles of H.T. his Manual of controversies. Whereby is manifested, that H.T. hath not (as he pretends) clearly demonstrated the truth of the Roman religion by him falsly called Catholick, by texts of holy scripture, councils of all ages, Fathers of the first five hundred years, common sense, and experience, nor fully answered the principal objections of protestants, whom he unjustly terms sectaries. By John Tombes, B.D. And commended to the world by Mr. Richard Baxter.

SECT. VII.

The Popish pretended miracles prove not the truth of their Church, nor the mi∣racles related by some of the Fathers.

But H. T. taking his Major, as to the power of miracles, sufficiently proved pro∣ceeds thus. The Minor is proved by these ensuing undeniable testimonies. First, Protestants and other Sectaries pretend that miracles have ceased ever since Christ and his Apostles time, because they and their Sectmasters have never yet been able to do any, a sure conviction that they want this mark.

Answ. 1. PRotestants do not pretend that all working of miracles is ceased since the Apostles time, but such frequent working of miracles as was in the Apostles time. 2. That they do not for the reason which this author allegeth say so, but because the truth is so, and if they have not been able to do any, no more have the Papists; if they could they would do them to convince the Sectaries (as he terms us) sith signs are not for them to believe, but for them that believe not, 1 Cor. 14. 22. And therefore if Papists could do any miracles, surely they would do them openly to convince the hereticks who deny their Popes and Churches infallibility, of which surely we are all such infidels, as that without miracles done by Popes and the Preachers of his vicarship we shall never be brought to believe it. But they choose rather to cheat foolish Papists with counterfeit tricks, as of the boy of Bilson, Garnets straw and such like devices, then to let any understanding Protestants have any sight of them, who would discover their knavery.

But H. T. tells us. Secondly, histories (as well of enemies as friends) have recorded many famous miracles in all ages wrought by the Catholick Church. The Magdeburgian Centurists, although Protestants (such is evidence and force of

truth) have recorded many great miracles done by Catholicks in their 13. c. of every century for one thousand three hundred years together after Christ. St. Francis of Assisium fifteen dayes before his death had wounds freshly bleeding in his hands, feet and side, such as Christ had on the Cross, and this by miracle, Mat. Paris p. 319. One Paul Form having stoln two cons••crated hosts out of a Church sold one of them to the Jews, who out of malice and contempt stab'd it, saying; If thou be the God of Christians manifest thy self, whereupon blood issued out of the host, for which fact thirty eight of them were burnt at Knoblock in Brandenburg, and all the rest of the Jews were banished out of that Mar∣quisate. This is recorded by Pontianus in his fifth book of memorable things, and by John Mandevil a Protestant in his book de locis communibus p. 87. as also by Osiander Epist. 116. p. 28.

Answ. 1. The Magdeburgian Centurists have indeed in their several cen∣turies one chapter of marvellous things, but many of them are such as were wrought immediately by divine providence and are liable to various constru∣ctions, few of them, done by men in testimony of the truth of any religion, doctrine or Church, and fewer yet of any certain credit. 2. There's no rela∣tion of any of them that are said to be done as wrought by the Catholick Church, either Roman or properly so called, however there be some related as done by persons of the Catholick Church, who are more justly to be accounted Protestants in respect of the doctrine they taught then Papists, whom they falsly call Catholicks. 3. It is not denied that Socrates l. 7. hist. c. 17. men∣tions a miracle of Paul a Novatian Bishop, and Augustin. tract. 13. on John, and de unit. Eccles. c. 16. denies not, that the Donatists alleged miracles, and he calls them by contempt Mirabiliarios, and judged that the Church was to be judged by Scripture and the miracles by the Church, as Bellarm▪ confesseth de notis Eccl. l. 4. c. 14. 4. Those that are said to be done by persons of the Catholick Church for the first five hundred years, were not done by persons that held the now Romish doctrine or in confirmation of it or the verity of the now Roman Church. 5. All the rest in all the ages following are of none or very small credit. Gregory the great is himself judged by Romanists to have been too credulous of tales, those Dialogues which are said to be his (in which are related some of the miracles which the Papists rely on) being either none of his or shewing too much credulity in him: the rest of the miracles in the legends are so ridiculous fopperies, as even discreet Papists themselves have dis∣credited. Dr. Rainold Conf. with Hart ch. 8. divis. 2. allegeth Canus as in general excepting against the reports of miracles even by grave, ancient, learned holy Fathers, loc. Theol. l. 11. c. 6. and particularly against Gregories Dia∣logues, and Bedes history, and the very Portesse as having uncertain, forged, false and frivolous things in them about Francis and Dominick, and he shews that Pope Gelasius and a council of seventy Bishops with him condemned many false stories which were rehearsed in the Roman Portesses, if Espencaeus Comment. in 2. Epist. ad Tim. c. 4. digress. 21. be to be believed. The two pretended miracles which this Author hath chosen for instance have nothing like divine miracles or truth. The miracles of Christ and his Apostles were such as were done openly in the sight of all so as they could not be denied, but even adver∣saries confessed them, these were things only in private, so as that there might be some device used to delude the sight, or might be fancied to be so by some

doating persons, or might be by the illusion of Satan, which is not improbable to have been used in them, there being great cause to conceive, that in those dayes of darknesse by seeming wonders, apparitions, visions, prophecies, Satan promoted the worship of Saints, especially of the Virgin Mary, the opinion of purgatory, prayer for the dead, worship of reliques, by which Idolatry and su∣perstition grew among Christians about and after the time of the second Nicen•• Synod. Nor is there any likelihood that the wounds of Francis should ap∣pear fifteen dayes afore death, in which time he was likely covered, and not after his death, in which his body being naked they might have been more vi∣sible, were not the time afore death more convenient for the imposture. And the like may be said of the other tale. What likelihood is there that a man should venture his life to steale two pieces of bread, or little water cakes, or that a Jew should buy one, or do such an act before witnesses, which would bring so much evil on him? the thing seems more likely to have been a devised tale to pick a quarrel with the Jews, as it was in those dayes usual for a pretence to get their goods as it had been done to the Templars. Sure there was no justice to burn thirty eight for the fact of one, much lesse to banish all Jews thence. And why was nothing done to Paul Form? either it was therefore a mee•• fiction, like one of those in Sir John Mandevils travailes, or else a device to sti•• up rage against the Jews, that they might prey on their goods. 6. Were it yeilded (as it is not) that there was truth in these relations, yet the most that can be collected is, that God would vindicate Francis from some ill opinions or reports of him, not that he might be extolled, as Horatius Turselin in his blasphemous Epigram did, as if he were comparable with Christ, or that either the Popes supremacy or the order of Friers, or the verity of the doctrine of the Roman Church then, much lesse the truth of the present Roman Church should be confirmed. Nor, if the other accident were true, doth it follow, that God would thereby confirm the opinion of transubstantiation, but the verity of Christs being the Son of God, and we may more justly answer concerning i••, then Bellarmin doth concerning the miracle of the Novatian Bishop, that it was done, not to confirm the Novatian faith, but Catholick baptism, so the other was done, not to confirm the Popish opinion of transubstantiation, but the Christian doctrine of the man Christ his being the Son of God.

H. T. adds, notwithstanding this confession of adversaries, I will also all some Fathers, of whose relations of miracles it is not worth while to consider whether they were true or not, there being not one of them that proves this point, that the Church which wants miracles is not the true Church, or that the present Roman doctrine or Church are the true doctrine or Church. That which Cyprian and Optatus relate, if true, did only vindicate the Lords Supper from contempt, that of Gregory Thaumaturgus, whether it were so or onely a re∣port (of which good men were sometimes too credulous) it proves not the truth of the Roman Church, but rather, if any, of the Greek Church which owned not the Popes supremacy, nor their doctrines in that age. Much less is that which he brings out of Chrysostom concerning the reliques of Babylas for his purpose, sith it is expresly said to have proved against infidels that Christ was the Son of God, and the Idols of the Gentiles were vain things, which no more proves the truth of the Roman then of the Protestant Churches, nor so much as of the Greek Churches who hold the same. That of Ambrose concerning his bro∣ther

Satyrus proves not transubstantiation, but rather the contrary, sith Satyrus adored not the Eucharist, when he kept it, and that he did keep him from drowning was but a conjecture, nor is it proved that God by that accident approved his superstition, though he might reward his faith and love, of which that was a sign. What Augustin l. 22. de civit. Dei c. 8. writes of things done in his time are not undoubted, sith some of them are related upon the re∣port of one or more not very judicious, who might enlarge things beyond truth, esp••cially when the custome was of reading the relations to the people, and they were pressed in conscience to divulge them, as there Augustin saith was done by him, and it seemed so much for advantage of Christian Religion; some of them might be by medicines working beyond expectation though attributed, as the fashion is, to that which was last used; some of them perhaps fell out ac∣cording to the course of such diseases, as are said to be cured; that of the heal∣ing of two Cappadocians hath too much suspicion of counterfeiting, and Au∣gustin himself, though he relates somethings of his own knowledge, yet makes none of them like the miracles of Christ and his Apostles, which were more frequent and open and manifest in the presence of the adversaries, as the raising of Lazarus and many more were, and therefore he allegeth them for the stopping of their mouths, who called for miracles, rather then for any evident proof of religion, using this very preface in the beginning of the Chapter, Why, say they, are not those miracles now done which ye say have been done? I may say indeed they were necessary before the world should believe for this that the world might believe. Whosoever as yet seeks after prodigies, that he may believe, is him∣self a great prodigy, who the world believing, believes not. But whatever be to be thought of the relations of Augustin in that place, certain it is that Au∣gustin, ch. 9, 10. useth them not to give testimony to the confirmation either of the truth of the Roman Church or any of their doctrines, nor for the wor∣shipping of Stephen the Martyr, or any other of the Saints, but only to prove the resurrection of Christ, to which they in their death gave testimony, and therefore are all impertinent to the purpose of H. T. to prove the verity of the Roman Church by them.